REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
Eastvale City Hall Council Chambers
12363 Limonite Avenue, Suite 900, Eastvale, CA 91752
Wednesday, May 11, 2022
Regular Council Meeting: 6:30 PM
City Councilmembers
Clint Lorimore, Mayor
Todd Rigby, Mayor Pro Tem
Christian Dinco, Councilmember
Brandon Plott, Councilmember
Jocelyn Yow, Councilmember
Henry Garcia, Interim City Manager
Erica Vega, City Attorney (Contract Legal Services)
Marc Donohue, City Clerk/Communications Director
This Agenda contains a brief general descrip-on of each item to be considered. Except as otherwise provided by law, no ac-on or direc-on shall be taken on any item not appearing on the following Agenda. Unless legally privileged, all suppor-ng documents, including staff reports, and any wri-ngs or documents provided to a majority of the City Council a3er the pos-ng of this agenda are available for review at Eastvale City Hall, 12363 Limonite Avenue, Eastvale, CA 91752 or you may contact the City Clerk’s Office, at (951) 361-0900 Monday through Thursday from 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. and available online at www.eastvaleca.gov.
In accordance with AB 361 (Government Code sec-on 54953(e)), members of the City Council, the public, and others may aBend and par-cipate in this mee-ng remotely via GoToWebinar. If you wish to view the mee-ng and/or make public comment through GoToWebinar you may do so by logging on to GoToWebinar at the above stated date and -me via the following link:
https://bit.ly/3IjMS2l. Members of the public may provide public comment by sending comments to the City Clerk’s Office by email at [email protected] or u-lize the “raise your hand” func-on in GoToWebinar to provide oral public comment during the designated public comment periods. Staff will monitor emails to the extent possible during the mee-ng. Email comments will be read into the record, with a maximum allowance of 3 minutes per individual comment, subject to the Council’s discre-on to reduce the amount of -me for public comments. Email comments received a3er the agenda item is heard will not be read into the record.
In the event of a disrup-on to the GoToWebinar broadcast of the mee-ng, or the ability to receive public comment through GoToWebinar, the meeting will be recessed until remote public access is restored.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabili-es Act, if you need special assistance to par-cipate in this mee-ng, you should contact the City Clerk’s Office at (951) 361-0900.
Regular mee-ngs are recorded and made available on the City’s website atwww.eastvaleca.gov. Mee-ng recordings are uploaded to the City’s website within 24 hours (unless otherwise noted) after the completion of the meeting. 1 1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. CLOSED SESSION PUBLIC COMMENT
Any member of the public may address the Council on items within the Council’s subject maer jurisdicon, but which are not listed on this agenda during PUBLIC COMMENTS. However, no acon may be taken on maers that are not part of the posted agenda. We request comments made on the agenda be made at the me the item is considered and that comments be limited to three minutes per person with a maximum of six minutes (me may be donated by one person). Please address your comments to the Council and do not engaged in dialogue with individual Council Members, City staff, or members of the audience. Blue speaker forms are available at the front table to the entrance of Council Chambers.
4. CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)
5. INVOCATION
6. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
7. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS
The City Council may only add an item to the Agenda a2er making a finding that there is a need to take immediate acon on the item and that the item came to the aenon of the agency subsequent to the posng of the agenda. An acon adding an item to the agenda requires 2/3 vote of the Council. If there is less than 2/3 of the Council members present, adding an item to the agenda requires a unanimous vote. Added items will be placed for discussion at the end of each section unless otherwise noted.
8. PRESENTATIONS/ANNOUNCEMENTS
9. AGENCY PARTNER UPDATES
10. PUBLIC COMMENT
Any member of the public may address the Council on items within the Council’s subject maer jurisdicon, but which are not listed on this agenda during PUBLIC COMMENTS. However, no acon may be taken on maers that are not part of the posted agenda. We request comments made on the agenda be made at the me the item is considered and that comments be limited to three minutes per person with a maximum of six minutes (me may be donated by one person). Please address your comments to the Council and do not engaged in dialogue with individual Councilmembers, City staff, or members of the audience. Blue speaker forms are available at the front table to the entrance of Council Chambers.
11. CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent Calendar items are normally enacted in one moon. The Mayor or City Council may remove a Consent Calendar item for separate acon. If a member of the public would like to 2 speak on a Consent Calendar item, please complete a blue “Public Comment Form” and submit to the City Clerk prior to the item.
