Calimesa City Council
July 20, 2026

CITY OF

BEAUMONT

CITY OF

BEAUMONT

CHERRY VALLEY BLVD

BROOKSIDE AVE

ROBERTS RD
CHERRY

VALLEY BLVD

BECKWITH AVE
I-P
W-2
W-2
R-A
R-A
C-P-S
C-P-S
C-R
R-L
R-L-M

R-L R-R
L-I
Specific
Plan
Area 1
R-A

R-L-M R-A
C-N
W-2
%&'(10
Light Agricultural (A-1)
Scenic Highway Commercial (C-P-S)
Controlled Development Areas (W-2)
Industrial Park (I-P)
Residential Agriculture (R-A)
Riverside County Zoning Classifications
Light Industrial (-LI)
Regional Commercial (FAR 75:1) (C-R)
Residential Low Medium (4-7 DU/AC) (R-L-M)
Residential Low (2-4 DU/AC) (R-L)
Residential Rural (0-2 DU/AC) (R-R)
City of Calimesa Zoning Classifications
Summerwind Ranch Specific Plan
Unincorporated Riverside County
Boundary
Legend
Project Site (313.4 AC)

19.8 AC

87.0 AC

9.4 AC Roadway ROW
City of Calimesa Existing Boundary

58.5 AC
138.7 AC
City of Calimesa
Annexation Project
Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8
0 275 550 1,100
Feet Existing Zoning Classifications
Source(s): Esri, Nearmap Imagery (November 2025), RCIT (2025) Figure 4

CITY OF

BEAUMONT
R-L-M

CITY OF

BEAUMONT

CHERRY VALLEY BLVD

ROBERTS RD
CHERRY

VALLEY BLVD

CHAMPIONS DR

BECKWITH AVE
L-I
O-S-R
O-S-R
R-E
C-C
C-R
R-L
R-L-M
R-R
R-L
L-I
Specific
Plan
Area 1
C-C
R-A-1
W-2
R-A-1
%&'( R-A 10
Warehouse Overlay Zone (WOZ)
Open Space Residential (1 DU/10AC) (O-S-R)
Light Industrial (L-I)
Community Commercial (FAR 50:1) (C-C)
Residential Low Medium (4-7 DU/AC) (RLM)
Residential Low (2-4 DU/AC) (RL)
Residential Rural (0-2 DU/AC) (RR)
Business Park (BP)
Light Agricultural (A-1)
Scenic Highway Commercial (C-P-S)
Controlled Development Areas (W-2)
Industrial Park (I-P)
Residential Agricultura (R-A)
Unincorporated Riverside County
Boundary
Residential Estate (R-E)
138.7 AC

9.4 AC Roadway ROW

19.8 AC
138.7 AC

87.0 AC

58.5 AC
City of Calimesa Zoning Classifications Riverside County Zoning Classifications Summerwind Ranch Specific Plan
Legend
Project Site (313.4 AC)
City of Calimesa Proposed Boundary
City of Calimesa
Annexation Project
Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8
0 275 550 1,100
Feet Proposed Pre-Zoning Classifications
Source(s): Esri, Nearmap Imagery (November 2025), RCIT (2025) Figure 5

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

• Conditional Use Permit 25-4 (CUP-25-4; “Building 1”). In accordance with the Zoning Text Amendment proposed as part of ZTA-25-4, revised Table 18.30.030 of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code would be amended to require approval of a CUP by the City of Calimesa Planning Commission for warehouse and distribution buildings up to 1,100,000 s.f. in size that are zoned for L-I land uses and that are located within a WOZ. Although no new development is proposed on site as part of the Project, CUP25-4 is required to fulfill the requirements of (amended) Municipal Code Table 18.30.030 for Building 1, which is the existing warehouse building in the western portions of the Northern Annexation Area. The overall site plan for CUP-25-4 is presented on Figure 6, CUP-25- 4 and CUP-25-5 Overall Site Plan. As shown, Building 1 includes a total of 811,000 s.f. of warehouse space and 10,000 s.f. of oƯice space, for a total building area of 811,000 s.f. A total of 130 truck trailer docking doors are accommodated, with 65 dock doors each on the western and eastern sides of the building. A total of 274 passenger vehicle parking stalls are provided to the north and south of the building, while a total of 271 truck trailer parking stalls are accommodated in the truck courts located to the east and west of the building. Approval of CUP-25-4 would meet the requirements of the L-I zone (as revised by ZTA-25-4) for buildings up to 1,100,00 s.f. in size, and would ensure that Building 1 is consistent with all applicable City zoning requirements. • Conditional Use Permit 25-5 (CUP-25-5; “Building 2”). As noted above, pursuant to Table 18.30.030 of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code would be amended to require approval of a CUP by the City of Calimesa Planning Commission for warehouse and distribution buildings up to 1,100,000 s.f. in size that are zoned for L-I land uses and that are located within a WOZ. Although no new development is proposed on site as part of the Project, CUP-25-5 is required to fulfill the requirements of (amended) Municipal Code Table 18.30.030 for Building 2, which is the existing warehouse building in the eastern portions of the Northern Annexation Area. The overall site plan for CUP-25-5 is presented on Figure 6, CUP-25-4 and CUP-25-5 Overall Site Plan. As shown, Building 2 includes a total of 992,760 s.f. of warehouse space and 20,000 s.f. of oƯice space, for a total building area of 1,012,760 s.f. A total of 170 truck trailer docking doors are accommodated, with 85 dock doors each on the northern and southern sides of the building. A total of 432 passenger vehicle parking stalls are provided to the north and south of the building, while a total of 248 truck trailer parking stalls are accommodated in the truck courts located to the south and north of the building. Approval of CUP25-5 would meet the requirements of the L-I zone (as revised by ZTA-25-4) for buildings up to 1,100,000 s.f. in size, and would ensure that Building 1 is consistent with all applicable City zoning requirements.

In addition, and following approval of ANNX-25-1, GPA25-2, ZC-25-2 , ZTA-25-4, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25- 5 by the City of Calimesa City Council, the Riverside LAFCO would be responsible for approval of the Project’s proposed annexation, which, if approved, would modify the City of Calimesa boundaries to include the 313.4-acre Annexation Area. No detachment process or other actions are required by the County of Riverside.

In addition to the boundary annexation described above, resolving water and sanitary sewer service jurisdiction for the Annexation Area would require a separate action by the Riverside County LAFCO. The Northern Annexation Area currently is within the Yucaipa Valley Water District's (YVWD) service area for potable water service. The Southern Annexation Area, however, is not currently within the jurisdictional

City of Calimesa
Annexation Project
-

PROJECT INFORMATION
Owner / Applicant TSG - CGERRYVAl..l.EY,L.P.
2PAAKPI.AZA,SUIT£ f 700 IRVINE,CA926\4
~~¼rZ+~)B;~- 1396
Architect
HP"- INC
18831 BARDEEN AVf. . SUIT£ f100
IRVINE,CA92612
~T}l;~)IN!~t-~~io
Applicant's RepresentatM> URBANEfMRONS
1J45FOUNTAINPI.ACE REDI.ANDS,CA92J7J
~~ipzr;ci~6
Assesso<s Parcel Number
407- 220-004
W7- 220-007
«)7- 220- 008
Wl- 220-009
«)7- 220- 014
Legal Description
~~~~~= 3788 MCAAY ST
RWERSIDE,CA92506 TEL,(949)583- 0759
CONTACT: MANUELCONZAL.ES
Construction Type: 8UIL0ING1 111- 8
8UILOING2 111-8
IN THE CCMJN1Y Of RIVERS«, STAIE Of CAI.JF"ORN"- OCING A PORTION Of THE r;oRTH ,w.f" Of SE:CTIOtl30,TOWt!SHIP2SOIJfH.AA>IGE1W£ST,SANBERNAAOl00M[Rl~. ACCOROINGTOTH[ Ofnc"'- PU,TTHERE:Of.
·1 · 1· (-· 1 ·-1-· I
-i-+-i--+-+-+-i-+
i i i i i i i i i I I I I I I I I I
+- -i-+-i--+-+-+-i-+ - i i i i i i i i i I I I I I I I I I +- -i-+-i--+-+-+-i-+ - i _i_ i _i . i . i_ i _i_ i I I I I I I I I I +- - i- + -i--+-i - + - i- -f
i i L l .L L~ i i i fT a:suttu1NG1i- , t- -i- -i8-1it,68()--S-;f; -t l- - 1- ..!. _.).._ -!.. _j _ .).. - 1- -1. I I I I I I I I I +- - i- + -+-+-i - + - i-+
L-i-LL lJ-LLJ I I I I I I I I I
+- -i-+-+-+-i-+-i-+
j_ -i- l _J_ .l. J_ .). -i- -i. I I I I I I I I I
+- - i- + -+-+-i-+-i-+
l- - 1- ..!. -i- -!..-l - .!.. - i- • I I I I --- --- -

VICINITY MAP
"-""
,~ ~ ~~.;._
--
CHERR'()'AI..LEYBLVD
"- CHERRY

SITE PLAN KEYNOTES
0 HEAVY BROOM FINISH CONC. PAVEMENT
@ASPl-iALT CONCRETE(AC)PAV1NG
0 CONCRETE WAil(.WAY, MEDIUM BROOM FINISH
0DRIVEWAYAPRONS TDBE CONSTRUCTT.:D
0 MAN DOORS TO LANDSCAPED AREAS. FINISH TO BE MEDIUM BROOM FINISH ~~i~EDl0wfK 1.fci4°p~sL{ ~:1·oR DRIVE WAY w/ 1:20 MAX. AS REQ.

BY CITY INSPECTOR
©B'HWROUGHTIRONFENCE
@NOTUSED
© APPROXIMATE LOCATION or TRANSFORMER
@ FIRE HYDRANT W/ CONC. FILLED STEEL GUARD POSTS
@COVEREDTRASHENCLOSUREPERCOUNTYSTANOARD
@EXTERIOR PARKING LIGHT POLE
@LANDSCAPE. SEE"L" owes. LANOSCAPEAREASINOICATEOBY SHAOEOPATTERN @ CHAlN-UNK FENCE ANO GATE, PER APWA STO. 600-0(H- 8"). @ BICYCL£ RACKS W/ COVERED ROOF STRUCTURE
@ OUTDOOR PATIO
@PUMP HOUSE
@GUARD SI-LA.CK

SITE LEGENDS
D
D ~ -vi~gR -™~t~N~'fs
D jltl:O:it = ~~~ ;~;.1)G HANDICAPPARKING
~ STAU.(9'X 18'}
C ~~~ 6k~PARKING
:~l\1;x,1s·i
0-0
EXISTING PUBLIC FlREHYDRANT
PRIVATEflREHYORANT- APPRQXIW.TELOCATION
ifar~:w:ROX
WAT£R LINE SEE CML DRWGS

GAS LINE SEE CML DRWGS

SEWER LATERAL SEE CML DRWGS

GENERAL NOTES - FLOOR PLAN
A.ffiESOILSREPORTPREPAREOsYGINTER&'-SSOCLlo.TES PROJ.NO. ~~~~:STED 00 1/7/2013 SHOULD BE A PART OF ffiESE CONTRACT B-~~~igN~~XPANSNE IN NATURE. USESTEELREINFORCINGFORAU.

C, ~~J~s~ii~ ~E J2iol~N[~-~ -gr CONCRETE W.IJ.l., FACE OF o. gg>J~f 6NLANJEhOR ...v'Y ~~N~~N7IfuSu:fr~o.Z,~~RS ANO SWMB.

E.ffiEENTIREPROJECT SHAU.BEPERWINENTLYMAINTAlNEOWlffiAN tg1t~1CBJ~~fWi't.ic~~'1;~1~t TO 1NSTAU.ATION & AT LEAST F. ~6~-;£:Tiw~~L ~~1n>I~T81 cu0tl!W~~rgr-S~ i.oJwi~s. ACTUAL UTUTY LOCATIONS G. PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM BLOG. SEE "c" DRAWI NGS H. ~y~~J;T{is1~~ER ii;~~r~f\6~RG~tl~~T~AATJNG
I. SEE "C' OR/\WINGS fOR FINISH GRADE ELEVATIONS.

J. CONCRETE SIDEWALKS TO BE A MINIMUM OF ~• THICK W/ TOOLED JOINTS AT 6'0C. EXPANSION/CONSTRUCTIONJOINTSSHAL.LBEA
MAJ(IMUM 12' EA. WAY W/ 1:20 W.X. SLOPE. EXPANSION JOINTS TO :r~~2tFi'ifs~l~PANSION FILLER MATERIAL OF 1/4". S(E "L" K. PAlNTCURBSAND PROVIOESICNS TO INFORMOFFIRE LANES'-5 REQUIREDS"l''1RED£PARTMENT L CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS PERT.'JNING TO THE LANDSCN'E AND IRRIG>.TIONOFTHEENTIREPROJECTSITTSHAL.LBESUBMITTEDTOTHE BUILDINGDEPARTMENTANDAPPRO\IEDBYPUBUCFACILITIES OEVUOPMENTPRIORTO ISSIJANCEOFBUILDINGPERMITS M. PRIOR TOFlNALCITYINSPECTION,THELANOSCAPEARCHITECTSHAL.L suaMITACERTIF1CATEOFCOMPL.ETK)NTOPUaLICfACIUTIES OEVO.OPMENT N. rJ:li~~~W!r~~l~~Ll~~G~~ k~~~ro c?~~u~~

0. LANDSCAPED AREAS SHALL BE 0£UNEATED W1TH A MINIMUM SIX INCHES (6") HIGH CURB
P.APPRO\IEDCONCEPTUALLANDSCN'EPLANPRIORTOGRADINGPERMIT

TABULATION
~
Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8
--
IULIJNG1 --IULIJNG2 --IEfTOTAL ---PRIVATESTRIH GOOSS --TOTAL sq.tt 2.396,402 4,132,544 6,528,946 s.! 126,709 s.l. 6,655,655 s.r. otfice @1/250sf
warelnJse(p1/2000sl
10,000 20,000 JO,OOO s.t
801,000 992,760 1,793,760s.t
1space@25par1<ilQslalls rOQUied 42spaoo

ACREAGE
PARCEL I - 45.CU5AC
PARCEL 2 - 5.646AC.

PARCEL J - 62.092AC
PARCEL 4-18.452AC.
~~~ i = Jllr ~- ~~R J: TI:m ~
Figure 6
CUP-25-4 and CUP-25-5 Overall Site Plan

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

boundary of any water or sanitary sewer provider; it is located within the Sphere of Influence (SOI) of the Beaumont-Cherry Valley Water District (BCVWD) for potable water service, and is not within the jurisdictional boundary or SOI of any provider for sanitary sewer service. Riverside County LAFCO will make the determination as to the service providers in the Northern Annexation Area and the Southern Annexation Area. A full discussion of existing water and sanitary sewer service conditions and the supporting capacity analysis is provided in subsection 2.1.19, Utilities and Service Systems.

9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The proposed Annexation Area abuts the City of Calimesa city limits on the east and southeast, while the City of Beaumont city limits occur to the south of the Northern Annexation Area and to the east of the Southern Annexation Area.

Areas abutting the Northern Annexation Area to the north, east, and southeast are within unincorporated Riverside County, while lands to the west of the Northern Annexation Area are located within the City of Calimesa. Lands to the north of the Northern Annexation Area mostly consists of open space, along with several scattered rural residential homes and associated structures. Properties to the east and west of the Northern Annexation Area consist of small-scale agricultural uses and scattered rural residences.

Lands to the south of the Northern Annexation Area are within the City of Beaumont city limits and consist of scattered vacant parcels, a truck services business, and the former Sunny Cal Egg Ranch. The Sunny Cal Egg Ranch site previously received entitlement approval for a planned residential development consisting of approximately 560 residential units. Land to the west of the Northern Annexation Area and to the north of the western portion of the Southern Annexation Area are located within the City of Calimesa city limits and include rural residential, agricultural uses, and undeveloped lands, while the Rancho Calimesa Mobile Home Park is located approximately 0.26-mile northwest of the Northern Annexation Area.

Lands to the northwest, west, and south of the Southern Annexation Area are located within the City of Calimesa, while lands to the east of the Southern Annexation Area are located within the City of Beaumont. To the west of the Southern Annexation Area is I-10, beyond which are undeveloped lands, agricultural uses, single-family residential uses, and an existing commercial shopping center that includes a Stater Brothers Market. To the south of the Southern Annexation Area is I-10, beyond which are undeveloped lands and single-family residential uses, along with an existing utility corridor. Lands to the east of the Southern Annexation Area are within the City of Beaumont city limits and consists of scattered vacant parcels, a truck services business, and the former Sunny Cal Egg Ranch (as described above). To the north of the Southern Annexation (and to the west of the Northern Annexation Area) are small scale agricultural uses and scattered rural residences.

10. Other public agencies whose approval is required: The Project’s proposed annexation request will require approval by the Riverside County Local Area Formation Commission (LAFCO). No approvals from other public agencies would be required.

11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally aƯiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.? In accordance with the provisions of Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1 and the provisions of California Senate Bill 18 (SB 18) and Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52), the City of Calimesa conducted Tribal Consultation eƯorts with the following tribes:

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

• Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians
• Augustine Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians
• Cabazon Band of Mission Indians
• Cahuilla Band of Mission Indians
• Los Coyotes Band of Cahuilla and Cupeño Indians
• Morongo Band of Mission Indians
• Pala Band of Mission Indians
• Pauma Band of Luiseno Indians
• Pechanga Cultural Resources Department
• Quechan Indian Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation
• Ramona Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians
• Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians
• Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians
• Serrano Nation of Mission Indians
• Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians
• Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians
• Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation
As a result of the Native American consultation eƯorts, no significant tribal cultural resources were identified by the consulting tribes, and there were no requests for mitigation measures.

Note: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See Public Resources Code section 21080.3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per Public Resources Code section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California OƯice of Historic Preservation. Please also note that Public Resources Code section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality.

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below (☒) would be potentially aƯected by this Project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ☐ Aesthetics ☐ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ☐ Public Services ☐ Agriculture & Forest Resources ☐ Hazards & Hazardous Materials ☐ Recreation ☐ Air Quality ☐ Hydrology/Water Quality ☐ Transportation ☐ Biological Resources ☐ Land Use / Planning ☐ Tribal Cultural Resources ☐ Cultural Resources ☐ Mineral Resources ☐ Utilities/Service Systems ☐ Energy ☐ Noise ☐ Wildfire
☐ Geology/Soils ☐ Population/Housing ☐ Mandatory Findings of Significance

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
☒ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant eƯect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
☐ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant eƯect on the environment, there will not be a significant eƯect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ☐ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant eƯect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) is required.
☐ I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one eƯect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the eƯects that remain to be addressed. ☐ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant eƯect on the environment, because all potentially significant eƯects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

July 1, 2026
Signature Date
Kelly Lucia, Community Development Director
Printed Name

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

Evaluation of Environmental Impacts:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a Lead Agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the Lead Agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The Lead Agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be crossreferenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

2.0 Environmental Analysis

2.1 Environmental Issues Assessment

2.1.1 Aesthetics
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse eƯect upon a scenic
highway corridor within which it is located? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those
that are experienced from publicly accessible
vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and
other regulations governing scenic quality?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely aƯect day or nighttime views
in the area?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a. Would the Project have a substantial adverse eƯect upon a scenic highway corridor within which it is located?
b. Would the Project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c. In non-urbanized areas, would the Project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality o public views o the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced rom publicly accessible vantage point). I the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
d. Would the Project create a new source o substantial light or glare which would adversely aƯect day or nighttime views in the area?
No Impact. The Project as evaluated herein entails applications for ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA-25-4, ZC-25- 2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 to allow for pre-zoning of the approximately 313.4-acre Annexation Area to facilitate future annexation of the Annexation Area into the boundaries of the City of Calimesa, and to permit the two existing warehouse buildings as required by (amended) Table 18.30.030 of the City of Calimesa

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

Municipal Code. Under existing conditions, the Northern Annexation Area is developed with two existing occupied large industrial buildings measuring 1,012,760 s.f. and 811,000 s.f. in size, which previously were constructed pursuant to Riverside County approvals for GPA 534, CZ 7799, TPM 36564, and PPT 25337. In addition, there is an existing equestrian shade structure/stable and associated pasture that occurs along the north-central boundary of the Northern Annexation Area and that is associated with an oƯ-site residential use to the north. Approximately 4.9 acres in the north-central portions of the Southern Annexation Area previously were developed as a truck equipment and repair business (Bonafide Truck Equipment and Repair), while an existing wireless tower facility previously was constructed in the southwestern portion of the Southern Annexation Area. The Bonafide Truck Equipment and Repair previously was entitled as part of Change of Zone No. 06288 (CZ06288) and Conditional Use Permit No. 03322 (CUP0322), while the wireless tower facility most recently was entitled pursuant to Plot Plan 16147 (PP16147). Proposed ANNX-25-1, GPA25-2, ZTA-25-4, ZC-25-2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 would not allow for any new disturbance or development within the Annexation Area beyond the uses that already exist, and the proposed Project does not include applications for any new development. Rather, the Project comprises an administrative adjustment to the boundaries of the City of Calimesa and two CUPs to permit the two existing warehouse buildings within the Northern Annexation Area, none of which would result in physical impacts to the environment beyond what already occurs under existing conditions. There are no components of the proposed Project that would result in changes to aesthetic or lighting conditions associated with the Annexation Area. Accordingly, the Project would not: a) have a substantial adverse eƯect upon a scenic highway corridor within which it is located; b) substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway; c) substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings; or d) create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely aƯect day or nighttime views in the area. No impact would occur.

2.1.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental eƯects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental eƯects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural
use?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or timberland
zoned Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code section 51104(g))?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result
in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use
or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a. Would the Project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland o Statewide Importance (Farmland) as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program o the Caliornia Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b. Would the Project conflict with existing zoning or agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c. Would the Project conflict with existing zoning or, or cause rezoning o, orest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
d. Would the Project result in the loss o orest land or conversion o orest land to non-orest use? e. Would the Project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion o Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion o orest land to non-orest use?
No Impact. Under existing conditions, the 313.4-acre Annexation Area is classified by the California Department of Conservation (CDC) Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) as “Grazing Land,” “Farmland of Local Importance,” and “Other Lands,” and no portion of the Annexation Area is located within a Riverside County Agricultural Preserve or is subject to a Williamson Act Contract (CDC, n.d.; RCIT, n.d.).

Furthermore, the Project as evaluated herein entails applications for ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA-25-4, ZC25-2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 to allow for pre-zoning of the approximately 313.4-acre Annexation Area to facilitate future annexation of the Annexation Area into the boundaries of the City of Calimesa, and to permit the two existing warehouse buildings as required by (amended) Table 18.30.030 of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code. Under existing conditions, the Northern Annexation Area partially is developed with two

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

existing occupied large industrial buildings measuring 1,012,760 s.f. and 811,000 s.f. in size, which previously were constructed pursuant to Riverside County approvals for GPA 534, CZ 7799, TPM 36564, and PPT 25337, along with an existing equestrian shade structure/stable and associated pasture that occurs along the northcentral boundary of the Northern Annexation Area and that is associated with an oƯ-site residential use to the north. Under existing conditions the Southern Annexation Area partially is developed with an existing wireless tower facility and a truck equipment and repair business (Bonafide Truck Equipment and Repair) previously entitled pursuant to PP16147 and CUP0322, respectively. Proposed ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA25-4, ZC-25-2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 would not allow for any new disturbance or development on site beyond the uses that already exist in the Annexation Area, and the proposed Project does not include applications for any new development. Rather, the Project comprises an administrative adjustment to the boundaries of the City of Calimesa and two CUPs to permit the two existing warehouse buildings, none of which would result in physical impacts to the environment beyond what already occurs under existing conditions. There are no components of the proposed Project that would result in impacts to agricultural or forestry resources beyond what already occurs under existing conditions. Accordingly, the Project would not: a) convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use; b) conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract; c) conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g)); d) result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use; or e) involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. No impact would occur.

2.1.3 Air Quality
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. 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
standard?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Expose sensitive receptors, which are located
within one (1) mile of the Annexation Area, to
substantial pollutant concentrations?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
d. Result in other emissions (such as those leading
to odors) adversely aƯecting a substantial
number of people?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a. Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation o the applicable air quality plan? b. Would the Project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase o any criteria pollutant or which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable ederal or state ambient air quality standard?
c. Would the Project expose sensitive receptors, which are located within one (1) mile o the Annexation Area, to substantial pollutant concentrations? d. Would the Project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely aƯecting a substantial number o people?
No Impact. The Project as evaluated herein entails applications for ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA-25-4, ZC25-2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 to allow for pre-zoning of the approximately 313.4-acre Annexation Area to facilitate future annexation of the Annexation Area into the boundaries of the City of Calimesa, and to permit the two existing warehouse buildings as required by (amended) Table 18.30.030 of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code. Under existing conditions, the Northern Annexation Area partially is developed with two existing occupied large industrial buildings measuring 1,012,760 s.f. and 811,000 s.f. in size, which previously were constructed pursuant to Riverside County approvals for GPA 534, CZ 7799, TPM 36564, and PPT 25337, along with an existing equestrian shade structure/stable and associated pasture that occurs along the northcentral boundary of the Northern Annexation Area and that is associated with an oƯ-site residential use to the north. Under existing conditions the Southern Annexation Area partially is developed with an existing wireless tower facility and a truck equipment and repair business (Bonafide Truck Equipment and Repair) previously entitled pursuant to PP16147 and CUP0322, respectively. Proposed ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA25-4, ZC-25-2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 would not allow for any new disturbance or development on site beyond the uses that already exist in the Annexation Areas, and the proposed Project does not include applications for any new development. Rather, the Project comprises an administrative adjustment to the boundaries of the City of Calimesa and two CUPs to permit the two existing warehouse buildings, none of which would result in physical impacts to the environment beyond what already occurs under existing conditions. There are no components of the proposed Project that would result in impacts due to a conflict with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), or due to air quality emissions, localized air quality emissions, health risks, or odors, and there are no components of the proposed Project that would result in an increase in air emissions beyond what already occurs under existing conditions. Accordingly, the Project would not: a) conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan; b) 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 standard; c) expose sensitive receptors, which are located within one (1) mile of the Annexation

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

Area, to substantial pollutant concentrations; or d) result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely aƯecting a substantial number of people. No impact would occur.

2.1.4 Biological Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse eƯect, 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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Have a substantial adverse eƯect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Have a substantial adverse eƯect on state or
federally protected wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or
other means?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a. Would the Project have a substantial adverse eƯect, 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 Caliornia Department o Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlie Service?

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

b. Would the Project have a substantial adverse eƯect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the Caliornia Department o Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlie Service? c. Would the Project have a substantial adverse eƯect on state or ederally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
d. Would the Project interere substantially with the movement o any native resident or migratory fish or wildlie species or with established native resident or migratory wildlie corridors, or impede the use o native wildlie nursery sites?
e. Would the Project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
. Would the Project conflict with the provisions o an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
No Impact. The Project as evaluated herein entails applications for ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA-25-4, ZC-25- 2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 to allow for pre-zoning of the approximately 313.4-acre Annexation Areas to facilitate future annexation of the Annexation Areas into the boundaries of the City of Calimesa, and to permit the two existing warehouse buildings as required by (amended) Table 18.30.030 of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code. Under existing conditions, the Northern Annexation Area partially is developed with two existing occupied large industrial buildings measuring 1,012,760 s.f. and 811,000 s.f. in size, which previously were constructed pursuant to Riverside County approvals for GPA 534, CZ 7799, TPM 36564, and PPT 25337, along with an existing equestrian shade structure/stable and associated pasture that occurs along the northcentral boundary of the Northern Annexation Area and that is associated with an oƯ-site residential use to the north. Under existing conditions the Southern Annexation Area is partially developed with an existing wireless tower facility and a truck equipment and repair business (Bonafide Truck Equipment and Repair) previously entitled pursuant to PP16147 and CUP0322, respectively. Proposed ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA25-4, ZC-25-2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 would not allow for any new disturbance or development on site beyond the uses that already exist in the Annexation Area, and the proposed Project does not include applications for any new development. Rather, the Project comprises an administrative adjustment to the boundaries of the City of Calimesa and two CUPs to permit the two existing warehouse buildings, none of which would result in physical impacts to the environment beyond what already occurs under existing conditions. There are no components of the proposed Project that could result in impacts to biological resources or due to a conflict with applicable plans and policies protecting sensitive biological resources, as Project approval would not authorize any new areas of physical disturbance beyond what already occurs under existing conditions. In addition, no portion of the proposed Annexation Areas are targeted for conservation pursuant to the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). Accordingly, the Project would not: a) have a substantial adverse eƯect, 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; b) have a substantial adverse eƯect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service; c) have a substantial adverse eƯect on state or federally protected

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means; d) interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites; e) conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance; or f) conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. No impact would occur.

2.1.5 Cultural Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historical resource
pursuant to § 15064.5?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a. Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance o a historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
b. Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance o an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
c. Would the Project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside o ormal cemeteries?
No Impact. The Project as evaluated herein entails applications for ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA-25-4, ZC-25- 2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 to allow for pre-zoning of the approximately 313.4-acre Annexation Areas to facilitate future annexation of the Annexation Areas into the boundaries of the City of Calimesa, and to permit the two existing warehouse buildings as required by (amended) Table 18.30.030 of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code. Under existing conditions, the Northern Annexation Area partially is developed with two existing occupied large industrial buildings measuring 1,012,760 s.f. and 811,000 s.f. in size, which previously were constructed pursuant to Riverside County approvals for GPA 534, CZ 7799, TPM 36564, and PPT 25337, along with an existing equestrian shade structure/stable and associated pasture that occurs along the northcentral boundary of the Northern Annexation Area and that is associated with an oƯ-site residential use to the north. Under existing conditions the Southern Annexation Area partially is developed with an existing wireless tower facility and a truck equipment and repair business (Bonafide Truck Equipment and Repair) previously entitled pursuant to PP16147 and CUP0322, respectively. Proposed ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTAPage 470 of 593 City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

25-4, ZC-25-2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 would not allow for any new disturbance or development on site beyond the uses that already exist in the Annexation Areas, and the proposed Project does not include applications for any new development. Rather, the Project comprises an administrative adjustment to the boundaries of the City of Calimesa and two CUPs to permit the two existing warehouse buildings, none of which would result in physical impacts to the environment beyond what already occurs under existing conditions. There are no components of the proposed Project that would result in impacts to historical resources, archaeological resources, or human remains, as Project approval would not authorize any new areas of physical disturbance beyond what already occurs under existing conditions. Accordingly, the Project would not: a) cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5; b) cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5; or c) disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. No impact would occur.

2.1.6 Energy
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Result in potentially significant environmental
impacts due to wasteful, ineƯicient, or
unnecessary consumption of energy
resources, during project construction or
operation?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Conflict with or obstruct a State or Local plan
for renewable energy or energy eƯiciency? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a. Would the Project result in potentially significant environmental impacts due to wasteul, ineƯicient, or unnecessary consumption o energy resources, during project construction or operation?
b. Would the Project conflict with or obstruct a State or Local plan or renewable energy or energy eƯiciency?
No Impact. The Project as evaluated herein entails applications for ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA-25-4, ZC-25- 2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 to allow for pre-zoning of the approximately 313.4-acre Annexation Areas to facilitate future annexation of the Annexation Areas into the boundaries of the City of Calimesa, and to permit the two existing warehouse buildings as required by (amended) Table 18.30.030 of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code. Under existing conditions, the Northern Annexation Area partially is developed with two existing occupied large industrial buildings measuring 1,012,760 s.f. and 811,000 s.f. in size, which previously were constructed pursuant to Riverside County approvals for GPA 534, CZ 7799, TPM 36564, and PPT 25337, along with an existing equestrian shade structure/stable and associated pasture that occurs along the northcentral boundary of the Northern Annexation Area and that is associated with an oƯ-site residential use to the north. Under existing conditions the Southern Annexation Area partially is developed with an existing

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

wireless tower facility and a truck equipment and repair business (Bonafide Truck Equipment and Repair) previously entitled pursuant to PP16147 and CUP0322, respectively. Proposed ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA25-4, ZC-25-2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 would not allow for any new disturbance or development on site beyond the uses that already exist in the Annexation Areas, and the proposed Project does not include applications for any new development. Rather, the Project comprises an administrative adjustment to the boundaries of the City of Calimesa and two CUPs to permit the two existing warehouse buildings, none of which would result in physical impacts to the environment beyond what already occurs under existing conditions. There are no components of the proposed Project that would result in an increase in the demand for energy resources within the Annexation Area beyond what occurs under existing conditions. Thus, the proposed Project that would have no potential to result in the wasteful, ineƯicient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, and there are no components of the proposed Project that would have the potential to conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy eƯiciency.

Accordingly, the Project would not: a) result in potentially significant environmental impacts due to wasteful, ineƯicient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation; or b) conflict with or obstruct a State or Local plan for renewable energy or energy eƯiciency. No impact would occur.

2.1.7 Geology and Soils
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse eƯects, including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault,
as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines
and Geology Special Publication 42.
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse eƯects, including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving strong seismic ground shaking?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse eƯects, including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse eƯects, including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving landslides?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
f. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project,
and potentially result in on- or oƯ-site landslide,
lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or
collapse?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
g. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1- B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
h. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of waste water?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
i. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a. Would the Project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse eƯects, including the risk o loss, injury, or death involving rupture o a known earthquake ault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist or the area or based on other substantial evidence o a known ault? Reer to Division o Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
b. Would the Project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse eƯects, including the risk o loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking? c. Would the Project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse eƯects, including the risk o loss, injury, or death involving seismic-related ground ailure, including liqueaction? d. Would the Project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse eƯects, including the risk o loss, injury, or death involving landslides? e. Would the Project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss o topsoil? . Would the Project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result o the project, and potentially result in on- or oƯ-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liqueaction or collapse?
g. Would the Project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B o the Uniorm Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to lie or property? h. Would the Project have soils incapable o adequately supporting the use o septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available or the disposal o waste water?

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

i. Would the Project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic eature?
No Impact. The Project as evaluated herein entails applications for ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA-25-4, ZC-25- 2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 to allow for pre-zoning of the approximately 313.4-acre Annexation Areas to facilitate future annexation of the Annexation Areas into the boundaries of the City of Calimesa, and to permit the two existing warehouse buildings as required by (amended) Table 18.30.030 of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code. Under existing conditions, the Northern Annexation Area partially is developed with two existing occupied large industrial buildings measuring 1,012,760 s.f. and 811,000 s.f. in size, which previously were constructed pursuant to Riverside County approvals for GPA 534, CZ 7799, TPM 36564, and PPT 25337, along with an existing equestrian shade structure/stable and associated pasture that occurs along the northcentral boundary of the Northern Annexation Area and that is associated with an oƯ-site residential use to the north. Under existing conditions the Southern Annexation Area partially is developed with an existing wireless tower facility and a truck equipment and repair business (Bonafide Truck Equipment and Repair) previously entitled pursuant to PP16147 and CUP0322, respectively. Proposed ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA25-4, ZC-25-2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 would not allow for any new disturbance or development on site beyond the uses that already exist in the Annexation Areas, and the proposed Project does not include applications for any new development. Rather, the Project comprises an administrative adjustment to the boundaries of the City of Calimesa and two CUPs to permit the two existing warehouse buildings, none of which would result in physical impacts to the environment beyond what already occurs under existing conditions. There are no components of the proposed Project that would result in impacts to or impacts from the existing geologic conditions within the Annexation Areas beyond what already occurs under existing conditions. Accordingly, the Project would not: a) directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse eƯects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault; b) directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse eƯects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking; c) directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse eƯects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction; d) directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse eƯects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides; e) result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil; f) be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or oƯ-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse; g) be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property; h) have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water; or i) directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. No impact would occur.

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

2.1.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may have
a significant impact on the environment?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse
gases?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a. Would the Project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
b. Would the Project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted or the purpose o reducing the emissions o greenhouse gases?
No Impact. The Project as evaluated herein entails applications for ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA-25-4, ZC-25- 2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 to allow for pre-zoning of the approximately 313.4-acre Annexation Areas to facilitate future annexation of the Annexation Areas into the boundaries of the City of Calimesa, and to permit the two existing warehouse buildings as required by (amended) Table 18.30.030 of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code. Under existing conditions, the Northern Annexation Area partially is developed with two existing occupied large industrial buildings measuring 1,012,760 s.f. and 811,000 s.f. in size, which previously were constructed pursuant to Riverside County approvals for GPA 534, CZ 7799, TPM 36564, and PPT 25337, along with an existing equestrian shade structure/stable and associated pasture that occurs along the northcentral boundary of the Northern Annexation Area and that is associated with an oƯ-site residential use to the north. Under existing conditions the Southern Annexation Area partially is developed with an existing wireless tower facility and a truck equipment and repair business (Bonafide Truck Equipment and Repair) previously entitled pursuant to PP16147 and CUP0322, respectively. Proposed ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA25-4, ZC-25-2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 would not allow for any new disturbance or development on site beyond the uses that already exist in the Annexation Areas, and the proposed Project does not include applications for any new development. Rather, the Project comprises an administrative adjustment to the boundaries of the City of Calimesa and two CUPs to permit the two existing warehouse buildings, none of which would result in physical impacts to the environment beyond what already occurs under existing conditions. There are no components of the proposed Project that would result in an increase in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions beyond what already occurs under existing conditions, and there are no components of the proposed Project that would conflict with applicable policies and regulations related to GHGs, including the City of Calimesa’s General Plan. Accordingly, the Project would not: a) generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; or b) conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. No impact would occur.

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

2.1.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use,
or disposal of hazardous materials?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one-quarter (1/4) mile of an existing
or proposed school?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

a. Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal o hazardous materials? b. Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably oreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release o hazardous materials into the environment?
c. Would the Project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter (1/4) mile o an existing or proposed school? d. Would the Project be located on a site which is included on a list o hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
No Impact. The Project as evaluated herein entails applications for ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA-25-4, ZC-25- 2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 to allow for pre-zoning of the approximately 313.4-acre Annexation Areas to facilitate future annexation of the Annexation Areas into the boundaries of the City of Calimesa, and to permit the two existing warehouse buildings as required by (amended) Table 18.30.030 of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code. Under existing conditions, the Northern Annexation Area partially is developed with two existing occupied large industrial buildings measuring 1,012,760 s.f. and 811,000 s.f. in size, which previously were constructed pursuant to Riverside County approvals for GPA 534, CZ 7799, TPM 36564, and PPT 25337,

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

along with an existing equestrian shade structure/stable and associated pasture that occurs along the northcentral boundary of the Northern Annexation Area and that is associated with an oƯ-site residential use to the north. Under existing conditions the Southern Annexation Area partially is developed with an existing wireless tower facility and a truck equipment and repair business (Bonafide Truck Equipment and Repair) previously entitled pursuant to PP16147 and CUP0322, respectively. Proposed ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA25-4, ZC-25-2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 would not allow for any new disturbance or development on site beyond the uses that already exist in the Annexation Areas, and the proposed Project does not include applications for any new development. Rather, the Project comprises an administrative adjustment to the boundaries of the City of Calimesa and two CUPs to permit the two existing warehouse buildings, none of which would result in physical impacts to the environment beyond what already occurs under existing conditions. There are no components of the proposed Project or Annexation Areas that would have the potential to result in an increase in the use of or release of hazardous materials on site, nor are there any components of the proposed Project that could result in hazardous materials impacts to nearby schools.

Accordingly, the Project would not: a) create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials; b) create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment; c) emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter (1/4) mile of an existing or proposed school; or d) be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 that could result in a significant hazard to the public or the environment.

No impact would occur.

2.1.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade
surface or ground water quality?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such
that the project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would result
in substantial erosion or siltation on- or oƯ-site?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
course of a stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would
substantially increase the rate or amount of surface
runoƯ in a manner which would result in flooding onor oƯsite? e. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would create
or contribute runoƯ water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoƯ?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would
impede or redirect flood flows?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
g. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk the
release of pollutants due to project inundation? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ h. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a. Would the Project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surace or ground water quality? b. Would the Project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management o the basin?
c. Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern o the site or area, including through the alteration o the course o a stream or river or through the addition o impervious suraces, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or oƯ-site? d. Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern o the site or area, including through the alteration o the course o a stream or river or through the addition o impervious suraces, in a manner which would substantially increase the rate or amount o surace runoƯ in a manner which would result in flooding on- or oƯsite? e. Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern o the site or area, including through the alteration o the course o a stream or river or through the addition o impervious

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

suraces, in a manner which would create or contribute runoƯ water which would exceed the capacity o existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources o polluted runoƯ?
. Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern o the site or area, including through the alteration o the course o a stream or river or through the addition o impervious suraces, in a manner which would impede or redirect flood flows? g. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would the Project risk the release o pollutants due to project inundation?
h. Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation o a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
No Impact. The Project as evaluated herein entails applications for ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA-25-4, ZC-25- 2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 to allow for pre-zoning of the approximately 313.4-acre Annexation Areas to facilitate future annexation of the Annexation Areas into the boundaries of the City of Calimesa, and to permit the two existing warehouse buildings as required by (amended) Table 18.30.030 of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code. Under existing conditions, the Northern Annexation Area partially is developed with two existing occupied large industrial buildings measuring 1,012,760 s.f. and 811,000 s.f. in size, which previously were constructed pursuant to Riverside County approvals for GPA 534, CZ 7799, TPM 36564, and PPT 25337, along with an existing equestrian shade structure/stable and associated pasture that occurs along the northcentral boundary of the Northern Annexation Area and that is associated with an oƯ-site residential use to the north. Under existing conditions the Southern Annexation Area partially is developed with an existing wireless tower facility and a truck equipment and repair business (Bonafide Truck Equipment and Repair) previously entitled pursuant to PP16147 and CUP0322, respectively.

As part of the existing development within the Northern Annexation Area, a cooperative agreement (herein, “Agreement”) was executed between the property owner and the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFCWCD), dated March 2, 2021. As a component of the Agreement, the developers of the existing development on site were required to construct certain flood control improvements. These improvements, which are depicted on RCFCWCD Drawing No. 5-0236, required the construction of approximately 4,150 lineal feet of underground storm drain lines (Line A) in the southern portions of the property, the construction of an outlet basin for Line A, construction of approximately 510 lineal feet of lateral storm drains (Lateral A-1), the construction of approximately 1,908 lineal feet of lateral storm drain (Lateral A-2), installation of approximately 9 lineal feet of lateral storm drain (Lateral A-8), installation of approximately 7 lineal feet of lateral storm drain (Lateral A-9), and construction of an inlet basin. These improvements were constructed as part of the existing development in the Northern Annexation Area, and the required improvements were accepted by RCFCWCD as documented in a letter from RCFCWCD dated January 8, 2024. The Agreement and January 8, 2024, letter from RCFCWCD are available for public review at the City of Calimesa Planning Department and can be reviewed during the City’s normal business hours at 908 Park Avenue, Calimesa, CA 92320.

Proposed ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA-25-4, ZC-25-2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 would not allow for any new disturbance or development on site beyond the uses that already exist in the Annexation Areas, and the proposed Project does not include applications for any new development. Rather, the Project comprises an administrative adjustment to the boundaries of the City of Calimesa and two CUPs to permit the two existing

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

warehouse buildings, none of which would result in physical impacts to the environment beyond what already occurs under existing conditions. There are no components of the proposed Project or Annexation Areas that would have the potential to result in alterations to existing site drainage patterns, result in changes to surface water or groundwater quality, or that could result in changes to areas subject to flood hazards.

Accordingly, the Project would not: a) violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality; b) substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin; c) substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or oƯ-site; d) substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoƯ in a manner which would result in flooding on- or oƯsite; e) substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would create or contribute runoƯ water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoƯ; f) substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would impede or redirect flood flows; g) risk the release of pollutants due to project inundation from floods, tsunamis, or seiches; or h) conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. No impact would occur.

2.1.11 Land Use and Planning
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Physically divide an established community? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Cause a significant environmental impact due
to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding
or mitigating an environmental eƯect?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a. Would the Project physically divide an established community? b. Would the Project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted or the purpose o avoiding or mitigating an environmental eƯect?
No Impact. The Project as evaluated herein entails applications for ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA-25-4, ZC-25- 2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 to allow for pre-zoning of the approximately 313.4-acre Annexation Areas to facilitate future annexation of the Annexation Areas into the boundaries of the City of Calimesa, and to permit the two existing warehouse buildings as required by (amended) Table 18.30.030 of the City of Calimesa

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

Municipal Code. Under existing conditions, the Northern Annexation Area partially is developed with two existing occupied large industrial buildings measuring 1,012,760 s.f. and 811,000 s.f. in size, which previously were constructed pursuant to Riverside County approvals for GPA 534, CZ 7799, TPM 36564, and PPT 25337, along with an existing equestrian shade structure/stable and associated pasture that occurs along the northcentral boundary of the Northern Annexation Area and that is associated with an oƯ-site residential use to the north. Under existing conditions the Southern Annexation Area partially is developed with an existing wireless tower facility and a truck equipment and repair business (Bonafide Truck Equipment and Repair) previously entitled pursuant to PP16147 and CUP0322, respectively. Proposed ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA25-4, ZC-25-2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 would not allow for any new disturbance or development on site beyond the uses that already exist in the Annexation Areas, and the proposed Project does not include applications for any new development. Rather, the Project comprises an administrative adjustment to the boundaries of the City of Calimesa and two CUPs to permit the two existing warehouse buildings, none of which would result in physical impacts to the environment beyond what already occurs under existing conditions.

With approval of GPA 25-2, the light industrial uses within the Northern Annexation Area would be designated by the General Plan for “Light Industrial (LI)” land uses with a “Warehouse Overlay Zone (WOZ),” and would be zoned for “Light Industrial (L-I)” land uses with a “Warehouse Overlay Zone (WOZ).” The northern portions of the Northern Annexation Area, along with small parcel of land along the east-central boundary of the Northern Annexation Area, would be designated for “Open Space Residential (1 DU/10 ac) (OSR)” land uses and would be zoned for “O-S-R (Open Space Residential).” The existing wireless tower facility and a truck equipment and repair business within the Southern Annexation Area would be designated by the General Plan for “Community Commercial (CC)” land uses and would be zoned for “C-C (Community Commercial, FAR 50:1),” while the eastern portions of the Southern Annexation Area would be designated for “Residential Estate (RE)” land uses and would be zoned for “R-E (Residential Estate).” The LI land use designation and L-I zoning classification allow development up to a floor area ratio (FAR) of

0.5 and permit industrial activities such as low-intensity packing, manufacturing, assembly of nonhazardous products and materials, and limited retail sales and services related to or supportive of manufacturing activity and employees. The existing light industrial buildings within the Northern Annexation Area and that are proposed to be designated for LI land uses and proposed to be zoned for L-I land uses have a total FAR between 0.25 and 0.34, which is below the maximum FAR for the LI land use designation and L-I zone, while the existing warehouse buildings are occupied by light industrial warehousing uses; thus, the existing warehouse buildings would be consistent with the site’s proposed LI land use designation and L-I zoning classification. In addition, Table 1, Northern Annexation Area Consistency with City of Calimesa Industrial Development Standards, provides an analysis of the existing development’s consistency with the Industrial Development Standards as set forth in Table 18.30.040 of Chapter 18.30 (Industrial Zone Districts) of the City’s Municipal Code. As shown, the existing warehouse buildings fully comply with all applicable development standards of the proposed “Light Industrial (L-I)” zone. In addition, approval of proposed ZC25-2, ZTA-25-4, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 would permit the existing warehouse buildings that currently exceed the maximum 250,000 s.f. allowed within the L-I zone pursuant to Table 18.30.030 of the City’s Municipal Code, as approval of these applications would allow for warehouse buildings up to 1,100,000 s.f. in size with approval of the proposed CUP applications. Accordingly, and assuming approval of the Project’s

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

applications for ZC-25-2, ZTA-25-4, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5, the Project would not result in any impacts due to a conflict with the site’s proposed LI land use designation or L-I zoning classification.