11.1. City Council Meeting Minutes
Submitted by: Marc A. Donohue, City Clerk/Communications Director RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the City Council meeting minutes from the special meeting on April 20, 2022 and the regular meeting on April 27, 2022.
11.2. Approval of Construction Contract to Elecnor Belco Electric, Inc. for Limonite Avenue Communications Improvement Project in the Amount of $198,160.00 Submitted by: Jimmy Chung, City Engineer
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Approve the Construction Contract to Elecnor Belco Electric, Inc., the lowest responsible bidder, in accordance with unit bid prices in the amount of $158,528.00 plus 25% contingency of $39,632.00 for the Limonite Avenue Communications Improvement Project; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents including Notice of Completion.
12. PUBLIC HEARINGS
The public is encouraged to express your views on any maer set for public hearing. It is our procedure to first receive the staff report, then to ask for public tesmony, first from those in favor of the project followed by tesmony from those in opposion to it, and if there is opposion, to allow those in favor, rebual tesmony only as to the points brought up in opposion. To tesfy on the maer, you need to simply come forward to the speaker’s podium at the appropriate me, give your name and address and make your statement. A2er a hearing is closed, you may not further speak on the maer unless requested to do so or are asked quesons by the Mayor or a Councilmember. Public comment is limited to three (3) minutes each with a maximum of six (6) minutes (time may be donated by one speaker.)
12.1. A Request (PLN21-20039) by The New Home Company for Approval of the Following Entitlements Related to the 158.6 Acre Site Located at the Northwest Corner of Hamner Avenue and Limonite Avenue Commonly Known as the Leal Property: an Addendum to the Certified Program Environmental Impact Report for the Leal Master Plan, Leal Master Plan Amendment (SPA001), a Development Agreement (DA003), a Tentative Tract Map (TTM 38290) to Create 14 Developable Lots, 19 Lots for Infrastructure, Trails and Open Space and a Major Development Plan Review (PLN22- 20020 DR001) to Facilitate the Development of 2,500 Residential Units and 595,000 Square Feet of Commercial Development Including a Hotel, a Civic Center (City Hall, Library, Police Station) and a Fire Station
Submitted by: Gina Gibson-Williams, Community Development Director RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
3 Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Conduct a public hearing;
2. Approve PLN21-20039 and the following:
A Resolu-on approving an Addendum to the Cer-fied Program Environmental Impact Report for the Leal Master Plan;
Introduc-on of An Ordinance approving an Amendment to the Leal Master Plan (SPA001), Reading the Ordinance by Title and Waiving Further Reading of the Ordinance;
Introduc-on of An Ordinance approving a Development Agreement (DA003), Reading the Ordinance by Title and Waiving Further Reading of the Ordinance; A Resolution approving a Tentative Tract Map (TTM 38290) and; A Resolution approving a Major Development Plan Review (PLN22-20020 DR001).
13. CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS
14. CITY MANAGER/CITY STAFF REPORT
15. CITY COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS/COMMITTEE REPORTS
16. ADJOURNMENT
The next regular mee-ng of the Eastvale City Council is scheduled for Wednesday, May 25, 2022, at 6:30 p.m. at Eastvale City Hall Council Chambers, 12363 Limonite Avenue, Suite 900, Eastvale, CA 91752.
17. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
I hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that the foregoing Agenda was posted at the following locations: City Hall, 12363 Limonite Avenue, Suite 910 and website of the City of Eastvale (www.eastvaleca.gov,) not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting.
______________________________________________________
Marc A. Donohue, MMC
City Clerk
4 MINUTES
CITY OF EASTVALE
Special Joint Meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission Wednesday, April 20, 2022
Special Meeting: 6:30 P.M.
Eastvale City Council Chambers
12363 Limonite Avenue, Suite 900
Eastvale, CA 91752
1. CALL TO ORDER
The special meeting of the Eastvale City Council was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Mayor Lorimore.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Councilmembers Dinco, Plott, Yow, Mayor Pro Tem Rigby, and Mayor Lorimore.
Planning Commissioners Hove, Lee, Rochelle, Vice-Chair Mensen, and Chair Laney.
Absent:
City Staff
Present: Interim City Manager Garcia, Community Development Director Gibson-Williams, and City Clerk/Communications Director Donohue were present at roll call. Other staff members were present and responded to questions.
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Planning Commission Chair Laney led the Pledge of Allegiance.
4. PUBLIC COMMENT – None
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
5.1 Adoption of the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Addendum to the Eastvale General Plan Final Impact Report
Community Development Director Gibson-Williams provided a PowerPoint presentation and answered related questions.