Table 1 Northern Annexation Area Consistency with City of Calimesa Industrial Development Standards
Standard
Requirement for Light
Industrial (L-I) Building 1 Design Building 2 Design
Minimum site area (net) 20,000 s.f. +/- 47.7 net acres (2.1 million s.f.)
± 88.8 net acres (3.9
million s.f.)
Street Setback - Building1 20 feet from ROW 375 feet 514 feet Street Setback – Parking 10 feet from ROW 240 feet 373 feet Street Setback – Landscaping Min. 8-foot-wide
parkway
23 feet 23 feet
Side Street Setback 8 feet from ROW 179 feet 481 feet
Rear Yard Setback All storage of materials
and display areas shall
be located no closer
than 15 feet of the
property line adjacent to
the public right-of-way
N/A2
N/A2
Maximum Floor Area Ratio
(FAR)

0.50 0.39 0.26

1. The City of Calimesa General Plan Circulation Element does not classify Cherry Valley Boulevard as a Circulation Element Roadway; however, this road is classified as an “Arterial (128-foot right-of-way)” by the Riverside County General Plan, and as such the standards for “Major and Secondary Arterials” were applied.

2. The existing development consists of two warehouse buildings with the storage of materials occurring within the existing building; no storage of materials occurs outdoors.

Notes: ROW = Right-of-Way
The CC land use designation and C-C zoning classification allow for large-scale commercial activities serving the City of Calimesa or the subregion, allow for a maximum FAR of 0.5, and permit a variety of commercial uses, including “Appliance stores and repair (large appliances),” “Automative repair garages, which do not include body and fender shops or spray painting” (subject to compliance with the development standards for commercial districts as set forth in Section 18.25.050 of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code), and wireless communication facilities (with approval of a Conditional Use Permit). Table 2, Southern Annexation Area – Existing Truck Equipment and Repair Facility Consistency with City of Calimesa Commercial Development Standards, provides an analysis of the existing Bonafide Truck and Equipment Repair facility’s consistency with the Industrial Development Standards as set forth in Table 18.25.040 of Chapter 18.25 (Commercial Zone Districts) of the City’s Municipal Code. As shown, the existing Bonafide Truck and Equipment Repair facility fully complies with all applicable development standards of the proposed C-C zone. In addition, the existing wireless tower facility is a permitted use within the proposed CC zone with approval of a CUP. The existing wireless tower facility most recently was permitted by Riverside County PP16147, which includes site-specific conditions of approval that are functionally equivalent to a CUP, and as such the existing wireless tower facility would be considered a permitted use within the proposed CC land use designation and C-C zone. Accordingly, the Project would not result in any impacts due to a conflict with the site’s proposed CC land use designation or C-C zoning classification.

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

Table 2 Southern Annexation Area – Existing Truck Equipment and Repair Facility Consistency with City of Calimesa Commercial Development Standards
Standard
Requirement for Community
Commercial (C-C)
Existing Bonafide Truck and
Equipment Repair Facility
Minimum Site Area (net) 10,000 s.f. ± 196,000 s.f.

Minimum Front Setback 20 feet1 ± 170 feet
Minimum Side Setback (ea.) 10 feet ± 42 feet
Minimum Side Street Setback 20 feet N/A
Minimum Rear Yard Setback 10 feet ± 280 feet
Maximum Floor Area Ratio 0.50 ± 0.04
Maximum Height for Buildings and Structures 2 stories/35 feet 1 story/± 25 feet

1. The front yard setback may be reduced to zero feet if a public place or sitting or eating area is provided within the required setback area. Playground equipment does not satisfy this requirement.

The “OSR – Open Space Residential (1 DU/10 AC)” land use designation and the “O-S-R (Open Space Residential)” zoning classification are intended to preserve open space while allowing for limited detached single-family development on parcels of 10 acres or greater, and also allows for agricultural-related uses.

No development is planned as part of the Project within the areas proposed to be designated for OSR land uses or that would be zoned for O-S-R land uses. There is an existing equestrian shade structure/stable and associated pasture that occurs along the north-central boundary of the Northern Annexation Area and that is associated with an oƯ-site residential use to the north. No changes are proposed to the existing equestrian shade structure/stable and pasture as part of the Project. Private equestrian stables are identified as a permitted use within the O-S-R zoning classification. Accordingly, the Project would not result in any impacts due to a conflict with the site’s proposed OSR land use designation or O-S-R zoning classification.

The “RE (Residential Estate)” land use designation and the “R-E (Residential Estate)” zoning classification are intended to accommodate single-family detached homes as well as buildings and structures related to agriculture, farm use, animal keeping, and equestrian uses on minimum 5-acre lot sizes. No development is proposed as part of the Project within the eastern portions of the Southern Annexation Area that are proposed to be designated for RE land uses and that would be zoned for R-E land uses, and there is no existing development within this portion of the Southern Annexation Area. It should be noted that under existing conditions, the Riverside County General Plan designates this portion of the Southern Annexation Area for “Community Development – Very Low Density Residential (CD-VLDR)” land uses, which allows for residential development on minimum one-acre lot sizes. Thus, the Project would not result in any impacts due to a conflict with the proposed RE land use designation or R-E zoning classification, and the Project would not allow for more dwelling units than is allowed on site under existing conditions based on the existing Riverside County CD-VLDR General Plan land use designation.

In addition, there are no components of the proposed Project that would have the potential to physically divide an established community, or that could cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental eƯect.

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

Accordingly, the Project would not: a) physically divide an established community; or b) cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental eƯect. No impact would occur.

2.1.12 Mineral Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to
the region or the residents of the State?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locallyimportant mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific
plan or other land use plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a. Would the Project result in the loss o availability o a known mineral resource that would be o value to the region or the residents o the State?
b. Would the Project result in the loss o availability o a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No Impact. The Project as evaluated herein entails applications for ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA-25-4, ZC-25- 2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 to allow for pre-zoning of the approximately 313.4-acre Annexation Areas to facilitate future annexation of the Annexation Areas into the boundaries of the City of Calimesa, and to permit the two existing warehouse buildings as required by (amended) Table 18.30.030 of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code. Under existing conditions, the Northern Annexation Area partially is developed with two existing occupied large industrial buildings measuring 1,012,760 s.f. and 811,000 s.f. in size, which previously were constructed pursuant to Riverside County approvals for GPA 534, CZ 7799, TPM 36564, and PPT 25337, along with an existing equestrian shade structure/stable and associated pasture that occurs along the northcentral boundary of the Northern Annexation Area and that is associated with an oƯ-site residential use to the north. Under existing conditions the Southern Annexation Area partially is developed with an existing wireless tower facility and a truck equipment and repair business (Bonafide Truck Equipment and Repair) previously entitled pursuant to PP16147 and CUP0322, respectively. Proposed ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA25-4, ZC-25-2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 would not allow for any new disturbance or development on site beyond the uses that already exist in the Annexation Areas, and the proposed Project does not include applications for any new development. Rather, the Project comprises an administrative adjustment to the boundaries of the City of Calimesa and two CUPs to permit the two existing warehouse buildings, none of which would result in physical impacts to the environment beyond what already occurs under existing conditions.

According to mapping information available from the California State Mining and Geology Board (formerly the Division of Mines and Geology), both the Northern Annexation Area and the Southern Annexation Area

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

are located classified as occurring within Mineral Resources Zone (MRZ) 3, which is defined as, “[a]reas containing mineral deposits the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data” (CDC, n.d.).

Accordingly, the Project has no potential to result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region or the residents of the State, and no impact would occur. In addition, the City of Calimesa General Plan, the Riverside County General Plan, and the Riverside County The Pass Area Plan (TPAP) do not identify the Annexation Area as a locally-important mineral resource recovery site, the Annexation Area is not subject to any approved specific plans, and there are no other plans that designate the Annexation Area as a locally-important mineral resource recovery site. (Calimesa, 2014; Riverside County, 2021a; Riverside County, 2021b) As such, the Project has no potential to result in potential impacts to mineral resources. Therefore, the Project would not: a) result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region or the residents of the State; or b) result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan. No impact would occur.

2.1.13 Noise
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project result in:
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
vicinity of the project in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a. Would the Project result in the generation o a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity o the project in excess o standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards o other agencies? b. Would the Project result in the generation o excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
c. For a project located within the vicinity o a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles o a public airport or public use airport,

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

would the Project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact. The Project as evaluated herein entails applications for ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA-25-4, ZC-25- 2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 to allow for pre-zoning of the approximately 313.4-acre Annexation Areas to facilitate future annexation of the Annexation Areas into the boundaries of the City of Calimesa, and to permit the two existing warehouse buildings as required by (amended) Table 18.30.030 of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code. Under existing conditions, the Northern Annexation Area partially is developed with two existing occupied large industrial buildings measuring 1,012,760 s.f. and 811,000 s.f. in size, which previously were constructed pursuant to Riverside County approvals for GPA 534, CZ 7799, TPM 36564, and PPT 25337, along with an existing equestrian shade structure/stable and associated pasture that occurs along the northcentral boundary of the Northern Annexation Area and that is associated with an oƯ-site residential use to the north. Under existing conditions the Southern Annexation Area partially is developed with an existing wireless tower facility and a truck equipment and repair business (Bonafide Truck Equipment and Repair) previously entitled pursuant to PP16147 and CUP0322, respectively. Proposed ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA25-4, ZC-25-2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 would not allow for any new disturbance or development on site beyond the uses that already exist in the Annexation Areas, and the proposed Project does not include applications for any new development. Rather, the Project comprises an administrative adjustment to the boundaries of the City of Calimesa and two CUPs to permit the two existing warehouse buildings, none of which would result in physical impacts to the environment beyond what already occurs under existing conditions. Accordingly, the proposed Project would have no potential to result in impacts due to construction- or operational-related noise or vibration beyond what already occurs under existing conditions, and there are no components of the proposed Project that would result in the exposure of people residing or working in the area to excessive airport-related noise levels beyond what already occurs under existing conditions. Therefore, the Project would not: a) generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance; b) generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels; or c) expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels. No impact would occur.

2.1.14 Population and Housing
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Induce substantial unplanned population growth
in an area, either directly (for example, by
proposing new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing people
or housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

a. Would the Project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (or example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (or example, through extension o roads or other inrastructure)?
b. Would the Project displace substantial numbers o existing people or housing, necessitating the construction o replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. The Project as evaluated herein entails applications for ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA-25-4, ZC-25- 2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 to allow for pre-zoning of the approximately 313.4-acre Annexation Areas to facilitate future annexation of the Annexation Areas into the boundaries of the City of Calimesa, and to permit the two existing warehouse buildings as required by (amended) Table 18.30.030 of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code. Under existing conditions, the Northern Annexation Area partially is developed with two existing occupied large industrial buildings measuring 1,012,760 s.f. and 811,000 s.f. in size, which previously were constructed pursuant to Riverside County approvals for GPA 534, CZ 7799, TPM 36564, and PPT 25337, along with an existing equestrian shade structure/stable and associated pasture that occurs along the northcentral boundary of the Northern Annexation Area and that is associated with an oƯ-site residential use to the north. Under existing conditions the Southern Annexation Area partially is developed with an existing wireless tower facility and a truck equipment and repair business (Bonafide Truck Equipment and Repair) previously entitled pursuant to PP16147 and CUP0322, respectively. Proposed ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA25-4, ZC-25-2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 would not allow for any new disturbance or development on site beyond the uses that already exist in the Annexation Areas, and the proposed Project does not include applications for any new development. Rather, the Project comprises an administrative adjustment to the boundaries of the City of Calimesa and two CUPs to permit the two existing warehouse buildings, none of which would result in physical impacts to the environment beyond what already occurs under existing conditions.

The portions of the Annexation Area that are proposed to be designated by the Calimesa General Plan for “Light Industrial (LI)” land uses with a “Warehouse Overlay Zone (WOZ)” and that would be zoned for zoned for “Light Industrial (L-I)” land uses with a “Warehouse Overlay Zone (WOZ)” already are fully developed with warehouse uses. The portions of the Annexation Areas proposed designated by the General Plan for “Community Commercial (CC)” land uses and that would be zoned for “C-C (Community Commercial, FAR 50:1)” are partially developed with an existing truck and equipment repair facility and wireless tower. While there is a potential that additional development could occur within the areas to be designated for CC land uses and that would be zoned for C-C, such future development already is accounted by regional plans (e.g., the South Coast Air Quality Management District [SCAQMD], Southern California Association of Governments [SCAG] growth projections, etc.) because the new land use designations and zoning classifications under the City of Calimesa align with the existing Riverside County General Plan land use designation for the site. Likewise, while there is a potential for additional future development within the areas proposed to be designated for Open Space Residential (1 DU/10 ac) (OSR)” land uses and that would be zoned for “O-S-R (Open Space Residential)” and in the areas proposed to be designated for “Residential Estate (RE)” land uses and would be zoned for “R-E (Residential Estate),” any such future development also already is accounted for by regional plans and the Riverside County General Plan. In fact, development within the portions of the site proposed to be designated RE and zoned R-E within the Southern Annexation Area would be limited to one residential dwelling unit per five acres, while the existing Riverside County General Plan land use designation for this portion of the Southern Annexation Area currently allows

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

residential development on minimum one-acre lot sizes; thus, the Project would not allow for an increase in the site’s planned residential population as compared to the site’s existing Riverside County General Plan land use designation of CD-VLDR. The land use designations and zoning classifications proposed as part of the Project for the Northern Annexation Area and Southern Annexation Area therefore would not allow for any intensification of population growth beyond what already is accounted for under existing conditions. No impact would occur.

The proposed Project would not authorize any new development on site. While existing residential communities occur to the southeast, southwest, and west of the Annexation Areas, there are no components of the proposed Project that would physically divide these existing established communities.

Even with future development on the undeveloped portions of the Annexation Areas, roadway connections between these existing communities would be maintained. As such, the Project would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere, and no impact would occur.

Therefore, the Project would not: a) induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure); or b) displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. No impact would occur.

2.1.15 Public Services
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered fire protection facilities, need for new or
physically altered fire protection facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered police facilities, need for new or physically
altered police facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental impacts, in
order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response
times or other performance objectives?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
altered school facilities, need for new or physically
altered school facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental impacts, in
order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response
times or other performance objectives?
d. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered park facilities, need for new or physically
altered park facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of any other new or
physically altered public facilities, need for other new or physically altered facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant environmental impacts,
in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,
response times or other performance objectives?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a. Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision o new or physically altered fire protection acilities, need or new or physically altered fire protection acilities, the construction o which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other perormance objectives?
b. Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision o new or physically altered police acilities, need or new or physically altered police acilities, the construction o which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other perormance objectives? c. Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision o new or physically altered school acilities, need or new or physically altered school acilities, the construction o which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other perormance objectives? d. Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision o new or physically altered park acilities, need or new or physically altered park acilities, the construction o which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other perormance objectives? e. Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision o any other new or physically altered public acilities, need or other new or physically altered

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

acilities, the construction o which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other perormance objectives? No Impact. The Project as evaluated herein entails applications for ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA-25-4, ZC-25- 2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 to allow for pre-zoning of the approximately 313.4-acre Annexation Areas to facilitate future annexation of the Annexation Areas into the boundaries of the City of Calimesa, and to permit the two existing warehouse buildings as required by (amended) Table 18.30.030 of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code. Under existing conditions, the Northern Annexation Area partially is developed with two existing occupied large industrial buildings measuring 1,012,760 s.f. and 811,000 s.f. in size, which previously were constructed pursuant to Riverside County approvals for GPA 534, CZ 7799, TPM 36564, and PPT 25337, along with an existing equestrian shade structure/stable and associated pasture that occurs along the northcentral boundary of the Northern Annexation Area and that is associated with an oƯ-site residential use to the north. Under existing conditions the Southern Annexation Area partially is developed with an existing wireless tower facility and a truck equipment and repair business (Bonafide Truck Equipment and Repair) previously entitled pursuant to PP16147 and CUP0322, respectively. Proposed ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA25-4, ZC-25-2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 would not allow for any new disturbance or development on site beyond the uses that already exist in the Annexation Areas, and the proposed Project does not include applications for any new development. Rather, the Project comprises an administrative adjustment to the boundaries of the City of Calimesa and two CUPs to permit the two existing warehouse buildings, none of which would result in physical impacts to the environment beyond what already occurs under existing conditions.

The Project does not include any proposed public facilities on site, such as fire stations, police facilities, school facilities, park facilities, or any other public facilities such as health care facilities or libraries. In addition, the Project would not allow for an intensification of land uses on site as compared to the site’s adopted Riverside County General Plan land use designations or zoning classifications; thus, the Project would not result in an increase in demand for public services beyond what occurs on site or that is planned on site under existing conditions.

The City of Calimesa Fire Marshal and Fire Chief reviewed the Project’s applications for GPA 22-04, ZC 22- 02, CUP 24-02, and CUP 24-03, and determined that because the existing buildings within the Northern Annexation Area and Southern Annexation Area were constructed in accordance with Riverside County’s building standards, including standards related to fire protection and the California Fire Code (as adopted by Riverside County), the Fire Marshal and Fire Chief determined that the existing development would not pose a substantial adverse eƯect associated with wildland fire hazards. In addition, and in response to growth in the Project area, a new fire station is planned to be constructed on a three-acre site within Planning Area TC-4 of the Oak Valley Town Center Specific Plan, which ultimately would provide fire protection services to the Annexation Area. Funding for the new fire station is anticipated to be accomplished through the imposition of impact fees on new developments within the City pursuant to City of Calimesa Municipal Code Chapter 18.115 (Development Impact Fees), including impact fees that may be assessed on future development within the Northern Annexation Area or Southern Annexation Area.

With respect to police protection services, under existing conditions police protection services to the Annexation Areas are provided by the Riverside County SheriƯ’s Department (RCSD) from their Cabazon Station, located at 50290 Main Street, Cabazon, CA 92230, located approximately 13.8 miles southeast of

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

the Annexation Areas. The City of Calimesa contracts with the RCSD to provide police protection services within the City limits, with police protection services to the City also provided by the Cabazon Station. Thus, because the existing developments within the Project area already are served by the RCSD from the Cabazon Station, and because the existing developments would continue to be served by the RCSD with approval of the Project’s proposed annexation into the City of Calimesa, the proposed Project would not result in an increase in demand for police protection services. Mandatory payment of fees, which already has occurred as part of building permits issued by Riverside County and/or would be required for any new development proposed within the Northern Annexation Area or Southern Annexation Area, would ensure that existing or future development within the Annexation Areas has no adverse eƯects on police protection facilities and that existing or future development within the Annexation Areas would have no eƯect on service ratios, response times or other performance objectives.

As noted above, any future development within the Northern Annexation Area or Southern Annexation Area following Project approval would be required to contribute fees pursuant City of Calimesa Municipal Code Chapter 18.115 (Development Impact Fees), which, in addition to fire protection and police facilities, would provide fair-share funding for any new or expanded parks or other public facilities necessitated by such future development. Additionally, any new development within the Annexation Areas would be subject to payment of school impact fees pursuant to Leroy F. Greene School Facilities Act of 1998 at the rates established by the Beaumont Unified School District (BUSD), which would constitute full and complete mitigation for any future impacts to school services.

Accordingly, the Project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire protection, police, school, park, library, or health care facilities, need for new or physically altered fire protection, police, school, park, library, or health care facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives. No impact would occur.

2.1.16 Recreation
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would occur
or be accelerated?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Does the project include recreational facilities
or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical eƯect on the environment?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

a. Would the Project increase the use o existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational acilities such that substantial physical deterioration o the acility would occur or be accelerated?
b. Does the Project include recreational acilities or require the construction or expansion o recreational acilities which might have an adverse physical eƯect on the environment? No Impact. The Project as evaluated herein entails applications for ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA-25-4, ZC-25- 2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 to allow for pre-zoning of the approximately 313.4-acre Annexation Areas to facilitate future annexation of the Annexation Areas into the boundaries of the City of Calimesa, and to permit the two existing warehouse buildings as required by (amended) Table 18.30.030 of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code. Under existing conditions, the Northern Annexation Area partially is developed with two existing occupied large industrial buildings measuring 1,012,760 s.f. and 811,000 s.f. in size, which previously were constructed pursuant to Riverside County approvals for GPA 534, CZ 7799, TPM 36564, and PPT 25337, along with an existing equestrian shade structure/stable and associated pasture that occurs along the northcentral boundary of the Northern Annexation Area and that is associated with an oƯ-site residential use to the north. Under existing conditions the Southern Annexation Area partially is developed with an existing wireless tower facility and a truck equipment and repair business (Bonafide Truck Equipment and Repair) previously entitled pursuant to PP16147 and CUP0322, respectively. Proposed ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA25-4, ZC-25-2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 would not allow for any new disturbance or development on site beyond the uses that already exist in the Annexation Areas, and the proposed Project does not include applications for any new development. Rather, the Project comprises an administrative adjustment to the boundaries of the City of Calimesa and two CUPs to permit the two existing warehouse buildings, none of which would result in physical impacts to the environment beyond what already occurs under existing conditions.

The proposed Project does not include any proposal for new or expanded recreational facilities on site; thus, the Project would not include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical eƯect on the environment. Additionally, according to City of Calimesa General Plan Figure OSPR-2 (Trails Master Plan), no portion of the Southern Annexation Area is planned to include any trail connections. Although the Trails Master Plan exhibit identifies “Unknown” trails within the Northern Annexation Area, the existing warehouse developments within the Northern Annexation Area were designed to accommodate on-site trails that connect with the existing “Unknown” trails present within the northern portions of the Northern Annexation Area. Thus, the Project would not conflict with the Trails Master Plan.

In addition, the Project would not authorize any new development on site beyond what already is allowed on site under existing conditions; thus, the Project would not include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical eƯect on the environment. Any such new development within the Annexation Areas in the future would be subject to review for compliance with CEQA, and any such new development on the Annexation Areas would be required to contribute DIF fees pursuant to City of Calimesa Municipal Code Chapter 18.115 (Development Impact Fees) and/or would be required to accommodate parkland on site. As the proposed Project would not authorize any new development on site, the proposed Project would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated.

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

Accordingly, the Project would not: a) increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated; or b) include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical eƯect on the environment. No impact would occur.

2.1.17 Transportation
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle, and
pedestrian facilities?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves
or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g. farm equipment)?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Cause an eƯect upon, or a need for new or
altered maintenance of roads? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. Cause an eƯect upon circulation during the
project’s construction? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f. Result in inadequate emergency access or
access to nearby uses? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a. Would the Project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian acilities? b. Would the Project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
c. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design eature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. arm equipment)? d. Would the Project cause an eƯect upon, or a need or new or altered maintenance o roads? e. Would the Project cause an eƯect upon circulation during the project’s construction? . Would the Project result in inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? No Impact. The Project as evaluated herein entails applications for ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA-25-4, ZC-25- 2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 to allow for pre-zoning of the approximately 313.4-acre Annexation Areas to

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

facilitate future annexation of the Annexation Areas into the boundaries of the City of Calimesa, and to permit the two existing warehouse buildings as required by (amended) Table 18.30.030 of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code. Under existing conditions, the Northern Annexation Area partially is developed with two existing occupied large industrial buildings measuring 1,012,760 s.f. and 811,000 s.f. in size, which previously were constructed pursuant to Riverside County approvals for GPA 534, CZ 7799, TPM 36564, and PPT 25337, along with an existing equestrian shade structure/stable and associated pasture that occurs along the northcentral boundary of the Northern Annexation Area and that is associated with an oƯ-site residential use to the north. Under existing conditions the Southern Annexation Area partially is developed with an existing wireless tower facility and a truck equipment and repair business (Bonafide Truck Equipment and Repair) previously entitled pursuant to PP16147 and CUP0322, respectively. Proposed ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA25-4, ZC-25-2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 would not allow for any new disturbance or development on site beyond the uses that already exist in the Annexation Areas, and the proposed Project does not include applications for any new development. Rather, the Project comprises an administrative adjustment to the boundaries of the City of Calimesa and two CUPs to permit the two existing warehouse buildings, none of which would result in physical impacts to the environment beyond what already occurs under existing conditions.

No new development is proposed as part of the Project, and the Project would not entail any changes to the existing transportation system. As such, the Project has no potential to conflict with City of Calimesa General Plan policies related to transportation, including the policies contained within the General Plan Circulation Element. Similarly, because no new development is proposed the proposed Project has no potential to conflict with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 2024-2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). In addition, according to City of Calimesa General Plan Figure OSPR-2 (Trails Master Plan), no portion of the Southern Annexation Area is planned to include any trail connections. Although the Trails Master Plan exhibit identifies “Unknown” trails within the Northern Annexation Area, the existing warehouse developments within the Northern Annexation Area were designed to accommodate on-site trails that connect with the existing “Unknown” trails present within the northern portions of the Northern Annexation Area. There are no other applicable plans, policies, programs, or ordinances related to transportation in eƯect in the Project area. Accordingly, the Project has no potential to conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.

The provisions of CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b) relate to Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT).

Any future proposals for development within the Annexation Area would be required to be evaluated under CEQA, which would require an evaluation of potential VMT impacts in accordance with the City of Calimesa’s Final City of Calimesa Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled and Level of Service Assessment (May 2020) (Calimesa, 2020). Notwithstanding, because no new development is proposed as part of the Project, the proposed Project would have no potential to result in an increase in VMT per capita within the local area. As such, the proposed Project has no potential to conflict with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b).

No new roadway improvements or intersections are proposed as part of the Project. As such, the Project would have no potential to substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections). In addition, the land use designations and zoning classifications

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

proposed for the Northern Annexation Area and Southern Annexation Area are substantially consistent with the site’s adopted Riverside County General Plan land use designations and zoning classifications; thus, the proposed Project would not result in any impacts due to incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment) beyond what already is allowed under the site’s adopted Riverside County General Plan land use designations and zoning classifications. Furthermore, because no new roadways are proposed as part of the Project and because the Project would not result in the generation of any new traƯic within the local area, the Project would not cause an eƯect upon or a need for new or altered maintenance of roads. Similarly, because no roadway improvements are proposed as part of the Project and no new development would be authorized with Project approval, the proposed Project would not result in inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses.

Based on the preceding analysis, the proposed Project would not : a) conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities; b) conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b); c) substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment); d) cause an eƯect upon, or a need for new or altered maintenance of roads; e) cause an eƯect upon circulation during the project’s construction; or f) result in inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses. No impact would occur.

2.1.18 Tribal Cultural Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, or cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical resources or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code
section 5020.1(k)?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to
be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code section
5024.1? In applying for the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance o a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, eature, place, or cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms o the size and scope o the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a Caliornia Native American tribe, and that is listed or eligible or listing in the Caliornia Register o Historical resources or in a local register o historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)? b. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance o a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, eature, place, or cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms o the size and scope o the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a Caliornia Native American tribe, and that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set orth in subdivision (c) o Public Resources Code section 5024.1? In applying or the criteria set orth in subdivision (c) o Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance o the resource to a Caliornia Native American tribe.

No Impact. Changes in the California Environmental Quality Act, eƯective July 2015, require that the City address another category of cultural resources – tribal cultural resources. Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs) are those resources with inherent tribal values that are diƯicult to identify through the same means as archaeological resources. These resources can be identified and understood through direct consultation with the tribes who attach tribal value to the resource. Tribal cultural resources may include Native American archaeological sites, but they may also include other types of resources such as a cultural landscape. Also relevant is the category termed “traditional cultural property” (TCP) which is typically associated with cultural resource management performed under federal auspices. “Traditional” in this context refers to those beliefs, customs, and practices of a living community of people that have been passed down through the generations, usually orally or through practice. The traditional cultural significance of a historic property, then, is significance derived from the role the property plays in a community’s historically rooted beliefs, customs, and practices. A TCP can be defined, generally, as one that is eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) because of its association with cultural practices or beliefs of a living community that (a) are rooted in that community’s history, and (b) are important in maintaining the continuing cultural identity of the community. A landscape can be a TCP and by extension a TCR, provided the cultural landscape meets the criteria and that the landscape is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope. The appropriate treatment of tribal cultural resources is determined through consultation with tribes.

In compliance with Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52), notices regarding this Project were mailed to the following tribes on January 8, 2026:
• Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians
• Augustine Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians
• Cabazon Band of Mission Indians
• Cahuilla Band of Mission Indians
• Los Coyotes Band of Cahuilla and Cupeño Indians
• Morongo Band of Mission Indians

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

• Pala Band of Mission Indians
• Pauma Band of Luiseno Indians
• Pechanga Cultural Resources Department
• Quechan Indian Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation
• Ramona Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians
• Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians
• Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians
• Serrano Nation of Mission Indians
• Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians
• Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians
• Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation
Of the Tribes listed above, the following Tribes provided responses to the City:
• The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians responded in a letter dated February 5, 2026, requesting consultation and copies of any cultural resource documentation. The City provided additional information via email on February 5, 2026. The tribe did not identify any TCRs and did not request any mitigation measures. Consultation with the Tribe was concluded in a letter dated February 9, 2026. • The Augustine Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians responded and declined consultation in a letter dated January 13, 2026.
• The Cahuilla Band of Mission Indians acknowledged receipt of the consultation letter on January 9, 2026, and advised that the Tribe would notify the City if they wanted to consult. No further correspondence was received, and consultation closed on April 8, 2026. • The Morongo Band of Mission Indians responded in a letter dated January 20, 2026, requesting consultation and copies of any cultural resource documentation. An initial consultation meeting occurred on February 4, 2026, and a follow up consultation meeting occurred on April 8, 2026. The Tribe reminded the City that SB 18 and/or AB 52 notifications may be required should aƯected parcels apply for future approvals that involve ground disturbance. The Tribe advised via email on April 8, 2026, that no further action was needed and consultation was closed at that time. • The Pala Band of Mission Indians responded and declined consultation in a letter dated January 29, 2026.
• The Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians responded via email on January 15, 2026, and stated that the Tribe has no information to provide. The Tribe recommended that the City coordinate with tribes that are geographically closer to Calimesa.
• The Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation responded via email on January 27, 2026, that the Tribe elected not to consult. However, the tribe requested that the City reach out to discuss further if the proposed plans change to allow for any ground disturbing development that may be approved via an expeditated process for which tribal consultation pursuant to CEQA would not be initiated.

Based on the results of the consultation eƯorts between the City and the tribes, no tribal cultural resources, as defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, or cultural landscape that

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

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, were identified within the Annexation Areas. Additionally, the Project evaluated herein consists of the proposed annexation of the approximately 313.4-acre Annexation Area from the County of Riverside into the City of Calimesa, and would not authorize any new ground disturbances or development. Thus, even if tribal cultural resources did occur within the Annexation Areas, such resources would not be impacted by the proposed Project because the Project consists only of the administrative adjustment to the City of Calimesa city boundaries and would not result in any physical disturbances.

Accordingly, the proposed Project would not 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, or cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical resources or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), and no impact would occur. Similarly, the proposed Project would not 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, or cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code section 5024.1, and no impact would occur. Accordingly, Project impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources would be less than significant requiring no mitigation measures.

2.1.19 Utilities and Service Systems
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or
storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant
environmental eƯects?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Have suƯicient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
project’s projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. Comply with federal, state, and local management
and reduction statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a. Would the Project require or result in the relocation or construction o new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications acilities, the construction or relocation o which could cause significant environmental eƯects?
b. Would the Project have suƯicient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably oreseeable uture development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? c. Would the Project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
d. Would the Project generate solid waste in excess o State or local standards, or in excess o the capacity o local inrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment o solid waste reduction goals?
e. Would the Project comply with ederal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
No Impact. The Project as evaluated herein entails applications for ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA-25-4, ZC-25- 2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 to allow for pre-zoning of the approximately 313.4-acre Annexation Areas to facilitate future annexation of the Annexation Areas into the boundaries of the City of Calimesa, and to permit the two existing warehouse buildings as required by (amended) Table 18.30.030 of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code. Under existing conditions, the Northern Annexation Area partially is developed with two existing occupied large industrial buildings measuring 1,012,760 s.f. and 811,000 s.f. in size, which previously were constructed pursuant to Riverside County approvals for GPA 534, CZ 7799, TPM 36564, and PPT 25337, along with an existing equestrian shade structure/stable and associated pasture that occurs along the northcentral boundary of the Northern Annexation Area and that is associated with an oƯ-site residential use to the north. Under existing conditions the Southern Annexation Area partially is developed with an existing wireless tower facility and a truck equipment and repair business (Bonafide Truck Equipment and Repair) previously entitled pursuant to PP16147 and CUP0322, respectively. Proposed ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA25-4, ZC-25-2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 would not allow for any new disturbance or development on site

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

beyond the uses that already exist in the Annexation Areas, and the proposed Project does not include applications for any new development. Rather, the Project comprises an administrative adjustment to the boundaries of the City of Calimesa and two CUPs to permit the two existing warehouse buildings, none of which would result in physical impacts to the environment beyond what already occurs under existing conditions.

No new development or construction activities are proposed as part of the Project. Thus, the Project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental eƯects.

Figure 7, City of Calimesa Existing Sphere of Influence, Figure 8, City of Beaumont Existing Sphere of Influence, and Figure 9, Beaumont-Cherry Valley Water District Service Area and Sphere of Influence, depict the existing jurisdictional boundaries and adopted Spheres of Influence (SOIs) for the two cities and the water district most relevant to the existing wet utility service context in the vicinity of the Annexation Area.

Figure 7 depicts the existing boundary of the City of Calimesa and its adopted SOI. Figure 8 depicts the BCVWD's existing water service boundary and its adopted SOI, which was adopted in 2006. Figure 9 depicts the existing boundary of the City of Beaumont and its adopted SOI. As shown on these figures, and as discussed further below, no single agency currently maintains a jurisdictional boundary or adopted SOI that encompasses the entire Annexation Areas for both potable water and sanitary sewer service.

The Northern Annexation Area is within the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD) service area for potable water service. The YVWD’s 2020 Integrated Regional Urban Water Management Plan (2020 IRUWMP) provides information on YVWD's projected supplies and demands in five-year increments through the year 2045, and reports YVWD's progress on water use eƯiciency targets as defined in the Water Conservation Act of 2009. The 2020 IRUWMP relies on demographic forecast data available from the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), which in turn bases population forecasts in part on the land use designations specified by local general plans. The existing warehouse developments within the Northern Annexation Area were developed in accordance with their existing Riverside County General Plan land use designations, and thus water demand associated with these existing developments already was accounted for by the 2020 IRUWMP. (YVWD, 2021, p. 2-17) Moreover, as part of the development of the two warehouses within the Northern Annexation Area, the YVWD previously indicated that it has the ability to serve the existing development as part of Development Agreement No. 2021-12 between the YVWD and the developer of the warehouse buildings that was executed in August 2021, a copy of which is on file at the City of Calimesa Planning Department and can be reviewed during the City’s normal business hours at 908 Park Avenue, Calimesa, CA 92320.

The Northern Annexation area is within the jurisdictional boundary of the Yucaipa Valley Water District, which provides water and sanitary sewer to the existing warehouse development. As noted above, the Southern Annexation Area is not currently located within the jurisdictional service territory of any water or sanitary sewer provider. The Southern Annexation Area is located within the Sphere of Influence (SOI) of the Beaumont-Cherry Valley Water District (BCVWD) for potable water service but is not located within the jurisdictional boundary or SOI of any provider for sanitary sewer service. The YVWD's Bundled Service Policy

City of Calimesa
Annexation Project

IRONWOOD AVE
MOREN0-VAbl!.E¥
I
Source(s): Calimesa, 2017
---------- -------------------------
Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8
BE~l!JM©Nili
Figure 7
City of Calimesa Existing Sphere of Influence

City of Calimesa
Annexation Project
�
\�
""'
,,-\ \:)
..,,__
Source(s): Beaumont, 2018
Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

BEAUMONT
Figure 8
City of Beaumont Existing Sphere of Influence

City of Calimesa
Annexation Project
M©RENO VALLEY

SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY

AVENUE L
24 1/
I
Legend
Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8
c::J Beaumont-Cherry Valley Water District Boundary
l:=J Beaumont-Cherry Valley Water District Sphere of Influence (SOI) ~ Sections
27 14 13
BEAUMONT! S©I BANNING SOI
' ~
"°IT-l(JU nda Unive~it, Couoty of~iver ,we_- Ber~din coJI\,, Bu eauf.ha anagelnt, ---r---t---+-----t-"""T---t-----=-____,;;;;;;a,i,,,,r--"""7t---+-:----:;-'.~:----:7 --::-t--: ..,-;~ min, INCREMENT P, US!iS, METI/NAsA, EPA,'&. 'Fl Source(s): BCVWD, 2006 Figure 9
Beaumont-Cherry Valley Water District Service Area and Sphere of Influence

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

(YVWD Resolution No. 2020-31), which requires YVWD to provide bundled potable water, non-potable water, and sanitary sewer service to any parcel it serves, precludes YVWD from providing sanitary sewer service alone to the Southern Annexation Area while the BCVWD's SOI designation for water service remains in place. Accordingly, the Riverside County LAFCO will make the determination as to the service provider for the Southern Annexation Areas. Any future developments that would be allowed within the Annexation Area with Project approval would be required be consistent with the General Plan land use designations proposed for these portions of the site. Thus, any future development on site also would be consistent with the 2020 IRUWMP growth projections, which demonstrates that the YVWD would have suƯicient capacity to provide potable water within its service area through at least 2045 during normal, dry, and multiple dry years.

No new development is proposed as part of the Project within the Northern Annexation Area. The Northern Annexation Area's existing warehouse developments already receive wastewater treatment service from YVWD, consistent with the YVWD's Bundled Service Policy discussed above, which requires YVWD to provide bundled potable water, non-potable water, and sanitary sewer service to any parcel it serves. Thus, the Project would have no potential to result in an increase in wastewater requiring treatment by YVWD facilities within the Northern Annexation Area, and as such the Project would have no potential to result in a determination by YVWD that it has inadequate capacity to serve the Project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments. Any future development within the Northern Annexation Area would be required to be consistent with the City’s adopted General Plan land use designations, and because YVWD’s long-range plans anticipate providing wastewater treatment services for planned developments within its service area consistent with those designations, Thus, any such future development would not exceed the wastewater treatment capacity at existing or planned YVWD facilities.

As discussed above, the Southern Annexation Area is not currently located within YVWD's service area or SOI for potable water or sanitary sewer service, and therefore the existing demand generated by the Southern Annexation Area's existing uses was not included in the growth projections or supply planning presented in YVWD's 2020 IRUWMP. Nonetheless, the 2020 IRUWMP demonstrates that YVWD maintains substantial surplus water supply under normal, single-dry, and multiple-dry-year conditions. YVWD's water supply portfolio consists of local groundwater (62.7 percent of drinking water supply in 2020), imported State Water Project water purchased from the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District and the San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency (35.8 percent), and local surface water and recycled water (the remainder). The 2020 IRUWMP's Normal Year Supply and Demand Comparison projects a surplus of supply over demand ranging from approximately 42,892 acre-feet per year (AFY) in 2025 to approximately 70,554 AFY in 2045, with comparable surpluses projected under single-dry-year and multiple-dry-year scenarios. No new development is proposed within the Southern Annexation Area as part of the Project, and the existing on-site land uses (i.e., the truck equipment and repair business and the wireless communications facility) would continue to generate water and wastewater demand consistent with existing conditions, without an increase in demand. Given the magnitude of YVWD's surplus water supply relative to the modest demand associated with these existing uses, YVWD would have suƯicient water supply to serve the Southern Annexation Area, once annexed into its service area, during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. With respect to wastewater treatment capacity, YVWD's Wochholz Regional Water Recycling Facility (WRWRF) has a treatment capacity of 8.0 million gallons per day (MGD) and treated approximately 4,237 acre-feet of wastewater (an average of approximately 3.8 MGD) collected from its service area in 2020, indicating substantial remaining capacity, and the facility ultimately can be expanded to treat up to 11 MGD. Because the Project would not increase

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

wastewater generation within the Southern Annexation Area beyond existing conditions, wastewater generated by the Southern Annexation Area's existing and any future uses would not exceed YVWD's wastewater treatment capacity, once the Southern Annexation Area is annexed into YVWD's service area for sanitary sewer service as discussed above. However, the Southern Annexation Area is located within the Sphere of Influence (SOI) of the Beaumont-Cherry Valley Water District (BCVWD) for potable water service, but is not located within the jurisdictional boundary or SOI of any provider for sanitary sewer service. The YVWD's Bundled Service Policy (YVWD Resolution No. 2020-31), which requires YVWD to provide bundled potable water, non-potable water, and sanitary sewer service to any parcel it serves, precludes YVWD from providing sanitary sewer service alone to the Southern Annexation Area while the BCVWD's SOI designation for water service remains in place. Accordingly, the Riverside County LAFCO will make the determination as to the service provider for the Northern and Southern Annexation Areas.

There are no components of the proposed Project that would result in the generation of solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, and there are no components of the proposed Project that would otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals. Any future development on site would be required to comply with the City of Calimesa solid waste regulations (City of Calimesa Municipal Code, Chapter 8.30, Waste Management, Refuse Collection and Disposal Services), and there are no components of the proposed Project that would result in an increase in solid waste generation or that could result in a conflict with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste.

Accordingly, the Project would not: a) require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental eƯects; b) have insuƯicient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years; c) result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments; d) generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals; or e) fail to comply with federal, State, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste. No impact would occur.

2.1.20 Wildfire
New
Significant
Impact
More
Severe
Impacts
New Ability to
Substantially
Reduce
Significant Impact
No Substantial
Change rom
Previous
Analysis
If located in or near a State Responsibility Area (“SRA”), lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zone, or other hazardous fire areas that may be designated by the Fire Chief, would the project:
a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

New
Significant
Impact
More
Severe
Impacts
New Ability to
Substantially
Reduce
Significant Impact
No Substantial
Change rom
Previous
Analysis
b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby
expose project occupants to, pollutant
concentrations from a wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources, power lines
or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk
or that may result in temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding
or landslides, as a result of runoƯ, post-fire
slope instability, or drainage changes?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. Expose people or structures either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or
death involving wildland fires?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a. Would the Project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other actors, would the Project exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations rom a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread o a wildfire?
c. Would the Project require the installation or maintenance o associated inrastructure (such as roads, uel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? d. Would the Project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result o runoƯ, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
e. Would the Project expose people or structures either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk o loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires?
No Impact. The Project as evaluated herein entails applications for ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA-25-4, ZC-25- 2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 to allow for pre-zoning of the approximately 313.4-acre Annexation Areas to facilitate future annexation of the Annexation Areas into the boundaries of the City of Calimesa, and to permit the two existing warehouse buildings as required by (amended) Table 18.30.030 of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code. Under existing conditions, the Northern Annexation Area partially is developed with two existing occupied large industrial buildings measuring 1,012,760 s.f. and 811,000 s.f. in size, which previously

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

were constructed pursuant to Riverside County approvals for GPA 534, CZ 7799, TPM 36564, and PPT 25337, along with an existing equestrian shade structure/stable and associated pasture that occurs along the northcentral boundary of the Northern Annexation Area and that is associated with an oƯ-site residential use to the north. Under existing conditions the Southern Annexation Area partially is developed with an existing wireless tower facility and a truck equipment and repair business (Bonafide Truck Equipment and Repair) previously entitled pursuant to PP16147 and CUP0322, respectively. Proposed ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA25-4, ZC-25-2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 would not allow for any new disturbance or development on site beyond the uses that already exist in the Annexation Area, and the proposed Project does not include applications for any new development. Rather, the Project comprises an administrative adjustment to the boundaries of the City of Calimesa and two CUPs to permit the two existing warehouse buildings, none of which would result in physical impacts to the environment beyond what already occurs under existing conditions.

According to mapping information available from CalFire, the Southern Annexation Area is located within a Local Responsibility Area (LRA), and is classified as having a “Very High” susceptibility to wildfire hazards, while the Northern Annexation Area is located within a State Responsibility Area (SRA) and also is classified as having a “Very High” susceptibility to wildland fire hazards (CalFire, 2025). All lands surrounding the Annexation Area similarly are classified as having a “Very High” susceptibility to wildfire hazards. No new development is proposed on site as part of the Project, and as such the Project would have no potential to exacerbate wildfire hazards in the local area beyond what already occurs under existing conditions. In addition, both of the existing warehouse buildings within the Northern Annexation Area were developed in a manner that includes a concrete parking areas and/or irrigated landscape areas that extend to at least 100 feet around each side of the existing structures, which adequately provides for fire protection under existing conditions. Although the existing Bonafide Truck and Repair Equipment facility within the Southern Annexation Area accommodates only approximately 50 feet of non-flammable areas between the existing building and natural vegetation to the east, any fire hazards associated with this existing structure already occur under existing conditions, and there are no components of the proposed Project that would increase fire hazards potentially aƯecting the existing truck and equipment repair facility. Furthermore, any future development within the Annexation Area would be reviewed by the Riverside County Fire Department to ensure that adequate areas of fuel management are accommodate to reduce potential wildfire hazards to less-than-significant levels. Furthermore, and in response to growth in the Project area, a new fire station is planned to be constructed on a three-acre site within Planning Area TC-4 of the Oak Valley Town Center Specific Plan, which ultimately would provide fire protection services to the Annexation Area. Funding for the new fire station is anticipated to be accomplished through the imposition of impact fees on new developments within the City pursuant to City of Calimesa Municipal Code Chapter 18.115 (Development Impact Fees). Accordingly, the Project would not: a) substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan; b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire; c) require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment; d) expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoƯ, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes; or e) expose people or structures either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. No impact would occur.

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

2.1.21 Mandatory Findings o Significance
New
Significant
Impact
More
Severe
Impacts
New Ability to
Substantially
Reduce
Significant
Impact
No Substantial
Change rom
Previous
Analysis
Does the project have the potential to substantially
degrade the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below selfsustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number
or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or
animal, or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
No Impact. The Project as evaluated herein entails applications for ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA-25-4, ZC-25- 2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 to allow for pre-zoning of the approximately 313.4-acre Annexation Area to facilitate future annexation of the Annexation Area into the boundaries of the City of Calimesa, and to permit the two existing warehouse buildings as required by (amended) Table 18.30.030 of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code. Under existing conditions, the Northern Annexation Area partially is developed with two existing occupied large industrial buildings measuring 1,012,760 s.f. and 811,000 s.f. in size, which previously were constructed pursuant to Riverside County approvals for GPA 534, CZ 7799, TPM 36564, and PPT 25337, along with an existing equestrian shade structure/stable and associated pasture that occurs along the northcentral boundary of the Northern Annexation Area and that is associated with an oƯ-site residential use to the north. Under existing conditions the Southern Annexation Area partially is developed with an existing wireless tower facility and a truck equipment and repair business (Bonafide Truck Equipment and Repair) previously entitled pursuant to PP16147 and CUP0322, respectively. Proposed ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA25-4, ZC-25-2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 would not allow for any new disturbance or development on site beyond the uses that already exist in the Annexation Area, and the proposed Project does not include applications for any new development. Rather, the Project comprises an administrative adjustment to the boundaries of the City of Calimesa and two CUPs to permit the two existing warehouse buildings, none of which would result in physical impacts to the environment beyond what already occurs under existing conditions. Accordingly, the proposed Project has no potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory, and no impact would occur.

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

New
Significant
Impact
More
Severe
Impacts
New Ability to
Substantially
Reduce
Significant Impact
No Substantial
Change rom
Previous
Analysis
Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
(“Cumulatively considerable” means that the
incremental eƯects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the eƯects of past
projects, the eƯects of other current projects, and
the eƯects of probable future projects)?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
No Impact. The Project as evaluated herein entails applications for ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA-25-4, ZC-25- 2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 to allow for pre-zoning of the approximately 313.4-acre Annexation Area to facilitate future annexation of the Annexation Area into the boundaries of the City of Calimesa, and to permit the two existing warehouse buildings as required by (amended) Table 18.30.030 of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code. Under existing conditions, the Northern Annexation Area partially is developed with two existing occupied large industrial buildings measuring 1,012,760 s.f. and 811,000 s.f. in size, which previously were constructed pursuant to Riverside County approvals for GPA 534, CZ 7799, TPM 36564, and PPT 25337, along with an existing equestrian shade structure/stable and associated pasture that occurs along the northcentral boundary of the Northern Annexation Area and that is associated with an oƯ-site residential use to the north. Under existing conditions the Southern Annexation Area partially is developed with an existing wireless tower facility and a truck equipment and repair business (Bonafide Truck Equipment and Repair) previously entitled pursuant to PP16147 and CUP0322, respectively. Proposed ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA25-4, ZC-25-2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 would not allow for any new disturbance or development on site beyond the uses that already exist in the Annexation Area, and the proposed Project does not include applications for any new development. Rather, the Project comprises an administrative adjustment to the boundaries of the City of Calimesa and two CUPs to permit the two existing warehouse buildings, none of which would result in physical impacts to the environment beyond what already occurs under existing conditions. Accordingly, and as supported by the analysis presented herein, the proposed Project has no potential to result in impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable, and no impact would occur.