The following individuals provided public comment:
5 Eastvale City Council Special Joint Meeting Minutes
April 20, 2022 Page - 2
Juan Munoz, Southwest Carpenters
The City Council and the Planning Commission discussed the item and provided feedback.
On motion of Planning Commissioner Lee and second by Planning Commissioner Rochelle, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to:
1. Adopt a resolution recommending City Council approval of General Plan Amendment No. PLN22-20016 adopting the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update in accordance with California Government Code Sections 65580 through 65589, and an Addendum to Eastvale General Plan Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2011111061) in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15164.
On motion of Councilmember Dinco and Second by Councilmember Plott, the City Council voted unanimously to:
1. Adopt a resolution approving General Plan Amendment No. PLN22-20016 adopting the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update in accordance with California Government Code Sections 65580 through 65589, and an Addendum to Eastvale General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2011111061) in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15164.
Councilmember Yow inquired about a community benefit agreement and what the timeline would be.
ADJOURNMENT – The special meeting was adjourned at 8:09 p.m. The next regular meeting of the Eastvale City Council is scheduled for Wednesday, April 27, 2022, at 6:30 p.m. The next special meeting of the Eastvale Planning Commission is scheduled for Monday, April 25, 2022, at 6:00 p.m. _____________________________________
Marc A. Donohue, MMC
City Clerk/Communications Director
6 MINUTES
CITY OF EASTVALE
City Council Regular Meeting
Wednesday, April 27, 2022
Regular Meeting: 5:30 P.M.
Eastvale City Council Chambers
12363 Limonite Avenue, Suite 900
Eastvale, CA 91752
1. CALL TO ORDER
The regular meeting of the Eastvale City Council was called to order at 5:32 p.m. by Mayor Lorimore.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Councilmembers Dinco, Plott, Yow, Mayor Pro Tem Rigby, and Mayor Lorimore
Absent:
City Staff
Present: Interim City Manager Garcia, City Attorney Vega, and City Clerk/Communications Director Donohue were present at Roll Call. Other staff members were present.
3. CLOSED SESSION PUBLIC COMMENT – None
4. CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)
4.1 CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS (Government Code § 54956.8) Property: approximately 10 acres located within the parcel at the northwest corner of Limonite Avenue and Hamner Avenue
City negotiator: Gina Gibson-Williams, Community Development Director Negotiating parties: The New Home Company
Under negotiation: price and terms of payment
At the conclusion of closed session, City Attorney Vega stated that there was no reportable action.
4.2 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—EXISTING LITIGATION (Government Code § 54956.9(d)(1))
Name of case: James R. Riley v. City of Eastvale (San Diego County Superior Court Case No. 37-2022-00002650-CU-OE-CTL)
7 Eastvale City Council Meeting Minutes
April 27, 2022 Page - 2
At the conclusion of closed session, City Attorney Vega stated that there was no reportable action.
5. INVOCATION
Pastor Nathan Kang from Hillcrest Baptist Church offered the invocation.
6. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Pro Tem Rigby led the Pledge of Allegiance.
7. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS
Staff requested to pull Consent Calendar Item 11.8 from the agenda.
There was a consensus to pull Consent Calendar Item 11.8 from the agenda.
8. PRESENTATIONS/ANNOUNCEMENTS
8.1 Municipal Clerk’s Week Proclamation
Proclamation was presented to the City Clerk’s Office.
9. AGENCY PARTNER UPDATES
9.1 Eastvale Library Update
Felicia Chien, Branch Manager at Eastvale Public Library, provided an update.
10. PUBLIC COMMENT
The following individual provided public comment:
Eleanor Roosevelt High School Student
11. CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of Councilmember Yow and second by Mayor Pro Tem Rigby, the City Council voted unanimously to approve Consent Calendar Items 11.1 – 11.7 and 11.9 – 11.10.
11.1 City Council Meeting Minutes
The City Council approved the City Council meeting minutes from the regular meeting on April 13, 2022.
11.2 Warrant Register: March 2022
8 Eastvale City Council Meeting Minutes
April 27, 2022 Page - 3
The City Council approved the payment of warrants as submitted by the Finance Department.
11.3 Treasurer’s Report: March 2022
The City Council received and filed the City Treasurer’s Report.
11.4 Planning Department Update
The City Council received and filed the Planning Department Update.
11.5 Public Works Department Update
The City Council received and filed the Public Works Department Update.