New
Significant
Impact
More
Severe
Impacts
New Ability to
Substantially Reduce
Significant Impact
No Substantial
Change rom
Previous Analysis
Does the project have environmental
eƯects which will cause substantial
adverse eƯects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
No Impact. The Project as evaluated herein entails applications for ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA-25-4, ZC-25- 2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 to allow for pre-zoning of the approximately 313.4-acre Annexation Area to facilitate future annexation of the Annexation Area into the boundaries of the City of Calimesa, and to permit

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

the two existing warehouse buildings as required by (amended) Table 18.30.030 of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code. Under existing conditions, the Northern Annexation Area partially is developed with two existing occupied large industrial buildings measuring 1,012,760 s.f. and 811,000 s.f. in size, which previously were constructed pursuant to Riverside County approvals for GPA 534, CZ 7799, TPM 36564, and PPT 25337, along with an existing equestrian shade structure/stable and associated pasture that occurs along the northcentral boundary of the Northern Annexation Area and that is associated with an oƯ-site residential use to the north. Under existing conditions the Southern Annexation Area partially is developed with an existing wireless tower facility and a truck equipment and repair business (Bonafide Truck Equipment and Repair) previously entitled pursuant to PP16147 and CUP0322, respectively. Proposed ANNX-25-1, GPA-25-2, ZTA25-4, ZC-25-2, CUP-25-4, and CUP-25-5 would not allow for any new disturbance or development on site beyond the uses that already exist in the Annexation Area, and the proposed Project does not include applications for any new development. Rather, the Project comprises an administrative adjustment to the boundaries of the City of Calimesa and two CUPs to permit the two existing warehouse buildings, none of which would result in physical impacts to the environment beyond what already occurs under existing conditions. Accordingly, the proposed Project has no potential to result in environmental eƯects which will cause substantial adverse eƯects on human beings, either directly or indirectly, and no impact would occur.

2.2 Public Controversy
The City of Calimesa is aware that the proposed Project has generated public controversy, particularly with respect to the proposed annexation and pre-zoning of the Southern Annexation Area. However, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(f)(4), the existence of public controversy over the environmental eƯects of a project does not require preparation of an EIR if there is no substantial evidence in the record that the project may have a significant eƯect on the environment. Controversy alone, without substantial evidence of a significant environmental eƯect, does not constitute a basis for requiring an EIR. As demonstrated in the environmental analysis set forth in this Negative Declaration, the proposed Project consists of an administrative adjustment to the City of Calimesa's jurisdictional boundaries and associated land use entitlements for existing, previously entitled development. No new development is proposed as part of the Project. The analysis presented herein demonstrates that the Project would not result in any significant eƯect on the environment. Accordingly, consistent with Section 15064(f)(4), the public controversy surrounding the Project does not require preparation of an EIR.

2.3 Earlier Analysis
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an eƯect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration as per California Code of Regulations, § 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:

Earlier Analyses Used, if any:
• Environmental Impact Report No. 534 (SCH No. 2014011009), certified October 24, 2017. • Supplemental Environmental Impact Report No. 534 (SCH No. 2014011009), certified May 19, 2020.

Location: County of Riverside Planning Department

City of Calimesa Final Negative Declaration
Annexation Project Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8

4080 Lemon Street, 12th Floor
Riverside, CA 92505

3.0 References
Cited As: Reference:

CalFire, n.d. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire), no date. Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) Viewer (on-line mapping application). Accessed December 10, 2025. Available on-line at: https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/what-we-do/community-wildfire-preparedness-andmitigation/fire-hazard-severity-zones Calimesa, 2014 City of Calimesa, 2014. City of Calimesa 2014 General Plan. August 4, 2014. Available for review at the City of Calimesa Planning Division, located at 908 Park Avenue, Calimesa, CA 92320, during the City’s normal business hours.

Calimesa, 2020 City of Calimesa, 2020. Final City of Calimesa Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled and Level of Service Assessment. May 2020. Accessed December 9, 2025. Available on-line at: https://www.calimesa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/367/CalimesaTransportation-Impact-Analysis-Guidelines_Final-PDF?bidId= CDC, n.d. California Department of Conservation, no date. California Important Farmland Finder (online mapping application). Accessed December 9, 2025. Available on-line at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/ciff/
CDC, n.d. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, no date. Mineral Land Classification of the Greater Los Angeles Area, Special Report 143, Plate 7.15. Accessed December 10, 2025. Available on-line at: https://filerequest.conservation.ca.gov/?q=SR_143 RCIT, n.d. Riverside County Information Technology, no date. Riverside County Map My County (on-line mapping application). Accessed December 9, 2025. Available on-line at:
https://gis1.countyofriverside.us/Html5Viewer/index.html?viewer=MMC_Public Riverside County,
2021a
Riverside County, 2021. Riverside County General Plan. September 28, 2021. Accessed December 9, 2025. Available on-line at: https://planning.rctlma.org/riverside-countygeneral-plan Riverside County,
2021b
Riverside County, 2021. The Pass Area Plan. September 28, 2021. Accessed December 9, 2025. Available on-line at:
https://planning.rctlma.org/sites/g/files/aldnop416/files/migrated/Portals-14-genplan-GPA2022-Compiled-PAP-4-2022-rev-20220523.pdf

YVWD, 2021 Yucaipa Valley Water District, 2021. 2020 Upper Santa Ana River Watershed Integrated Regional Urban Water Management Plan. June 2021. Accessed December 10, 2025. Available on-line at: https://www.yvwd.us/services/urban_water_management_plan.php

City of Beaumont | 550 E. 6th Street, Beaumont, CA 92223 | (951) 769-8520 | BeaumontCA.gov May 16, 2026
Via Email and U.S. Mail
City of Calimesa
Community Development Department
908 Park Avenue
Calimesa, CA 92320
Subject: Public Comment on Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration – City of Calimesa Annexation Project – Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8, Annexation No. ANNX 25-1, General Plan Amendment No. 25-2, Zone Change (Pre-Zoning) No. ZC-25-2, Zoning Text Amendment No. ZTA-25-4, Conditional Use Permit No. 25-4, Conditional Use Permit No. 25-5 To Whom It May Concern:

The City of Beaumont appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the City of Calimesa’s Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration for the proposed annexation, zone change, general plan amendment, and conditional use permits for the proposed annexation of approximately 314.4 acres from the County of Riverside including the approximately 78.48-‑acre area commonly known as the “Golden Triangle.”
Beaumont offers no objection to the components of the project pertaining to the ongoing operations of the existing Shopoff site facilities and the proposed Northern Annexation Area. These facilities have long been contemplated as part of a coordinated regional vision, and there is no dispute in their continued functioning.

However, Beaumont must respectfully but firmly object to the proposed annexation of the Golden Triangle into the City of Calimesa. As noted in prior correspondence, Beaumont has already internally initiated annexation proceedings for this same area based on its direct proximity to Beaumont’s established infrastructure, service boundaries, and long-range planning efforts. Beaumont remains in the strongest and most efficient position to provide the full range of municipal services necessary to support future development of this strategically located‑ site.

The City of Beaumont has previously acknowledged the regional importance of the Golden Triangle and recognizes Calimesa’s interest in the area. Nevertheless, Beaumont maintains that annexing this land into its jurisdiction is the most logical and service efficient‑ outcome, ensuring cohesive infrastructure planning, public safety response, roadway connectivity, and alignment with existing service networks. Beaumont’s ability to effectively serve the area is supported by past collaborative outcomes, including the resolution of prior overlapping annexation interests in the Oak Valley and SCPGA Specific Plan area, which resulted in substantial mutual benefit to both cities and the region.

For these reasons, while Beaumont does not oppose the project elements related to the Northern Annexation Area, it strongly objects to the annexation component of the proposal and requests that the City of Calimesa refrain from pursuing annexation proceedings for the area identified in the draft negative declaration as the Southern Annexation Area, also known as the “Golden Triangle.”

City of Beaumont | 550 E. 6th Street, Beaumont, CA 92223 | (951) 769-8520 | BeaumontCA.gov Impacts of the Proposed Expansion of the Annexation Area The City of Beaumont respectfully submits the following comments regarding Calimesa’s proposed annexation areas, which extend beyond the guiding warehouses project boundaries and Northern Annexation Area identified in the Notice of Intent. Expanding the annexation footprint into additional areas presents several notable concerns related to water service governance, hydrology, land use consistency, and public service delivery.

Beaumont‑Cherry Valley Water District Sphere of Influence A significant portion of the expanded annexation area lies within the Beaumont‑Cherry Valley Water District’s (BCVWD) existing Sphere of Influence. Incorporating this territory into Calimesa would require substantial administrative, operational, and infrastructure adjustments for BCVWD, including modifications to existing water service standards, capital planning, and long‑term resource allocation.

These changes could disrupt the coordinated water supply and infrastructure planning already established for the region.

Hydrology and Water Quality Considerations
Modifying jurisdictional boundaries within an area that relies on interconnected groundwater management, drainage patterns, and water quality protection introduces additional complexity.

Shifting oversight to a different jurisdiction may require reevaluation of hydrological systems, stormwater infrastructure, and water quality responsibilities. These changes could affect regional drainage management and impose additional demands on existing water resource systems serving the area.

Land Use and Planning
From a land use perspective, the expansion of the annexation area beyond the NOI’s defined Northern Annexation Area boundaries results in less cohesive jurisdictional lines. A cleaner, more logical boundary configuration would be achieved if the approximately 78‑acre Southern Annexation Area portion of the project area were annexed to Beaumont, which maintains the most direct service adjacency and planning authority for that land. Beaumont’s existing infrastructure and adopted planning documents align more closely with the long‑term needs of this portion of the site, ensuring consistent development patterns and rational service delivery.

Public Services and Governance Efficiency
Jurisdictional boundaries that follow the existing street network are more efficient for the provision of public services, including public safety response, roadway maintenance, and utility coordination. The proposed expansion would create irregular boundary configurations that complicate emergency service routing, increase operational inefficiency, and disrupt the continuity of public service coverage.

Maintaining boundaries that align with established roadways and service lines ensures clarity for both residents and service providers.

Conclusion
For these reasons, the City of Beaumont encourages reconsideration of the expanded annexation area and recommends aligning the annexation boundaries with established service areas, infrastructure networks, and jurisdictional planning frameworks. Such an approach would support consistent land

City of Beaumont | 550 E. 6th Street, Beaumont, CA 92223 | (951) 769-8520 | BeaumontCA.gov use planning, protect regional water resource management, and maintain efficient public service delivery.

The City of Beaumont appreciates the opportunity to submit these comments and remains open to continued dialogue and regional coordination.

Respectfully submitted,

CITY OF BEAUMONT
Steven D. Jones
Director, Community Development Department
cc:

Supervisor Yxstian Gutierrez
Beaumont City Council
Beaumont City Attorney
Riverside County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo)

Board of Directors
Andy Ramirez
Division 1
Lona Williams
Division 2
Daniel Slawson
Division 3
John Covington
Division 4
David Hoffman
Division 5
Via Email and U.S. Mail
Kelly Lucia, MURP
Community Development Director
City of Calimesa
908 Park Avenue
Calimesa, CA 92320
[email protected]
Beaumont-Cherry Valley Water District
560 Magnolia Avenue, Beaumont, CA 92223
https:/lbcvwd.gov
May 18, 2026
Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission
6216 Brockton Avenue, Suite 111-B
Riverside, CA 92506
BCVWD Comments on Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative
Declaration - City of Calimesa Annexation Project - Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8, Annexation No. ANNX-25-1, General Plan Amendment No. GPA-25-2, Zone Change/Pre-Zoning No. ZC-25-2, Zone Text Amendment No. ZTA-25-4, Conditional Use Permit Nos.

CUP-25-4 and CUP-25-5
Dear Ms. Lucia and Honorable LAFCO Commissioners:

On behalf of the Beaumont-Cherry Valley Water District ("BCVWD"), thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the City of Calimesa's Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration for the City of Calimesa Annexation Project. BCVWD submits this letter to ensure that the administrative record accurately reflects the District's existing Sphere of Influence, long-standing potable and non-potable water planning, and position regarding the parcels proposed for annexation.

BCVWD understands that the City of Calimesa's proposed annexation includes two distinct areas as set forth hereafter.

The first area (Area 1) consists of APNs 407-220-024, 407-220-026, 407- 220-028, and 407-220-029. These parcels are not currently within BCVWD's Sphere of Influence or Service Boundary. These parcels are located north of Cherry Valley Boulevard, bounded generally by the Interstate 10 freeway on the west, Cherry Valley Boulevard on the South, and by the Danny Thomas Ranch properties to the east BCVWD therefore takes no issue with the City of Calimesa's consideration of annexation of those parcels, provided that such annexation does not create, imply, or rely 1

upon any determination affecting BCVWD's existing Sphere of Influence, facilities, master planning, or service obligations elsewhere in the project area.

The second area (Area 2) consists of APNs 407-230-004, 407-230-006, 407-230-011, 407-230- 016, 407-230-017, 407-230-018, 407-230-020, 407-230-029, and 407-230-030. These parcels are located south of Cherry Valley Boulevard, bounded generally by the Interstate 10 freeway on the west and southwest, and by the Sunny-Cal Egg Ranch properties to the east, which are currently located within the City of Beaumont. These parcels are commonly understood as part of the "Golden Triangle" area.

BCVWD must respectfully but firmly object to the proposed annexation of these Area 2 southern parcels into the City of Calimesa. These parcels are within BCVWD's existing Sphere of Influence and service has been planned for by the District for many years. Any change to these service conditions would be considered an attempt by others (such as Yucaipa Valley Water District) to provide a duplication of service effort. These facts are central to the appropriate service-planning analysis and cannot be treated as incidental to the municipal annexation process. BCVWD's adopted Potable Water System Master Plan (2016) identifies infrastructure improvements intended to serve this area as development occurs.

BCVWD is well positioned to provide potable water and non-potable water service to the Area 2 southern parcels. The District's master planning identifies facilities in and along Cherry Valley Boulevard, including planned improvements capable of supporting future service to the area. The fact that the Area 2 parcels do not currently receive active BCVWD service should not be interpreted as a lack of District interest, lack of service capability, or lack of planning responsibility.

Several parcels remain undeveloped or self-serving under existing conditions; however, transition from existing self-service conditions to public water service is precisely the type of long-term planning and infrastructure coordination that BCVWD has undertaken for this area in support of orderly development, public health, fire protection, and regional water-resource management.

BCVWD further notes that many of these same issues were previously considered by Riverside LAFCO during the 1993 sphere of influence proceedings involving the "Golden Triangle" area under LAFCO 92-52-3. During those proceedings, substantial concerns were raised regarding fragmented jurisdictional boundaries, conflicting infrastructure planning, emergency-service coordination, and disruption of long-range utility and transportation planning associated with Cherry Valley Boulevard and Interstate 10. The historical record reflects that the area was recognized as closely tied to the Beaumont and Cherry Valley community from a transportation, utility-service, and community-of-interest perspective. Ultimately, LAFCO denied the City of Calimesa's request to include the Golden Triangle area within its sphere of influence under LAFCO 92-52-3. Those same planning and governance concerns remain relevant today.

BCVWD's position is also consistent with the City of Beaumont's stated interest in annexing the same southern parcels located within Area 2. The City of Beaumont has initiated proceedings to evaluate annexation of approximately 78.48 acres along Cherry Valley Boulevard, consisting of the same nine Area 2 parcels identified above. Annexation of these parcels into the City of Beaumont, with potable and non-potable water service provided by BCVWD, would create a logical and efficient jurisdictional and utility-service framework. Cherry Valley Boulevard would serve as a reasonable northern boundary, Interstate 10 would serve as a clear western and southern boundary, and the existing City of Beaumont boundary at the Sunny-Cal Egg Ranch properties would provide a logical eastern connection.
2

By contrast, annexation of the southern parcels into the City of Calimesa would create a less cohesive jurisdictional configuration and would disregard the existing utility-service planning framework already established through BCVWD's Sphere of Influence. Municipal boundary decisions should not undermine adopted water-service planning, nor should city annexation be used to predetermine or alter the appropriate water and non-potable water service provider for lands already within BCVWD's Sphere of Influence. Piecemeal annexation activity and overlapping jurisdictional claims could weaken coordinated regional planning, complicate longterm infrastructure and water-supply planning, and create fragmented service boundaries inconsistent with the orderly development principles historically applied by LAFCO.

BCVWD is also concerned that the Negative Declaration appears to rely on broad utility-service assumptions that are not accurate as applied to the southern parcels. To the extent the environmental document assumes that the entire Annexation Area is within Yucaipa Valley Water District's potable water service area, or that YVWD is the appropriate long-term provider for the southern parcels, that analysis should be corrected before the City takes action. For parcels within BCVWD's Sphere of Influence, the environmental and annexation record must recognize BCVWD's existing planning role and should not rely on another agency's water supply or service documents to support annexation findings for those parcels.

This issue is not merely administrative. The appropriate service provider for the southern parcels affects long-term water supply planning, non-potable water planning, pressure-zone planning, fire-flow capability, infrastructure phasing, capital-facility financing, interagency coordination, and regional governance efficiency. BCVWD has an established interest in ensuring that development in and around Cherry Valley Boulevard is served through a coherent and efficient public water system and has partially installed master-planned facilities necessary to serve areas below Cherry Valley Boulevard, inclusive of the Area 2 parcels. Fragmenting the area through an inconsistent municipal annexation would create unnecessary uncertainty and could impair coordinated infrastructure delivery.

BCVWD therefore requests that the City of Calimesa revise the project and the Negative Declaration to remove the southern parcels - APNs 407-230-004, 407-230-006, 407-230-011, 407-230-016, 407-230-017, 407-230-018, 407-230-020, 407-230-029, and 407-230-030 -from the proposed City of Calimesa annexation. BCVWD further requests that LAFCO consider the southern parcels in the context of Beaumont's annexation interest, BCVWD's existing Sphere of Influence, and the historical findings associated with LAFCO 92-52-3, with BCVWD retained as the potable and non-potable water service provider.

BCVWD also requests that the project record be revised to make the following points clear:

1. BCVWD takes no issue with Calimesa's consideration of annexation of APNs 407-220- 024, 407-220-026, 407-220-028, and 407-220-029, which are not currently within BCVWD's boundary or Sphere of Influence.

2. APNs 407-230-004, 407-230-006, 407-230-011, 407-230-016, 407-230-017, 407-230- 018, 407-230-020, 407-230-029, and 407-230-030 are within BCVWD's existing Sphere of Influence.

3. BCVWD is the appropriate agency to provide potable water and non-potable water service to the Area 2 southern parcels.
3

4. BCVWD has planned and partially completed infrastructure necessary to serve the area south of Cherry Valley Boulevard, including master-planned facilities within Cherry Valley Boulevard. Any change to these service conditions would be considered a duplication of service by the District.

5. Annexation of the southern parcels into the City of Beaumont, with BCVWD providing potable and non-potable water service, would result in a more logical and service-efficient boundary configuration.

6. The Negative Declaration should not assume YVWD service for parcels within BCVWD's Sphere of Influence.

7. Any future LAFCO action should evaluate municipal annexation separately from water and non-potable water service governance, and should preserve BCVWD's Sphere of Influence and service-planning role.

BCVWD is not opposed to orderly annexation, efficient municipal service delivery, or regional coordination. However, BCVWD is concerned about any efforts to provide duplication of service by others and must protect its existing Sphere of Influence, its adopted planning documents, its long-term infrastructure investments, and its ability to provide efficient potable and non-potable water service to lands that have been planned for service by the District.

For these reasons, BCVWD respectfully requests that the City of Calimesa refrain from pursuing annexation of the southern parcels and that LAFCO consider the southern parcels in coordination with the City of Beaumont and BCVWD. BCVWD further requests that this letter be included in the administrative record for the Negative Declaration, the annexation proceedings, and any subsequent LAFCO action related to this project.

BCVWD appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments and remains available to coordinate with the City of Calimesa, the City of Beaumont, Riverside LAFCO, Yucaipa Valley Water District, the County of Riverside, and the project applicant to ensure that municipal boundary decisions and water-service governance are addressed in a manner that is logical, efficient, and protective of the public interest.

BEAUMONT-CHERRY VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
Daniel K. Jaggers
General Manager
Tel: (951) 845-9581 \. Fax: (951) 845-0159
Email: [email protected] ►~
4

Via Email
May 18, 2026
Kelly Lucia, Director
Community Development Department
City of Calimesa
908 Park Avenue
Calimesa, CA 92320
[email protected]
Re: Comment on Negative Declaration, City of Calimesa Annexation Project (Environmental Assessment No. EA-25-8, Annexation No. ANNX-25-1, General Plan Amendment No. 25-2, Zone Change (Pre-Zoning) No. ZC25-2, Zone Text Amendment No. ZTA-25-4, Conditional Use Permit-25-4, Conditional Use Permit-25-5)
Dear Ms. Lucia:

This comment is submitted on behalf of Supporters Alliance For Environmental Responsibility (“SAFER”) regarding the Negative Declaration (“ND”) prepared for the City of Calimesa Annexation Project, which proposes the annexation of approximately 313.4 acres from the County of Riverside into the City of Calimesa, located east of Interstate 10 (I10) and Calimesa Boulevard, north of Brookside Avenue, north and south of Cherry Boulevard, and west of Fabian Lane, on APNs 407-220-(024, 026, 028, and 029) and 407- 230-(004, 006, 011, 016, 017, 018, 020 029, and 030) (“Project”).

Under the proposed Project, the Annexation Area’s General Plan Land Use designations would be updated to “LI – Light Industrial” on the approximately 138.7 acres within the Northern Annexation Area containing two existing warehouse buildings, “OS-R – Open Space Residential” on approximately 87.0 acres within the Northern Annexation Area, “CC – Community Commercial” on approximately 19.8 acres within the Southern Annexation Area, and “RE – Residential Estate” on approximately 58.5 acres within the Southern Annexation Area.

The ND does not analyze any environmental impacts associated with additional development within the Project area. Rather, it only states that “[n]o new development is proposed as part of the Project” (ND, p. 3) and that the Project would not “result in physical impacts to the environment beyond what already occurs under existing conditions” (ND, p. 16).

May 18, 2026
Comment on Negative Declaration, Calimesa Annexation Project

Because the ND does not analyze the potential environmental impacts associated with additional development, the City cannot rely on the ND for future CEQA review, and any new development within the Annexation Area must undergo new, project-specific CEQA review. To ensure that subsequent projects within the Specific Plan will in fact be subject to adequate environmental review, SAFER respectfully requests that the City adopt a binding condition of approval for the Specific Plan requiring that any and all subsequent projects will be subject to CEQA review and require a project-specific mitigated negative declaration or environmental impact report prior to approval.

Sincerely,
Victoria Yundt
LOZEAU | DRURY LLP































!
"#$%%&
'()*
+
,-()*.%#$%%/01%2345

67
89:;9:<:=
>>?@8
A+
BC$(
DE#)
,E#)/E)#F$%)2345

GHIJKLMN
OKPMLQRSNJRRTUVRWXYZ[

\J]YKI
^_SR
G`MSN

abc

dKYIJeISYL
fP
ghij
klmmn
olmmpq
rp
stul
vw
xpts
yvmlwwq
z{u
t
|vnmn}vw~
t~
~l
€tmu
y‚vs}w
ƒvw
ts„

vm„mv†l
‡ˆ‰l
ts„
z
‰l‰Š
‰numvts‰l
‹v~
~l

lw~l‚s
xvŒl‚wv„l
ryk€Ž
‡‚
nˆ‰l
‚l‰lvŒl„
~l
n‘‰l
n†
zs~ls~
ns
’“””“”•
~n
tssl–
—˜—Ž’
t‰‚lw
†‚nu
~l
ns~p
n†
xvŒl‚wv„l
vs~n
~l
v~p
n†
tmvulwtŽ
™l
yl‚Œv‰l
vw
‰nuuls‘s}
~n
‚luvs„
~l
v~p
~t~
tssl–t‘ns
n†
mts„w
‚lšv‚lw
t
rvsn‚
›uls„uls~
~n
~l
€mts
s„l‚
yl‰‘nsw
”œŽ’Ž˜žŸ
ts„
•Ž˜œŽ”Ž
™tsŠ
pn
†n‚
~l
nn‚~sv~p
~n
‚nŒv„l
‰nuuls~wŽ
xpts
yvmlww
ŽyŽ
ƒvw
ts„

vm„mv†l
yl‚Œv‰l
¡
€tmu
y‚vs}w
¢¢¢
žtw~
™tšv~£
tspns

tpq
yv~l
”œ¤
€tmu
y‚vs}wq
›

¥””•”
¢•œ¡”¦¢¡¤˜’’
‚pts§wvmlww¨†‹wŽ}nŒ
©wª““‹‹‹Ž†‹wŽ}nŒ“nˆ‰l“‰t‚mw|t„¡«w¡ts„¡‹vm„mv†l













!"#
!$
%&'()
%&*+)*,
-((.
%&/&,
0!"#!$%&'()%&*+)*,-((.%&/&,1,&234+(((&,5627 89&* :;<=;<><?
=@AB
CD
EF&.

G6(+
06(+16+(2&,+5'H7
!"#
!$
%&'()
%&*+)*,
-((.
%&/&,
0!"#!$%&'()%&*+)*,-((.%&/&,1,&234+(((&,5627 I ++6J2&)
KLI>
FMN
"(.
O
"+(2&,+
C))&P+()
Q4R&653*OS
TUVWXYZ[
\]^_]WXW_`aYXWb[ZYb]cV`[`VdXWecW]Vf]WghXZcV`[`V`W]i^agj

kWhaXV
lm`]
TgZ`[

nop

qXaVW^V`aY
rd
stuv
wW[[ax
kW_ZXb`Y_y

z`Vd
a{
zZ[`gW]Z
oYYWUZV`aY
qXa|W^V
}azZ[~Z]
`]VX`rcV`aY
baW]
mZ€W
{Z^`[`V`W]
`Y
VmW
ZXWZi
q[WZ]W
`Y^[cbW
Z
YaVW
Va
mZ€W
ZYd
bW€W[ahWX]
^aYVZ^V
‚‚
ƒ
„}o
ZV
`_o[WXV

„V`[`Vd
†a^ZV`Y_
zZ[`{aXY`Z

„YbWX_XacYb
‡`XW
ˆ
zZr[W
†a^ZVaX
hX`aX
Va
ZYd
WU^Z€ZV`aY
ƒ
bWga[`V`aY
Z^V`€`V`W]
]a
‰W
^ZY
†a^ZVW
ˆ
ŠZX‹
acV
acX
{Z^`[`V`W]i
ŒŽ
‘’“’”•–
’‘”•“•”Ž
—•”˜•
”
™š›œ
”
–
–žŸ
•¡˜¢£Ÿ¤¤žŸ
’‘•¥•”•¤
—•¥¥
Ÿ¦ž•Ÿ
’
§–¨’¥©’¤
ª«¥–Ž
¤”’¬­Ž®
s{
VmW
W€W[ahWX
YWWb]
YW‰
_Z]
]WX€`^Wx
h[WZ]W
mZ€W
VmWg
^aYVZ^V
acX
¯c`[bWX
}WX€`^W]
_Xach
Va
rW_`Y
VmW
Zhh[`^ZV`aY
hXa^W]]
Z]
]aaY
Z]
hXZ^V`^Zr[Wx
ZV
mVVh]yƒƒ‰‰‰i]a^Z[_Z]i^agƒ{aX°dacX°
rc]`YW]]ƒrc`[bWX°]WX€`^W]i

±–
’“–•¬
¬¥’Ž¤
•
«Ÿ–‘¤¤•¡
Ÿ¦ž¤”¤
’¬
–”••‘’”•–¤²
«¥’¤
˜’“
’¥¥
³Ÿ’‘˜•¤
‘–ŸŸ¤«–¬‘
¤”
”–
–žŸ
´”•¥•”Ž
µ¦ž¤”
•­–®
´”•¥•”Ž
µ¦ž¤”
¨–”’‘”
¶–Ÿª’”•–
­Ž
µ¡•–
§–ž”˜’¤”
µ¡•–
·
µ¬¥’¬¤
naX
XWecW]V]
`Y
VmW
]acVmWZ]VWXY
ZXWZ]
a{
†a]
oY_W[W]
zacYVdx
k`€WX]`bW
zacYVdx
}ZY
¯WXYZXb`Ya
zacYVdx
ZYb
sghWX`Z[
zacYVdx
h[WZ]W
^aYVZ^Vy
§¨©§¸µ¡•–µ¬¥’¬¤´”•¥•”Žµ¦ž¤”¹¤ª«Ÿ’ž”•¥•”•¤®‘–ª
§–ž”˜’¤”
µ¡•–
·
Œ’˜•ª
naX
Z[[
a{
ºXZY_W
zacYVd
ZYb
VmW
]acVmWXY
haXV`aY]
a{
†a]
oY_W[W]
zacYVdx
h[WZ]W
]WYb
ŠZh
ZYbƒaX
‡`[[
}WX€W
†WVVWX
XWecW]V]
Vay
Œ”¥’¤µ¦ž¤”¤»¼•¥¥§Ÿ“Œ’˜•ª¹¤ª«Ÿ’ž”•¥•”•¤®‘–ª
½–Ÿ”˜—¤”
µ¡•–
·
¨–ª«”–
¾
naX
‡W]V
ZYb
zWYVXZ[
†a]
oY_W[W]
zacYVdx
h[WZ]W
b`XW^V
ŠZh
kWecW]V]
ZYb
‡`[[
}WX€W
†WVVWX]
Vay
§¨©¢¨–ª«”–´”•¥•”Žµ¦ž¤”¹¤ª«Ÿ’ž”•¥•”•¤®‘–ª
½–Ÿ”˜—¤”
µ¡•–
·
¨˜’”¤—–Ÿ”˜
naX
XWecW]V]
{Xag
VmW
YaXVmWXYga]V
hZXV]
a{
†a]
oY_W[W]
zacYVd
WUVWYb`Y_
ch
Va
¿`]Z[`Zx
}ZY
†c`]
ºr`]hax
nXW]Yax
ZYb
lc[ZXWx
h[WZ]W
^aYVZ^Vy
½–Ÿ”˜—¤”À•¤”Ÿ•­ž”•–´”•¥•”Žµ¦ž¤”¹¤ª«Ÿ’ž”•¥•”•¤®‘–ª













 !"# #$%&'(&#)&*(# #&+,
-&.
/(&

0
1

2








3

4
2

1 


51
6







7##*899...+, :+,9;<$(<=(&9=( >&<&?,& @A&,#
-#;,#
%&'(&&#
B

#&&#
C*?&&#
@A&,#
D7*

& E

($

& E
!>
F
G?& $H
@ &&
#;$

 !
D
!H

(
;
;(
DIH
#7
*
#
#7&
##
;
*?&&#
.J
#
 .
(;;,&#
#&
#
,>(,#
&'(&>
&J
(?&$
>
$
&,&$
&*+
BA

#&&#
C*?&&#
@A&,#
@A&,#
, (>:E
=(#
#
#&>
#8
KL,?#
:&#&
#7
M
,7&

#&&#
.>&:

C# #
;
&.
,(=
>
:(##&
/(
*>
;;,
: 

#&&#
& :&#
!>&
&*#
N-O
@*& &
@A&,#
C, (>:8

#
>
P#&
>
&.&
&
K &,#,
& &,(,#
@ &&
*?>&
:&>
>
**?&>
>&:
* 
7.:


!
;, #&
, & $
>&#;&>8
IQR
#7
*
#
,#(,#
;
*#&#
& ,#
;

!
&>(S*&(&
;, #&+
MQTU
#7
*
#
,#(,#
;
*#&#
& ,#
;

!
7:7S*&(&
;, #&+
7
#&

&'(&>
#
&?&.
* 
>
>&:
$
&,&$
>;,#
#
,; ,#:

!
;, #&+
>#
F
%& ,#
%&'(&#
@ &&
J&&*

!
;&>
;8
@&S,#(,#
&&#:
#(,#
,7&>( &
@A&,#
*7:
(*>#&
7
;#
 .

!
#
,>#&
>
,7&>( &
$
&'(&>
.J+
@#7 :
$
=&
&'(&>
#
>&#&&
.7&#7&
,; ,#
&L#
=&#.&&
**&>
*?&&#
>
&L#:

!
;, #&+
C;

!
;, #&
&

,; ,#
>
& ,#

&'(&>E
&'(&#
(#
=&
(=##&>

.#:
>
, (>&
#7&
; .:8
N
:&>
V-#,&
#
G.&W

;;,
#$E
(#$E
>9
,*$
&##&7&>+
@A&,#
&E
(=&E
>
&*= &
## &+
@A&,#
>>&E
,#E
#,*#&>
##
>#&E
*&#&E
>
;(
,*&
;
.J+





 







































 


!"#$%&'()
*'+",(-#.
/0#12.#$$3$45++'63#70
83+793-(73'$2.#$$3$4:29';067<#$#40=0$7>?9#$6"3+0@
,01.#$1+ABCD'(7"0#+7,043'$
EFF360G>HIJ@HJICKLKM
N=#3.GDOPDN,043'$,01.#$1+Q73.37&,0R(0+7S+0=T9#(73.3730+U6'= 

1 Jerrica Harding
From: Kelly Lucia <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 18, 2026 8:08 AM
To: Rita Mahoney; Jerrica Harding
Subject: Fwd: Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration: Calimesa Annexation Project Begin forwarded message:

From: "Fang, Edina" <[email protected]>
Date: May 18, 2026 at 8:06:54 AM PDT
To: Kelly Lucia <[email protected]>
Cc: "Lopez, Alberto" <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration: Calimesa Annexation Project

Good morning Kelly,
Department of Environmental Health (DEH) has no comment on the “Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration: Calimesa Annexation Project” as no development is planned. DEH will review and comment on planning cases once development is planned.

Thank you,
Edina Fang
Registered Environmental Health Specialist
County of Riverside
Department of Environmental Health
Environmental Cleanup Program
4080 Lemon Street, 10th Floor, Riverside, CA 92501
Phone: 951-955-8980
Fax: 951-955-8988
www.rivcoeh.org
I am available Monday-Friday, 7:00 AM – 3:30 PM

From: Kelly Lucia <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2026 6:25 PM
To: Kelly Lucia <[email protected]>
Subject: Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration: Calimesa Annexation Project

2 CAUTION: This email originated externally from the Riverside County email system. DO NOT click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Good evening,

Please find attached the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration for the Calimesa Annexation project. The comment period is open from Friday, April 17, 2026, through Monday, May 18, 2026. The public hearing has not been scheduled at this time. A separate public hearing notice will be circulated at a later date.

Thank you,
Kelly Lucia, M. URP
Community Development
Director
Cell 909.809.8778
Office 909.795.9801 ext. 229
Email [email protected]

Planning · Building & Safety ·
Code Enforcement
Please use the OpenGov Permit
Portal for all submittals
Check out our major
development projects!

Confidentiality Disclaimer
This email is confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure.

If you are not the author's intended recipient, be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error please delete all copies, both electronic and printed, and contact the author immediately.

County of Riverside California

CC Resolution 2026-29
GPA 25-02

1 RESOLUTION NO. 2026-29

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALIMESA APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 25-02 AMENDING THE

CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN TO ACCOMMODATE THE PROPOSED
ANNEXATION OF APPROXIMATELY 313.4 ACRES LOCATED EAST OF THE CITY AND NORTH OF THE I-10 FREEWAY, AND AMEND THE CITY OF CALIMESA’S GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP IN A MANNER GENERALLY

CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING LAND USE DESIGNATIONS IN THE

RIVERSIDE COUNTY GENERAL PLAN
WHEREAS, I-10 Logistics Owner, LLC (the “Applicant”) submitted a Master Land Use Entitlement Application seeking to obtain pre-zoning and land use entitlement approvals from the City of Calimesa in connection with the Applicant’s proposed annexation of approximately 313.4 acres (herein, “Annexation Area”) from the County of Riverside into the City of Calimesa, which require the City’s approval, inter alia, General Plan Amendment No. 25-2 (GPA-25-2), an amendment to the City's General Plan in the manner described in the title of this Resolution and further defined herein; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has also requested approval of the following applications approvals, which along with GPA-25-2 are referred to collectively herein as the “Project”:

1. Annexation No. 25-1 (ANNX-25-1), annexation of approximately 313.4 acres of unincorporated land, consisting of: (1) approximately 234 acres north of Cherry Hills Boulevard and east of the existing City limits consisting of APNs 407-220-024, 407-220-026, 407-220-028, and 407-220-029 (the “Northern Annexation Area”); and (2) approximately 79.4 acres of south of Cherry Hills Boulevard and east of the existing City limits consisting of APNs 407-230-004, 407- 230-006, 407-230-011, 407-230-016, 407-230-017, 407-230-018, 407-230-020, 407-230-029, and 407-230-030 (the “Southern Annexation Area”); and

2. Pre-Zoning/Zone Change No. 25-2 (ZC-25-2), an amendment of the City's Zoning Map pre zone the 313.4-acre Annexation Area in a manner consistent with GPA -25-2 and apply a Warehouse Overlay Zone ("WOZ") to 138.7 acres in the Northern Annexation Area that are currently developed with two warehouse buildings, which would permit warehouse buildings containing up to 1,100,000 square feet (s.f.) of building area with approval of a CUP; and

3. Zone Text Amendment No. 25-4 (ZTA-25-4), an amendment of Section 18.30.020 (Industrial zone districts) in Chapter 18.30 (Industrial Zone Districts), Table 18.30.030 (Uses Permitted Within Industrial Districts), Table 18.30.040 (Industrial Development Standards) of Chapter 18.30 (Industrial Zone Districts) of Title 18 (Zoning, Land Use and Development Regulations) and adding a new section 12 to Section 18.90.040 (Major Development Plan Review) of Chapter 18.90 (Development Plan Review) of Zoning, Land Use, and Development Regulations, Title 18 of the Calimesa Municipal Code to conditionally permit warehouse buildings no larger than 1,100,000 square feet in size in the L-I zone for properties located in the newly created Warehouse Overlay Zone (WOZ); and

4. Conditional Use Permit No. 25-4 (CUP25-4), to allow the continued operation of an existing warehouse not greater than 1,100,000 square feet in size located in the westerly portion of Northern Annexation Area ("Building 1") consistent with ZTA-25-4 and with no expansion or change in the current use; and

CC Resolution 2026-29
GPA 25-02

2 5. Conditional Use Permit No. 25-5 (CUP-25-5), to allow the continued operation of an existing warehouse not greater than 1,100,000 s.f. in size located in the easterly portion of Northern Annexation Area ("Building 2") consistent with ZTA-25-4 and with no expansion or change in the current use; and
WHEREAS, Exhibit A to this Resolution, which is hereby incorporated by this reference as though set forth in full, depicts the land use designations that would be applied to the properties in the Annexation Area in the City’s General Plan if GPA 25-2 is approved; and WHEREAS, if GPA-25-2 is approved, the approximately 85.7 acres currently designated Open Space – Recreation (OS-R) and approximately 1.3 acres currently designated Public Facilities (PF) in the County General Plan would be designated in the City’s General Plan as Open Space Residential (1DU/AC) (OSR), the approximately 138.7 acres currently designated in the County General Plan as Community Development – Light Industrial (CD-LI) would be designated in the City’s General Plan as Light Industrial (LI)/Warehouse Overlay Zone (WOZ), the approximately 19.8 acres currently designated in the County General Plan as Community Development – Commercial (CD-CR) would be designated in the City’s General Plan as Community Commercial (FAR 50:1), the approximately 58.5 acres currently designated in the County General Plan as Rural Community – Very Low Density Residential (RC-VLDR) would be designated in the City’s General Plan as Residential Estate (RE), and the approximately 9.4 acres currently designated in the County General Plan as Roadway ROW would be designated in the City’s General Plan as Roadway ROW; and
WHEREAS, GPA-25-2 would also further revise the City’s General Plan by updating the following figures and related text therein to reflect the annexation of the Annexation Are to the City: Figure 1-1 (Planning Area), Figure LU-1 (Land Use Map), Figure TM-1 (Circulation Map), Figure OSPR-1 (Existing Public Parks and Open Space Areas), Figure OSPR-2 (Trails Master Plan), Figure SAF-1(Fault Zones), Figure SAF-2 (Liquefaction Susceptibility), Figure SAF-3 (Areas Subject to Subsidence), Figure SAF-4 (General Geologic Conditions), Figure SAF-5 (Flood Zones), Figure SAF-6 (Fire Hazards Areas), and Figure SAF-7 (Evacuation Routes); and
WHEREAS, the City is the Project lead agency for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. ("CEQA") and the State CEQA Guidelines contained in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations; and WHEREAS, the City prepared an Initial Study to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed Project, which Initial Study is available on the City’s website and incorporated herein by this reference; and
WHEREAS, based on the Initial Study, the City staff determined the Project would not have any significant effects on the environment and prepared a Negative Declaration pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15070; and
WHEREAS, on June 22, 2026, the Planning Commission of the City of Calimesa held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the Project and the Negative Declaration, at which hearing all persons interested in the matter were permitted to speak, and considered all testimony provided and evidence in the administrative record; and

CC Resolution 2026-29
GPA 25-02

3 WHEREAS, on July 20, 2026, the City Council of the City of Calimesa held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the Project and the Negative Declaration, at which hearing all persons interested in the matter were permitted to speak, and considered all testimony provided and evidence in the administrative record; and
WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Calimesa does hereby find, determine and resolve as follows:

SECTION 1. The City Council hereby finds as follows:

A. The facts set forth in the recitals to this Resolution are true and correct.

B. Based on the City Council’s independent judgment and analysis of the entirety of the Project administrative record, the City Council recommends that the City Council find that the Initial Study and Negative Declaration were prepared in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the Negative Declaration adequately evaluates the reasonably foreseeable environmental effects of the Project, and no substantial evidence has been presented demonstrating that the Project may result in significant environmental impacts.

C. GPA 25-02 is consistent with the textual portions of the General Plan, and the proposed amendments are internally consistent with other portions of the General Plan.

D. GPA 25-02 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.

E. Approval of GPA 25-02 will not adversely affect the overall public health, safety, and welfare of the City.

SECTION 2. Based on preceding findings and the entirety of the Project administrative record, the City Council approves GPA 25-2.

SECTION 3. The documents and other material that constitute the record on which this decision is based are located in the Planning Department of the City of Calimesa, at 908 Park Avenue, Calimesa, California 92320 and are in the custody of the Community Development Director.

SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause it to be published and recorded in the manner required by law.

CC Resolution 2026-29
GPA 25-02

4 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this ___ day of ________, 2026, upon the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
____________________________________

JEFF CERVANTEZ, MAYOR
ATTEST:
____________________________________

DARLENE GERDES, CITY CLERK

CC Resolution 2026-29
GPA 25-02

5 Exhibit “A”
General Plan Amendment No. 25-02
Amended General Plan Figures

Legend
Overlay Zone Properties
li252Sl RIPAOZArea 1 - 15 du/acre - no apartments
C8:zl RIPAOZArea 2 - 35 du/acre - apartments permitted
~: ": City Limits
c:J General Plan Planning Area
c:J Downtown Business District
c::::J Summerwind Ranch Specific Plan
c:J Heritage Oaks Equestrian Community Specific Plan
t2Za WOZ - Warehouse Overlay Zone
General Plan Land Use
D RE - Residential Estates
D RR - Residential Rural (0-2 DU/AC)
D RL - Residential Low (2-4 DU/AC)
D RLM - Residential Low Medium (4-7 DU/AC)
- RH - Residential High (14-20 DU/AC)
D CN - Commercial Neighborhood (FAR 25:1)
- CC- Community Commercial (FAR 50:1)
- CR - Regional Commercial (FAR 75:1)
D BP - Business Park
- LI - Light Industrial
D OP - Office Professional
- OS - Open Space
D OSR - Open Space Residential (1 DU/10AC)
D QP - Quasi-Public (Public Buildings, Parks)
Down Town Business District
- DNC - Downtown Neighborhood Commercial
- DVC - Downtown Village Commercial
D DVS - Downtown Neighborhood Commercial
Source(s): ESRI, RC/T (202S)
_. i ~ 0 750 1,500 3,000
tu~ ---Feet
1-10 Logistics Center
Summerwind Ranch
Manors (3.2 du/ac)
Villas (3.7 du/ac)
Cottages (4.5 du/ac)
Bungalows (5.5 du/ac)
Garden Courts (10.1 du/ac)
- Townhomes/Condos/Apts
(19.1 du/ac)
Business Park
- Commercial
Schools
- Parks and Community Rec
Garden Air Wash (GA 1-4)
Open Space
RLC-1
-1/ /1/. RCA 2-5
- Linear Park
1ZZ, Nature Park
- Park
Downtown Business
·ct
rde E
~.r/.r'//
~
Summerwin
pecifieMesa Verde Estates
Medium High Density Residential (4,000sf min)
Medium Density Residential (5,000sf min)
Medium Low Density Residential (6,000sf min)
Low Density Residential (7,000sf min)
Very Low Density Residential (10 ,000sf min)
- Mixed Use - (Commercial & MF-20du/ac)
- Open Space - Natural
- Open Space - Park
Open Space - Private Recreation
Open Space - Basin
- Public Institutional
Heritage Oaks Equestrian Community Specific Plan
Heritage Residential (0-1.5 DU/AC)
- Open Space
Figure LU-1
Land Use Map
JN: 707-007
Date: 12-17-2025

DRAFT SUBJECT TO LAFCO APPROVAL

Highland
..,
V,
QJ
Ol
C
~
0 Greenspot Rd
E Lugonia Ave
E Colton Ave
Redlands
Mill Creek Rd
Mentone
Crafton
Hills
Yucaipa Valley
e
Legend
<
C.

Herngt 'Aki'
Preserve
c::::J General Plan Planning Area
~ Sphere of Influence
Mount
Russe//
Lake Perris
State
Recreation Area
Source(s): ESRI, RCIT (2025)
1-10 Logistics Center
(} eer
~
'l'I''~
..,
V,
.c
..,
U1
Yucaipa Creek
Eden Hot
Springs
Eden
rQ)
rr
0 I
/
. a creek r
zo<'l
Wildwood
Canyon
Wi/d1y0 00'
a_n Y-.O.ll
Bir
Moun
Cherry Valley
Oak Valley Golf
Club
Beaumont
Figure 1-1
Planning Area
JN: 707-007
Date: 11-19-2025

DRAFT SUBJECT TO LAFCO APPROVAL

2283 ft ..

Legend
D General Plan Planning Area
1111 Open Space
c::::J Parks
Source(s): ESRI, RC/T (202S)
_. i ~ 0 875 1,750
tu~
3,500 ~
Feet~
1-10 Logistics Center
Yucaipa Creek
Avenue H
Wil dwood Canyo n Rd
..,
V)
V\
MOUNTAIN VIEW PARK~
W Avenue L
Myrtlewood Dr
Palrner Ave
Morongo Golf
Club
---1111]11--Blvd
Oak Valley Pkwy
caste\lo Ln
Brookside Ave

SAN BERNARDINO

NATIONAL FOREST
Orchard St
0,.,,
(IJ
>
<(
>,
u
C:
z
"'
<::/'
s
Cherry Valley
Vineland St
t]
(IJ
>
<(
~ San Gorgon/a ass
E

0.. "'
(IJ
>
E 13th St
E 12th St
Figure OSPR-1
Existing Public Parks and Open Space Areas
JN: 707-007
Date: 12-17-2025

DRAFT SUBJECT TO LAFCO APPROVAL

- PASEO
1111 RCA MSHCP Conserved Lands - MULTI-USE = HIKING TRAIL Public/Quasi-Public Conserved Lands •••• EQUESTRIAN TRAIL EXISTING TRAIL c::::I City Boundary --- BIKE LANE = UNKNOWN
- BIKETRAIL --- ELIMINATED TRAIL
Source(s): ESRI, RCIT (202S}
_. i ~ 0 750 1,500 3,000
tu~ ---Feet
1-10 Logistics Center
♦ TRAILHEAD
u OVER CROSSING
(g STAGING AREAS
❖ RESIDENTIAL TRAIL CONNECTION
* SCENIC OVERLOOK
*

WILDLIFE CULVERT CROSSING

AT-GRADE PEDESTRIAN/ EQUESTRIAN CROSSING

AT-GRADE ROAD CROSSING

PRIVATE CONNECTION (GATED)
Figure OSPR-2
Trails Master Plan
JN: 707-007
Date: 01-06-2026

DRAFT SUBJECT TO LAFCO APPROVAL

r:::::J General Plan Planning Area
Fault Activity
Holocene
Late Quaternary
Fault Zones
Alquist-Priolo Zone
c=J Existing County Zone
1111 Recommended Zone
Source(s): ESRI, RC/T (202S)
• ~ ~ 0 0.15 0.3 0.6 ~~
tu~ ---Miles~~
1-10 Logistics Center
San Timoteo
Canyon
<;
.c
...

Lil
Calimesa
Avenue H
W Avenue L
Myrtlewood Dr
Pairner Ave
Morongo Golf
Club
...

Vl
...

C:
~ "'
CD
enue G
:c
0 Ill
Vl
...

Oak Valley Pkwy
caste\\o Ln
_. 3296ft
.......... -------
QJ
>
<(
E QJ >
<(
Vineland S
Figure SAF-1
Fault Zones
JN: 707-007
Date: 12-17-2025

DRAFT SUBJECT TO LAFCO APPROVAL

Herngt 'Aki'
Preserve
CJ General Plan Planning Area
Liquefaction Susceptibility
_. i ~ 0 850 1,700
UL
3,400 ~
Feet~ P l AN N I N C
1-10 Logistics Center
W Avenue L
Myrtlewood Dr
Avenue H
C
C' "'
co I
0 c:;J □
Orchard St
Q)
>
D
<(
>,
()
C
z "'
Q)
>
<(
E
UJ
CHE:RRY
VALL E:Y
Q)
>
<(
Vineland S
79 E 13
E 121
Figure SAF-2
Liquefaction Susceptibility
JN: 707-007
Date: 12-17-2025

DRAFT SUBJECT TO LAFCO APPROVAL

San Jacinto - --
Legend
t::J General Plan Planning Area
-- Highways
t::J Area Plan Boundary
~ Cities
Subsidence Zones
1111 Areas with Documented Subsidence
~ Susceptible Areas
1111 Streams, River, Canal, or Ditch
Source(s): ESRI, RCIT (2025)
1-10 Logistics Center
--·
' /.if, ' Jl' <I,..
"- -
. . ~
Calimesa
Elsinore-Temecula
Figure SAF-3
Areas Subject to Subsidence
JN: 707-007
Date: 11-19-2025

DRAFT SUBJECT TO LAFCO APPROVAL

Legend
c::::J General Plan Planning Area
c::J Area Plan Boundary
~ LakeorSea
Mapped landslides. For additional information, refer
to the landslide susceptibility map.

Highways
Surface Materials
CJ
CJ
1111
CJ
Holocene-age, fine-grained unconsolidated sediments including stream-, gravity-, lake-, and wind-deposited sediments. Deposits in this category include stream channel, alluvial fan, flood plain, colluvial, dune, and lucustrine sediments.

Holocene-age, coarse-grained unconsolidated sediments, including stream- and gravity-deposited desiments. Includes alluvial fan, stream channel , and terrace deposits.

Pleistocene-age, fine-grained unconsolidated to moderately consolidated sediments.

Pleistocene-age, coarse-grained unconsolidated to moderately consolidated sediments.

Soft-Rock and Moderately Consolidated to Undurated Sediments 1111
1111
Tertiary-age and older, fine-grained soft rock and moderately consolidated to indurated sediments; generally bedded or fractured. Bedding or fractures assumed to provide planes of weakness along which slope instability could occur.

Tertiary-age and older, coarse-grained soft rock and moderately consolidated to indurated sediments; typically massive to thickly bedded.

Igneous Rocks of Various Ages, both Volcanic and Plutonic CJ Massive igneous rocks Foliated and/or fractured igneous rocks Metamorphic Rocks of Various Ages, including Meta-igneous and metasedimentary rocks CJ Massive metamorphic rocks Foliated and/or fractured metamorphic rocks Source(s): ESRI, RCIT (2025)
1-10 Logistics Center
Figure SAF-4
General Geological Conditions
JN: 707-007
Date: 11-19-2025

DRAFT SUBJECT TO LAFCO APPROVAL

c:::::J General Plan Planning Area
~ Awareness Floodplain Boundaries
FEMA Flood Zone
1111 100 Year Flood Zone
1111 500 Year Flood Zone
Source(s): ESRI, RC/T (202S)
_. i ~ 0 850 1,700
tu~
3,400 ~
Feet~
1-10 Logistics Center
San Timoteo
Canyon
.. 2648ft
Avenue H
W Avenue L
Myrtlewood 0r
Pafrner Ave
Morongo Golf
Club
vi
...

C
~ "'
CD ...

Vl
V,
0 ::i::
lvd
Oak Valley Pkwy
caste\\o Ln
.. 3296ft
""""''• 'Y
I
-------------
Orchard St
cu
>
<(
>,
'-'
C
z "'
cu
>
<(
E
U.J
Cherry Vall
cu
>
<(
'-
"'
Vineland
E
Figure SAF-5
Flood Zones
JN: 707-007
Date: 12-17-2025

DRAFT SUBJECT TO LAFCO APPROVAL

Legend
c:J General Plan Planning Area
Fire Hazard Severity Zone Description
FZ2J
rz
IT7
High
Moderate
Very High
Fire Hazard Severity Zones in Local Responsibility Area Very High
High
Moderate
State Responsibility Areas
Local Responsibility Area (LRA)
State Responsibility Area (SRA)
Federal Responsibility Area (FRA)
Source(s): ESRI, RC/T (2025), Ca/FIRE (2025)
• ~ ~ 0 0.15 0.3 0.6 ~~ tu~ ---Miles~~
1-10 Logistics Center
bU
60 60
Averue H
My tlewooo ['
in
C"
"' >,
aJ
u
C
z "'
Cl)
.
<(
£
u.

Cl)
.>
<(
E 13
E 12tt
Figure SAF-6
Fire Hazards Areas
JN: 707-007
Date: 12-17-2025

DRAFT SUBJECT TO LAFCO APPROVAL

I
Legend
- Evacuation Route
City Limit
c::::J General Plan Pl annmg • Area
Summe rwmd • Ranch S •• Mesa v pecific Plan
erde Estates S • Herita pecific Plan
ge Oaks E questrian Com • SH- munrty Specific P
----=,•-••·""o• I an
"i - 0 L
~ ,~ 7so 1,500 ii ___ 3,000 ~~ """~ Feet ~ lli...._ll--"'111 .. 1-10 L og,stics • Center
San Bernardino County
~ GHERRYVALLEY I BLVD
Figure SAF-7
Evacuation Routes
JN: 707-007
Date: 01-06-2026

DRAFT SUBJECT TO LAFCO APPROVAL

Legend
City Limit
D General Plan Planning Area
Summerwind Ranch Specific Plan
Mesa Verde Estates Specific Plan
Heritage Oaks Equestrian Community Specific
Plan
GP Roadway Class.ification
Existing F reewayllnterstate
- Major Arterial
Secondary Arterial
- Collector
Residential Collector
Minor Road
Uf1•60~
Source(s): ESRI, RCIT (2025)
_. i ~ 0 750 1,500 3,000
tu~ ---Feet
1-10 Logistics Center
Mesa Verde Estates
Specific Plan
Roadway Classification
Arterial Hwy
Collector Street
Divided Collector Street
Emergency Aocess
Major Hwy
school Access Road
Secondary Arterial
Secondary Hwy
Urban Arterial Hwy
San Bernardino County
Summeiwind Ranch
Specific Plan
Roadway Classification
- - Urban Arterial (134' ROW)
- - Arterial (110' ROW)
- - Modified Secondary I (104' ROW)
Modified Secondary II (82' ROW)
Secondary (88' ROW)
Divided Collector (78' ROW)
Heritage Oaks Eq
Roadways located within the Herita
Community Specific Plan are local
not designated on this Circulation P
"'" '!'
z
0 I - -----a.---,.---------1 -----t---~:------GHERRY-VALLEY·BLVD------, Figure TM-1
Circulation Map
JN: 707-007
Date: 01-06-2026

DRAFT SUBJECT TO LAFCO APPROVAL

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-30

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALIMESA APPROVING LANDOWNER-INITIATED APPLICATION NO. ANNX-25-1

AND SUPPORTING APPLICATION FOR THE LANDOWNER-INITIATED
APPLICATION BY I-10 LOGISTICS OWNER, LLC REQUESTING THE

LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION FOR THE COUNTY OF

RIVERSIDE (LAFCO) TO INITIATE PROCEEDINGS FOR

REORGANIZATION OF TERRITORY AND TO INCLUDE A

CONCURRENT SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT
WHEREAS, I-10 Logistics Owner, LLC (the “Landowner” or “Applicant”) submitted a Master Land Use Entitlement Application seeking to obtain pre-zoning and land use entitlement approvals from the City of Calimesa in connection with the Applicant’s proposed annexation of approximately 313.4 acres of unincorporated land, consisting of:
(1) approximately 234 acres north of Cherry Valley Boulevard and east of the existing City limits consisting of APNs 407-220-024, 407-220-026, 407-220-028, and 407-220-029 (the “Northern Annexation Area”); and (2) approximately 79.4 acres of south of Cherry Valley Boulevard and east of the existing City limits consisting of APNs 407-230-004, 407-230- 006, 407-230-011, 407-230-016, 407-230-017, 407-230-018, 407-230-020, 407-230-029, and 407-230-030 (the “Southern Annexation Area”) (collectively referred to as “Territory”); and
WHEREAS the Northern Annexation Area consists of approximately 152.8 acres of developed area containing two large industrial buildings measuring 1,012,760 s.f. and 811,000 s.f. in size, approximately 1,237 associated parking spaces, and approximately

3.6 acres of right-of-way for Cherry Valley Boulevard and Roberts Street. There is also an existing equestrian shade structure/stable and associated pasture that occurs along the north-central boundary of the Northern Annexation Area and that is associated with an off-site residential use to the north. In addition, the Northern Annexation Area includes approximately 80.3 acres of open space; and
WHEREAS, the Southern Annexation Area consists of approximately 4.9 acres in the north-central portions as a developed truck equipment and repair business (Bonafide Truck Equipment and Repair). An existing wireless tower facility is located in the southwestern portion of the Southern Annexation Area. The remaining portions of the Southern Annexation Area consist of undeveloped lands; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code Section 56425, the City Council supports amendment to its Sphere of Influence (“SOI”) concurrent with the petition for annexation and as demonstrated by the City’s approval of the following discretionary approvals, which City approvals are referred to collectively herein as the “Project”:

1. Annexation No. 25-1 (ANNX-25-1), annexation of approximately 313.4 acres of unincorporated land, consisting of: (1) approximately 234 acres north of Cherry Valley Boulevard and east of the existing City limits consisting of APNs 407-220-024, 407-

220-026, 407-220-028, and 407-220-029 (the “Northern Annexation Area”); and (2) approximately 79.4 acres of south of Cherry Valley Boulevard and east of the existing City limits consisting of APNs 407-230-004, 407-230-006, 407-230-011, 407-230-016, 407-230-017, 407-230-018, 407-230-020, 407-230-029, and 407-230-030 (the “Southern Annexation Area”); and

2. General Plan Amendment No. 25-2 (GPA-25-2), an amendment to the City’s General Plan Land Use Map and related figures to include the Annexation Area and designate the land uses therein in a manner generally consistent with the existing land use designations in the Riverside County General Plan; and

3. Pre-Zoning/Zone Change No. 25-2 (ZC-25-2), an amendment of the City’s Zoning Map pre zone the 313.4-acre Annexation Area in a manner consistent with GPA -25-2 and apply a Warehouse Overlay Zone (“WOZ”) to 138.7 acres in the Northern Annexation Area that are currently developed with two warehouse buildings, which would permit warehouse buildings containing up to 1,100,000 square feet (s.f.) of building area with approval of a CUP; and

4. Zone Text Amendment No. 25-4 (ZTA-25-4), an amendment of Section

18.30.020 (Industrial zone districts) in Chapter 18.30 (Industrial Zone Districts), Table

18.30.030 (Uses Permitted Within Industrial Districts), Table 18.30.040 (Industrial Development Standards) of Chapter 18.30 (Industrial Zone Districts) of Title 18 (Zoning, Land Use and Development Regulations) and adding a new section 12 to Section

18.90.040 (Major Development Plan Review) of Chapter 18.90 (Development Plan Review) of Zoning, Land Use, and Development Regulations, Title 18 of the Calimesa Municipal Code to conditionally permit warehouse buildings no larger than 1,100,000 square feet in size in the L-I zone for properties located in the newly created Warehouse Overlay Zone (WOZ); and

5. Conditional Use Permit No. 25-4 (CUP-25-4), to allow the continued operation of an existing warehouse not greater than 1,100,000 square feet in size located in the westerly portion of Northern Annexation Area (“Building 1”) consistent with ZTA-25- 4 and with no expansion or change in the current use; and

6. Conditional Use Permit No. 25-5 (CUP-25-5), to allow the continued operation of an existing warehouse not greater than 1,100,000 s.f. in size located in the easterly portion of Northern Annexation Area (“Building 2”) consistent with ZTA-25-4 and with no expansion or change in the current use; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000, commencing with Section 56000 of the Government Code, the annexation of the Territory into the City is being initiated by petition with required signature of landowners or registered voters by I-10 Logistics Owner, LLC, as a landowner within the annexation area with more than 50% value; and

WHEREAS, the boundaries of the proposed areas are described in the legal description, Exhibit “A”, and depicted on the corresponding plat maps, Exhibit “B”, respectively, for annexation, which are incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) clearance for this annexation was analyzed by Environmental Assessment 25-8 (EA), a Negative Declaration (SCH No. 2026040877) adopted by City Council Resolution 2026-28, as the lead agency, on July 20, 2026; and
WHEREAS, on July 20, 2026, the City Council of the City of Calimesa held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the Project and the Negative Declaration, at which hearing all persons interested in the matter were permitted to speak, and considered all testimony provided and evidence in the administrative record; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Calimesa does hereby find, determine and resolve as follows:

SECTION 1. The City Council hereby finds as follows:

A. The facts set forth in the recitals to this Resolution are true and correct.

B. Based on the City Council’s independent judgment and analysis of the entirety of the Project administrative record, the City Council finds that the Initial Study and Negative Declaration were prepared in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the Negative Declaration adequately evaluates the reasonably foreseeable environmental effects of the Project, and no substantial evidence has been presented demonstrating that the Project may result in significant environmental impacts.

SECTION 2. ANNX-25-1 is hereby approved. The City supports submission of the annexation application to Riverside LAFCO as follows:

A. The proposal is made pursuant to the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 commencing with Section 56000 of the California Government Code.

B. The nature of the proposed annexation is the annexation of the territory into the City.

C. The affected Territory proposed to be annexed is described as the Northern and Southern Annexation Areas in the recitals and Exhibits “A” and “B” of this Resolution.

D. The affected Territory is not within the SOI of any city, but approval of GPA 25- 2 would amend the City’s General Plan Land Use Map and other related figures to include the Annexation Area and designate the land uses therein in a manner generally consistent with the existing land use designations in the Riverside County General Plan upon approval by LAFCO. The Landowner will file an annexation petition with a concurrent SOI

Amendment with LAFCO. The SOI Amendment shall include the information required under Government Code Section 56425 (e).

E. It is desired that the proposed annexation provides for and made subject to the terms and conditions of the City’s approval of the Project.

F. The City approves ANNX 25-1 and supports submission of the application for the following reasons:
i. The addition of the Territory into the City will generate local tax revenues, property taxes, employment benefits and other tangible and intangible benefits for the City of Calimesa; and
ii. These additional sources of income for the City will allow for funding of necessary public services and facilities, including without limitation public safety services and facilities; and
iii. The addition of the Territory will assist in the City’s public purpose of fostering a business and civic environment that may attract additional businesses and investment into the City due to economic activity resulting from ongoing use of the Territory.

SECTION 3. The City consents to waiver of protest proceedings pursuant to Government Code Sections 56662(a)(1) through 56662(a)(3), inclusive.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this ___ day of ________, 2026, upon the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
____________________________________

JEFF CERVANTEZ, MAYOR
ATTEST:
____________________________________

DARLENE GERDES, CITY CLERK

EXHIBIT “A”

TERRITORY LEGAL DESCRIPTION

EXHIBIT “B”

TERRITORY PLAT MAPS

-1-
ORDINANCE NO. 423

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CALIMESA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT 25-04 AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE MUNICIPAL

CODE TO ESTABLISH A NEW WAREHOUSE OVERLAY ZONE AND ZONE CHANGE 25-2 AMENDING THE CITY ZONING MAP TO PREZONE
APPROXIMATELY 314.4 ACRES LOCATED EAST OF THE CITY AND NORTH OF THE I-10 FREEWAY IN CONNECTION WITH ITS ANNEXATION BY THE

CITY, INCLUDING APPLICATION OF THE NEW WAREHOUSE OVERLAY ZONE TO THE APPROXIMATELY 138.7 ACRES OF THE ANNEXATION AREA

THAT ARE CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH TWO WAREHOUSE BUILDINGS WHEREAS, I-10 Logistics Owner, LLC (the “Applicant”) submitted a Master Land Use Entitlement Application seeking to obtain pre-zoning and land use entitlement approvals from the City of Calimesa in connection with the Applicant’s proposed annexation of approximately 313.4 acres (herein, “Annexation Area”) from the County of Riverside into the City of Calimesa, which require the City’s approval, inter alia, Zone Text Amendment No. 25-4 (ZTA-25-4) and Zone Change No. 25-2 (ZC-25-2) as each is described in the title of this Ordinance and further defined herein; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has also requested approval of the following applications approvals, which along with ZTA-25-4 and ZC-25-2 are referred to collectively herein as the “Project”):

1. Annexation No. 25-1 (ANNX-25-1), annexation of approximately 313.4 acres of unincorporated land, consisting of: (1) approximately 234 acres north of Cherry Valley Boulevard and east of the existing City limits consisting of APNs 407-220-024, 407-220-026, 407- 220-028, and 407-220-029 (the “Northern Annexation Area”); and (2) approximately 79.4 acres of south of Cherry Valley Boulevard and east of the existing City limits consisting of APNs 407- 230-004, 407-230-006, 407-230-011, 407-230-016, 407-230-017, 407-230-018, 407-230-020, 407-230-029, and 407-230-030 (the “Southern Annexation Area”); and

2. General Plan Amendment No. 25-2 (GPA-25-2), an amendment to the City's General Plan Land Use Map to include the Annexation Area and designate the land uses therein in a manner generally consistent with the existing land use designations in the Riverside County General Plan; and

3. Conditional Use Permit No. 25-4 (CUP25-4), to allow the continued operation of an existing warehouse not greater than 1,100,000 square feet in size located in the westerly portion of Northern Annexation Area ("Building 1") consistent with ZTA-25-4 and with no expansion or change in the current use; and

4. Conditional Use Permit No. 25-5 (CUP-25-5), to allow the continued operation of an existing warehouse not greater than 1,100,000 s.f. in size located in the easterly portion of Northern Annexation Area ("Building 2") consistent with ZTA-25-4 and with no expansion or change in the current use; and
WHEREAS, the City is the Project lead agency for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. ("CEQA") and the State CEQA Guidelines contained in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations; and

-2-
WHEREAS, the City prepared an Initial Study to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed Project, which Initial Study is available on the City’s website and incorporated herein by this reference; and
WHEREAS, based on the Initial Study, the City staff determined the Project would not have any significant effects on the environment and prepared a Negative Declaration pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15070; and
WHEREAS, on June 22, 2026, the Planning Commission of the City of Calimesa held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the Project and the Negative Declaration, at which hearing all persons interested in the matter were permitted to speak, and after consideration all of the testimony provided and evidence in the administrative record, made a recommendation of approval to the City Council regarding the Project; and WHEREAS, on July 20, 2026, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the Project and the Negative Declaration, at which hearing all persons interested in the matter were permitted to speak, and after consideration all of the testimony provided and evidence in the administrative record closed the public hearing; and
WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.

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

Section 1. The City Council hereby finds as follows:

A. The facts set forth in the recitals to this Ordinance are true and correct.

B. Based on the City Council’s independent judgment and analysis of the entirety of the Project administrative record, that the Initial Study and Negative Declaration were prepared in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the Negative Declaration adequately evaluates the reasonably foreseeable environmental effects of the Project, and no substantial evidence has been presented demonstrating that the Project may result in significant environmental impacts.

C. ZTA-25-4 and ZC-25-2 are each consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan, as amended by GPA-25-2, and would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City.

Section 5. The City Council hereby approves ZC-25-2 and the Zoning Map of the City of Calimesa is hereby amended as depicted in Exhibit A to this Ordinance, which is hereby incorporated as set forth in full. The approximately 87 acres currently zoned by the County as Controlled Development Areas (W-2) shall be pre-zoned by the City as Open Space Residential (1DU/10AC) (O-S-R). The approximately 138.7 acres currently zoned by the County as Industrial Park (I-P) shall be pre-zoned by the City as Light Industrial (LI)/Warehouse Overlay Zone (WOZ).

The approximately 19.8 acres currently zoned by the County as Scenic Highway Commercial (CP-S) shall be pre-zoned by the City as Community Commercial (FAR 50:1) (CC). The approximately 58.5 acres currently zoned by the County as Residential Agriculture (R-A) shall be pre-zoned by the City as Residential Estate (R-E). The approximately 9.4 acres currently zoned by the County as Roadway ROW (as defined by the County Code) shall be pre-zoned by the City

-3-
as Roadway ROW (as defined by the Municipal Code). Except as expressly amended by ZC-25-2, the City Zoning Map shall remain unchanged.

Section 6. Section 18.05.080 (Zone districts established) of the Calimesa Municipal Code, is hereby amended to add “Warehouse Center Overlay Zone” as follows to the Table therein:

18.05.080 Zone districts established.

Symbol Zone Name Chapter
WOZ Warehouse Overlay Zone 18.30
Section 7. Section 18.30.020 (Industrial zone districts) of the Municipal Code, is hereby amended by the addition thereto of a new paragraph “C” to read as follows:
“C. Warehouse Overlay (WOZ) Zone. This zone is intended to establish the Warehouse Overlay (WOZ) Zone to allow for warehouse development projects of a larger scale and square footage than otherwise allowed in the Light Manufacturing (LI) Zone, when the location is appropriate to avoid significant traffic and community impacts from such uses. In order for a site to qualify for designation into the WOZ, the site shall: (i) be bounded by a major arterial roadway with direct access to the I-10 freeway and (ii) be located in close proximity to, and not further than [½ mile] from an interchange on the I-10 freeway as measured from the property line of the site that is nearest to the interchange.” Section 8. Table 18.30.030 (Uses Permitted Within Industrial Districts) located in Section 18.30.030 (Use regulations for industrial districts) of the Municipal Code, is hereby amended to add a new column thereto under the heading of “WOZ” to represent uses allowed in the in the Warehouse Overlay Zone, as follows:

Table 18.30.030 – Uses Permitted Within Industrial Districts Use WOZ
A. Processing and Fabrication
Chemicals P
Clay P
Electrical P
Food products P
Glass P
Leather P
Lumber and wood products P
Machinery P

-4-
Use WOZ
Metals P
Paper P
Plastics P
Rubber P
Stone P
Textiles P
B. Storage/Wholesale Trades
Distribution center, including catalog sales or distribution • Up to 1,100,000 square feet in sized CC
• Greater than 1,100,000 square feet in size X
Equipment rental, storage and sales P
Lumber yard, contractor yard, nonhazardous materials storage yard and building material yard
P
Mini-warehousing, self-storages
C
P
Recreational vehicle storage P
Transportation/trucking yards, stations, terminals CC
Vehicle storage yards, inclusive of towing yards P
Warehouse/distribution
• Up to 1,100,000 square feet in sized CC
• Greater than 1,100,000 square feet in size X
C. Services
Auto body repair and painting C
Automobile or truck assembly C
Automotive services and garages, inclusive of car washes P Distributors, showrooms and administrative offices P
Fuel dispensing services P
Laboratories, inclusive of medical, chemical, dental, optical P Laundry, dry cleaning and cleaning plants P
Printing/blueprint/photography studios and laboratories P

-5-
Use WOZ
Research and development P
Services that are more industrial in nature (e.g., pest control, carpet cleaners) P
Incidental retailing when part of a permitted use of this section P D. Manufacturing
Asphalt and asphalt product manufacture and storage C
Bakery/food preparation P
Bottling plants P
Carpenter and cabinet shops P
Cement, lime, gypsum, plaster manufacturing or processing C Concrete batch plant C
Electronics: electrical and related parts; electrical appliances, motors and devices; radio, television and phonograph
P
Fertilizer processing and manufacture C
Furniture upholstering P
Instruments: electronic and precision; medical and dental; timing and measuring P
Metal casting, foundries or rolling or drawing mills C
Packing houses P
Paint manufacturing C
Pharmaceuticals: cosmetics, drugs, perfumes, toiletries and soap (not including refining or rendering of fats or oils)
P
E. Public/Quasi-Public Uses
Bus, rail and taxi stations C
Churches and other religious institutions X
Educational facilities (including public or private vocational schools) X Fire and police facilities P
Postal services P
Public administration buildings and civic center P
Public utility services offices X
Wireless communication facilities C

-6-
Use WOZ
F. Office and Related Uses
Financial services and institutions X
Professional office P
G. Miscellaneous
Adult entertainment b X
Animal hospital/veterinary office C
Brewery, microbrewery, distillery or winery C
Commercial cannabis activity e X
Commercial recreation facilities
• Indoor C
• Outdoor C
Kennel/animal shelter C
Public assembly c
• Occupancy of up to 20 total persons P
• Occupancy of 21 or more persons or use not meeting parking requirements C
Refuse disposal operations C
Tire recapping or retreading C
Restaurants C
Legend:

P – Permitted
C – Subject to conditional use permit
CC – Subject to city council-approved conditional use permit d X – Prohibited
H. Accessory Uses
Watchman's or caretaker's living quarters, only when incidental to and on the same site as a permitted or conditionally permitted use (where 24-hour surveillance is required)
P
Temporary Uses Subject to the
provisions of CMC

18.15.130,
Temporary use
permits.

-7-
Use WOZ
Other Uses Similar to and Having No Greater Impact on the Surrounding Environment Than the Uses Identified Above
Subject to the
provisions of CMC

18.15.180,
Determination of
similar use.

Section 9. Table 18.30.040 (Industrial Development Standards) located in in Section

18.30.040 (Industrial Development Standards) of the Municipal Code, is hereby amended to add a new column thereto under the heading of “WOZ” to represent uses allowed in the in the Warehouse Overlay Zone, as follows, with all other sections, subsections, and notes of Table

18.30.030 to remain the same:

Table 18.30.040 – Industrial Development Standards
Standard WOZ
Minimum site area (net) 20,000 sq.
ft.

Street setback a
Side street setback(s) b
Side yard setback c
Rear yard setback d
Maximum floor area ratio 0.50
Maximum height for buildings and structures 3 stories or 50’ s.f. = square feet
Section 10. A new subparagraph 12 is hereby added to paragraph B (“Applicability”) of Section 18.90.040 (Major Development Plan Review) of the Municipal Code to read as follows all:
“12. All buildings and structures proposed within the Warehouse Overlay Zone (“WOZ”).”
Section 11. Except as expressly amended by this Ordinance, all other provisions of the Municipal Code shall remain unchanged.

Section 12. This Ordinance shall become effective only upon the occurrence of all of the following events: (i) the passage of 30 days after second reading and adoption of this Ordinance and, during that period, the absence of any valid referendum petition having been filed (the occurrence of the regular ordinance effective date as provided by Government Code Section

-8-
36937); (ii) the City Council’s approval of and effectiveness of GPA-25-2 and (ii) the filing by the Riverside County Local Agency Formation Commission of a Certificate of Completion with the County Clerk/Recorder’s Office regarding the approval of the annexation of the property into the City of Calimesa.

Section 12. If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or place, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares it would have adopted this ordinance, and each and every section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

Section 13. Neither the adoption of this Ordinance nor the repeal of any other ordinance of this City shall in any manner affect the prosecution of any violation of any City ordinance or provision of the Calimesa Municipal Code, committed prior to the effective date hereto, nor be construed as a waiver of any license or penalty or the penal provision applicable to any violation thereof.

Section 14. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause it to be published in the manner required by law.

INTRODUCED AND APPROVED UPON FIRST READING this ____ day of _____________, 2026, upon the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

-9-
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED UPON SECOND READING this ____ day of _____________, 2026, upon the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
_________________________________

JEFF CERVANTEZ, MAYOR
ATTEST:
_________________________________

DARLENE GERDES, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________

STEVEN FLOWER, CITY ATTORNEY

-10-
Exhibit A
Zone Change Amendment 25-2

RESOLUTION 2026-31

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALIMESA APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 25-4 TO ALLOW AN EXISTING WAREHOUSE WITH 811,000 SQUARE FEET OF WAREHOUSE SPACE AND 10,000 SF OF OFFICE

SPACE IN A LIGHT INDUSTRIAL/WAREHOUSE OVERLAY ZONE ON PROPERTY TO

BE ANNEXED INTO THE CITY LOCATED EAST OF THE CITY AND NORTH OF THE I-10 FREEWAY (APN 407-220-028)
WHEREAS, I-10 Logistics Owner, LLC (the “Applicant”) submitted a Master Land Use Entitlement Application seeking to obtain pre-zoning and land use entitlement approvals from the City of Calimesa in connection with the Applicant’s proposed annexation of approximately 313.4 acres (herein, “Annexation Area”) from the County of Riverside into the City of Calimesa, which require the City’s approval, inter alia, Conditional Use Permit 25-4 (CUP-25-4), to allow the continued operation of an existing warehouse not greater than 1,100,000 square feet in size located in the northwesterly portion of Annexation Area (APN 407-220-028, the “Subject Site”)) with no expansion or change in the current use WHEREAS, the Applicant has also requested approval of the following applications approvals, which along with CUP-25-4 are referred to collectively herein as the “Project”:

1. Annexation No. 25-1 (ANNX-25-1), annexation of approximately 313.4 acres of unincorporated land, consisting of: (1) approximately 234 acres north of Cherry Hills Boulevard and east of the existing City limits consisting of APNs 407-220-024, 407-220-026, 407-220-028, and 407-220-029 (the “Northern Annexation Area”); and (2) approximately 79.4 acres of south of Cherry Hills Boulevard and east of the existing City limits consisting of APNs 407-230-004, 407-230-006, 407-230-011, 407-230- 016, 407-230-017, 407-230-018, 407-230-020, 407-230-029, and 407-230-030 (the “Southern Annexation Area”); and

2. General Plan Amendment No. 25-2 (GPA-25-2), an amendment to the City's General Plan Land Use Map to include the Annexation Area and designate the land uses therein in a manner generally consistent with the existing land use designations in the Riverside County General Plan; and

3. Pre-Zoning/Zone Change No. 25-2 (ZC-25-2), an amendment of the City's Zoning Map pre zone the 313.4-acre Annexation Area in a manner consistent with GPA -25-2 and apply a Warehouse Overlay Zone ("WOZ") to 138.7 acres in the Northern Annexation Area that are currently developed with two warehouse buildings, which would permit warehouse buildings containing up to 1,100,000 square feet (s.f.) of building area with approval of a CUP; and

4. Zone Text Amendment No. 25-4 (ZTA-25-4), an amendment of Section 18.30.020 (Industrial zone districts) in Chapter 18.30 (Industrial Zone Districts), Table 18.30.030 (Uses Permitted Within Industrial Districts), Table 18.30.040 (Industrial Development Standards) of Chapter 18.30 (Industrial Zone Districts) of Title 18 (Zoning, Land Use and Development Regulations) and adding a new section 12 to Section 18.90.040 (Major Development Plan Review) of Chapter 18.90 (Development Plan Review) of Zoning, Land Use, and Development Regulations, Title 18 of the Calimesa Municipal Code to conditionally permit warehouse buildings no larger than 1,100,000 square feet in size in the L-I zone for properties located in the newly created Warehouse Overlay Zone (WOZ); and

5. Conditional Use Permit No. 25-5 (CUP-25-5), to allow the continued operation of another existing warehouse not greater than 1,100,000 s.f. in size located in the easterly portion of Northern Annexation Area ("Building 2") consistent with ZTA-25-4 and with no expansion or change in the current use; and

CC Resolution 2026-31
CUP 25-4

2 WHEREAS, the existing warehouse development on the Subject Site consists of a total of 811,000 square feet of warehouse space and 10,000 square feet of office space, for a total building area of 811,000 square feet, with 130 truck trailer docking doors on the western side of the building and 65 dock doors on the eastern side, 274 passenger vehicle parking stalls on the north and south sides of the building, and 271 truck trailer parking stalls located in the truck courts to the east and west of the building; and
WHEREAS, there is no proposal to expand or change the existing warehouse development as part of CUP-25-4, and any such change or expansion would require the City’s subsequent approval; and WHEREAS, a list of conditions of approval for CUP-25-4 is attached hereto as Exhibit A to this Resolution and hereby incorporated as though set forth in full; and WHEREAS, the City is the Project lead agency for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. ("CEQA") and the State CEQA Guidelines contained in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations; and WHEREAS, the City prepared an Initial Study to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed Project, which Initial Study is available on the City’s website and incorporated herein by this reference; and
WHEREAS, based on the Initial Study, the City staff determined the Project would not have any significant effects on the environment and prepared a Negative Declaration pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15070; and
WHEREAS, on June 22, 2026, the Planning Commission of the City of Calimesa held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the Project and the Negative Declaration, at which hearing all persons interested in the matter were permitted to speak, and considered all testimony provided and evidence in the administrative record; and
WHEREAS, on July 20, 2026, the City Council of the City of Calimesa held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the Project and the Negative Declaration, at which hearing all persons interested in the matter were permitted to speak, and considered all testimony provided and evidence in the administrative record; and
WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Calimesa does hereby find, determine and resolve as follows:

SECTION 1. The City Council hereby finds as follows:

A. The facts set forth in the recitals to this Resolution are true and correct.

B. Based on the City Council’s independent judgment and analysis of the entirety of the Project administrative record, the City Council finds that the Initial Study and Negative Declaration were prepared in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the Negative Declaration adequately evaluates the reasonably foreseeable environmental effects of the Project, and no substantial evidence has been presented demonstrating that the Project may result in significant environmental impacts.

CC Resolution 2026-31
CUP 25-4

3 C. Based on the findings above and substantial evidence in the Project administrative record:

1. The proposed use is conditionally permitted within the subject land use district and complies with all of the applicable provisions of the zoning code, as amended by ZTA-25-4 and subject to approval of GPA-25-2 and ZC-25-2, which would designate and zone the Subject Site for Light Industrial, Warehouse Overlay uses.

2. The proposed use would not impair the integrity and character of the land use district in which it is to be located. No new development is proposed on site as part of the Project and CUP-25-4 will be required to comply with all applicable requirements of the Calimesa Municipal Code, as amended by ZTA-25-4 and the conditions of approval listed in Exhibit A to this Resolution.

3. The Subject Site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of land use being proposed. The existing warehouse building has already been developed on the Subject Site and there is no proposal to expand or change the existing warehouse development as part of CUP-25-4.

4. The proposed use is compatible with the land uses presently on the Subject Site.

The existing warehouse building has already been developed on the Subject Site and there is no proposal to expand or change the existing warehouse development as part of CUP-25-4.

5. The proposed use would be compatible with existing and future land uses within the general area in which the proposed use is to be located. The existing warehouse building has already been developed on the Subject Site, there is no proposal to expand or change the existing warehouse development as part of CUP-25-4, and neither GPA-25-2 nor ZC-25-2 would allow changes or intensification of existing uses in the general area.

6. The proposed use is compatible in scale, mass, coverage, density, and intensity with all adjacent land uses. The existing warehouse building has already been developed on the Subject Site, which is compatible with all existing adjacent uses. There is no proposal to expand or change the existing warehouse development as part of CUP-25-4, and GPA -25-2 and ZC-25-2 will maintain the existing pattern of development on adjacent sites.

7. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and services to ensure that the proposed use would not be detrimental to public health and safety. Yucaipa Valley Water District has provided documentation that there are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and services to ensure that the proposed use would not be detrimental to public health and safety.

8. There will be adequate provisions for public access to serve the Subject Site. The existing warehouse building has already been developed on the Subject Site and already has adequate public access.

9. The proposed use is consistent with the general plan. As amended by GPA 25-2, the General Plan will allow warehouse buildings no larger than 1,100,000 square feet in size with approval of a CUP, and the Subject Site is already developed with an existing 811,000-square foot warehouse.

10. There will not be significant adverse effects upon environmental quality and natural resources due to CUP-25-4. The Initial Study was prepared to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed Project and determined the Project would not have any significant effects on the environment.

CC Resolution 2026-31
CUP 25-4

4 11. Any negative impacts of the proposed use are mitigated. The Initial Study was prepared to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed Project and determined the Project would not have any significant effects on the environment that require mitigation.

CUP-25-4 will also be required to comply with all applicable requirements of the Calimesa Municipal Code, as amended by ZTA-25-4, and the conditions of approval listed in Exhibit A to this Resolution.

12. The proposed location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed use would not be detrimental to the public interests, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the city.

The existing warehouse building has already been developed on the Subject Site, it will be required to comply with all applicable requirements of the Calimesa Municipal Code, as amended by ZTA-25-4, and the conditions of approval listed in Exhibit A to this Resolution, and there is no proposal to expand or change the existing warehouse development as part of CUP 25 4.

SECTION 2. Based on preceding findings and the entirety of the Project administrative record, the City Council approves Conditional Use Permit 25-4.

SECTION 3. The documents and other material that constitute the record on which this decision is based are located in the Planning Department of the City of Calimesa, at 908 Park Avenue, Calimesa, California 92320 and are in the custody of the Community Development Director.

SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause it to be published and recorded in the manner required by law.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this ___ day of ________, 2026, upon the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
____________________________________

JEFF CERVANTEZ, MAYOR
ATTEST:
____________________________________

DARLENE GERDES, CITY CLERK

Exhibit “A”
Conditional Use Permit 25-4
Conditions of Approval

# Conditions of Approval Department

1.01 1.01 Future Tenants. The property owner (present and future) shall be responsible for providing a copy of the approved conditions of approval and approved exhibits to every current and future project tenant, lessee, and property owner to facilitate compliance with these conditions of approval. The existing warehouse uses are legal, conforming uses pursuant to Riverside County Plot Plan 25337 and Calimesa Ordinance No. 423. All conditions of approval, Riverside County EIR No. 534 & Supplemental EIR No. 534 mitigation measures/project design features, and Environmental Assessment EA-25-8 are continuously in effect throughout the operative life of the project for the use approved. Failure of the property owner, tenant, applicant, developer or any operator to comply with any or all of the conditions at any time may result in a public hearing and revocation of the approved land use, provided adequate notice, time and opportunity is provided to the property owner or other party to correct the non-complying situation. Failure to acquire a tenant or use the building for a period of six or more calendar months does not constitute a cessation or suspension of the use approved by the City.

Planning

1.02 Revisions. Any proposed change to the approved use/activity on the site; or an increase in the exterior footprint, including addition of a vehicle/trailer maintenance facility, addition of an outdoor diesel/fuel distribution facility, exterior expansion of the building footprint, landscaping modification, exterior lighting modification, proposed change in the conditions of approval, or proposed change to the EIR mitigation measures or modifications to the Project Features identified in Riverside County EIR No. 534 & Supplemental EIR No. 534, and EA-25-8 shall require amendment to the Conditional Use Permit through a public hearing process. Modification of the building interior area which does not result in a change of use shall be processed through a ministerial building permit review process.

Planning

1.03 Lighting. The glare from any luminous source, including on-site lighting shall not exceed one-half (0.5) foot-candle at property line. Planning

1.04 Applicability. If any of the conditions or limitations of this approval are held to be invalid, that holding does not invalidate any of the remaining conditions or limitations set forth. Planning

1.05 All operations must comply with the Mitigation Measures and Project Features described in Riverside County EIR No. 534, Supplemental EIR No. 534, and Environmental Assessment EA-25-8. Planning

1.06 Maintenance. As shown on the "I-10 Logistics Center Storm Drain, Roadway & Landscaping Maintenance Exhibit" attached hereto to this resolution as Attachment B, Developer is required to provide for the perpetual maintenance of the following items: 1) public streets, 2) parkway (including trails and paseos) and median landscaping and irrigation; 3) City owned catch basins and appurtenances; 4) streetlights; 5) traffic signal; and 6) street sweeping. Developer shall finance such maintenance through use of a financing district mechanism, as determined by and acceptable to the City Engineer in its sole discretion.

Engineering

1.07 Parking on access driveways, fire lanes and fire department turnarounds is prohibited. Fire

1.08 A current Five-Year Fire Sprinkler System certification shall be maintained at all times in accordance with CCR Title-19 and City of Calimesa Fire Prevention requirements. Fire

1.09 All current and future tenants shall obtain a Permit to Operate issued by the City of Calimesa. A Permit to Operate is valid for twelve months and shall be renewed annually. Planning and Fire

1.10 All current and future tenants shall obtain a Business License issued by the City of Calimesa. Business licenses are initially valid for six months and shall be renewed annually thereafter. Finance 1) GENERAL CONDITIONS

2 Exhibit “B”
Conditional Use Permit 25-4
I-10 Logistics Center Storm Drain, Roadway & Landscaping Maintenance Exhibit

X X X X X X X X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X X X X X X
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
)
))
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
))
)
))
))
))
))
)
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
)
)
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
)
)
)
))
)
))
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
))
))
)
)
))
))
))
))
)))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
)
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
))
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
)
))
))
))
)
)
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
)
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
)
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
)
))
))
))
)
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
))
))
)
)
))
))
))
))
))
)
)
))
))
)
))
))
))
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
)
))
)
)
)
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
)
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
)
)) CITY OF CALIMESA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD

SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD

SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
SD
SD

SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
LAT A2
LAT
A8
LAT A9
SD
SD
SD
SD

SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
SD

LINE B SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
SD
LAT A3
SD
SD
LAT A4

SD SD SD SD SD
LAT A5
LINE 5
LINE 4
SD SD
SD
SD
SD
SD

SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD

SD SD SD SD SD SD
LAT 1A-1
SD
LAT 2
SD
LAT 1B-2
SD
LAT
1A-4

SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD

SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
SD
SD
SD SD
SD

SD SD SD SD
LINE 1B
LINE 1A
LINE 2
LAT A10
LINE 3 ROBERTS STREET
CHERRY VALLEY BLVD.

LINE A
LAT A2

STREET LIGHT TO BE

MAINTAINED BY CITY OF
CALIMESA TYP.

STREET LIGHT TO BE

MAINTAINED BY CITY OF
CALIMESA TYP.

OUTLET

STRUCTURE

MAINTAINED

BY RCFC &
WCD
OUTLET

STRUCTURE

MAINTAINED
BY

PROPERTY
OWNER

INLET STRUCTURE

MAINTAINED BY

PROPERTY
OWNER

INLET STRUCTURE

MAINTAINED BY PROPERTY
OWNER

INLET STRUCTURE

MAINTAINED BY

OUTLET STRUCTURE MAINTAINED PROPERTY OWNER

BY PROPERTY OWNER
LAT A7

INLET STRUCTURE MAINTAINED BY

PROPERTY OWNER

EXISTING
PARCEL
LINE

EXISTING
PARCEL
LINE
ME-113
ME-113
ME-113

WATER TOWER AND

BUILDING TO BE

PRIVATELY MAINTAINED
ME-106
ME-108 ME-108
ME-108
ME-108
ME-109
ME-109
ME-109
ME-109
ME-109
ME-109
ME-109
ME-111
ME-111
ME-106
ME-107
ME-112
SD
SD
SD

SYMBOL CODE DESCRIPTION MAINTENANCE ENTITY

MAINTENANCE EXHIBIT
LINE A & LATERALS A1, A2, A8, A9 STORM DRAINS RCFC & WCD LINE B, LATERALS 1A-1,A3, A4, A5, A6, A7, A11, LAT 2 & ON-SITE

STORM DRAINS

PROPERTY OWNER
LINE 4, 5 & LATERALS A10, 1A-4, 1B-2, STORM DRAINS PROPERTY OWNER

INLET/OUTLET STRUCTURES AND BASINS RCFC & WCD

INLET/OUTLET STRUCTURES AND BASINS PROPERTY OWNER

CHERRY VALLEY BLVD MEDIAN CITY OF CALIMESA

PORTION OF CHERRY VALLEY BLVD MEDIAN WITHIN CITY OF

BEAUMONT

CITY OF CALIMESA

CHERRY VALLEY BLVD PARKWAY CITY OF CALIMESA

ROBERTS STREET PARKWAY CITY OF CALIMESA

CANYON WATERSHED COURT PARKWAY CITY OF CALIMESA
ROADWAYS - CHERRY VALLEY BLVD, ROBERTS ST. & CANYON

WATERSHED COURT

CITY OF CALIMESA

ROADWAY - CHERRY VALLEY BLVD CITY OF BEAUMONT

CATCH BASINS CITY OF CALIMESA
ME-101
ME-102
ME-103
ME-104
ME-105
ME-106
ME-107
ME-108
ME-109
ME-110
ME-111
ME-112
ME-113

REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE
WEBB
N
W E
S

COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE

CITY OF CALIMESA
I-10 LOGISTICS CENTER
CHERRY VALLEY BLVD., ROBERTS ST. & CANYON WATERSHED COURT STORM DRAIN, ROADWAY & LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE EXHIBIT MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 02 PP NO. 25337/TPM 36564
I-10 LOGISTICS CENTER

STORM DRAIN, ROADWAY &

LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE EXHIBIT

CITY OF CALIMESA

X X X X X X
X
X
X
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
)
)
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
)
)
)
))
))
))
)
)
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
)
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
)
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
)
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
)
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
)
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
)
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
))
))
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
LINE A
SD
SD

SD SD SD
SD
SD
LAT A1
SD SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
LAT A6
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
LAT A11

SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD

SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
SD

SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
LINE 3
LINE 2
LAT A2

SD SD SD SD SD
LINE 8 CANYON WATERSHED COURT
CHERRY VALLEY BLVD.

STREET LIGHT TO BE MAINTAINED BY
CITY OF CALIMESA TYP.

STREET LIGHT TO BE

MAINTAINED BY PUBLIC
MAINTENANCE TYP.

INLET STRUCTURE

MAINTAINED BY RCFC &
WCD

INLET STRUCTURE

MAINTAINED BY

RCFC & WCD

INLET STRUCTURE

MAINTAINED BY RCFC &
WCD

OUTLET STRUCTURE

MAINTAINED BY

PROPERTY OWNER

EXISTING
PARCEL
LINE

EXISTING
PARCEL
LINE
ME-113
ME-108
ME-108
ME-110 ME-110
ME-106 ME-106
ME-111
ME-110
ME-107
ME-107
ME-112
SD
SD
SD

SYMBOL CODE DESCRIPTION MAINTENANCE ENTITY

MAINTENANCE EXHIBIT
LINE A & LATERALS A1, A2, A8, A9 STORM DRAINS RCFC & WCD LINE B, LATERALS 1A-1,A3, A4, A5, A6, A7, A11, LAT 2 & ON-SITE

STORM DRAINS

PROPERTY OWNER
LINE 4, 5 & LATERALS A10, 1A-4, 1B-2, STORM DRAINS PROPERTY OWNER

INLET/OUTLET STRUCTURES AND BASINS RCFC & WCD

INLET/OUTLET STRUCTURES AND BASINS PROPERTY OWNER

CHERRY VALLEY BLVD MEDIAN CITY OF CALIMESA

PORTION OF CHERRY VALLEY BLVD MEDIAN WITHIN CITY OF

BEAUMONT

CITY OF CALIMESA

CHERRY VALLEY BLVD PARKWAY CITY OF CALIMESA

ROBERTS STREET PARKWAY CITY OF CALIMESA

CANYON WATERSHED COURT PARKWAY CITY OF CALIMESA
ROADWAYS - CHERRY VALLEY BLVD, ROBERTS ST. & CANYON

WATERSHED COURT

CITY OF CALIMESA

ROADWAY - CHERRY VALLEY BLVD CITY OF BEAUMONT

CATCH BASINS CITY OF CALIMESA
ME-101
ME-102
ME-103
ME-104
ME-105
ME-106
ME-107
ME-108
ME-109
ME-110
ME-111
ME-112
ME-113

REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE
WEBB
N
W E
S MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 01

COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE

CITY OF CALIMESA
I-10 LOGISTICS CENTER
CHERRY VALLEY BLVD., ROBERTS ST. & CANYON WATERSHED COURT

STORM DRAIN, ROADWAY & LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE EXHIBIT