11.6 City of Eastvale Crime Statistics – February 2022
The City Council received and filed the Eastvale Crime Statistics for February 2022.
11.7 Communications Monthly Summary
The City Council received and filed the Communications Monthly Summary.
11.9 Amendment to Bond Release and Public Improvement Maintenance Agreement for Parcel Map No. 36487
The City Council approved the Amendment to Bond Release and Public Improvement Maintenance Agreement for Parcel Map No. 36487 and authorized the City Manager to execute the amendment.
11.10 Conducting Council and Commission Meeting Utilizing Teleconferencing The City Council adopted a resolution authorizing City Council and Commission meetings to be conducted utilizing teleconferencing, while also allowing in person attendance, under AB 361.
12. PUBLIC HEARINGS – None
13. CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS
13.1 Strategic Plan Update
Management Analyst Vasquez provided a PowerPoint presentation and answered related questions.
Mayor Lorimore opened the public comment period. With no one desiring to speak 9 Eastvale City Council Meeting Minutes
April 27, 2022 Page - 4
on this item, Mayor Lorimore closed the public comment period.
The City Council received and filed the update.
13.2 Eastvale Community Enhancement Volunteer Program
Interim Community Safety Director Terfehr provided a PowerPoint presentation and answered related questions.
Mayor Lorimore opened the public comment period. With no one desiring to speak on this item, Mayor Lorimore closed the public comment period.
On motion of Councilmember Dinco and second by Councilmember Plott, the City Council voted unanimously to:
1. Approve the Eastvale Community Enhancement Volunteer Program Manual, and direct staff to move forward with the implementation of the Eastvale Community Enhancement Volunteer Program in accordance with the Manual.
2. Approve and Adopt Budget Resolution 22-23 Amending the 2021-22 Fiscal Budget by $8,400 for the development and implementation of the new Eastvale Community Enhancement Volunteer program.
3. Approve and Adopt Resolution 22-24 Authorizing access to State and Federal level summary criminal history information for employment (including volunteers).
13.3 Agreement for Business Incentive Loan Program with Bushfire Eastvale Inc. DBA Bushfire Kitchen in the amount of $100,000
Senior Management Analyst Ramirez-Cornejo provided a PowerPoint presentation and answered related questions.
Mayor Lorimore opened the public comment period. With no one desiring to speak on this item, Mayor Lorimore closed the public comment period.
On motion of Councilmember Plott and second by Councilmember Dinco, the City Council voted unanimously to Approve Business Incentive Loan Program Agreement with Bushfire Eastvale Inc. DBA Bushfire Kitchen for $100,000 from the Business Incentive Loan Program and authorize the Interim City Manager to execute the Agreement and take any other actions necessary to implement the Agreement.
13.4 Rescind Agreement for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Job Creation and Business incentive Loan Program with Precision Partners LLC, DBA Jinya Ramen Bar and Approve General Fund Business Incentive Loan Agreement Senior Management Analyst Ramirez-Cornejo provided a PowerPoint presentation 10 Eastvale City Council Meeting Minutes
April 27, 2022 Page - 5
and answered related questions.
Mayor Lorimore opened the public comment period. With no one desiring to speak on this item, Mayor Lorimore closed the public comment period.
On motion of Councilmember Plott and second by Mayor Pro Tem Rigby, the City Council voted unanimously to:
1. Rescind Agreement for CDBG Job Creation and Business Incentive Loan with Precision Partners LLC, DBA Jinya Ramen Bar; and
2. Approve Agreement for General Fund Business Incentive Loan with Precision Partners LLC, DBA Jinya Ramen Bar.
13.5 City Manager Executive Recruitment Services
Deputy Talent and Special Projects Director Zepeda provided a PowerPoint presentation and answered related questions.
Mayor Lorimore opened the public comment period. With no one desiring to speak on this item, Mayor Lorimore closed the public comment period.
On motion of Councilmember Dinco and second by Councilmember Yow, the City Council voted unanimously to establish an Ad-Hoc Committee to narrow down to three firms interested in assisting with the City Manager recruitment, before final consideration of the City Council.
On motion of Mayor Pro Tem Rigby and second by Councilmember Yow, the City Council voted unanimously to appoint Councilmembers Christian Dinco and Brandon Plott to the City Manager Recruitment Ad-Hoc Committee.
The City Council discussed the item and directed that the City Manager Recruitment Ad-Hoc Committee will meet with the Deputy Talent and Special Projects Director Zepeda and/or Interim City Manager Garcia as soon as more proposals are solicited and received.
14. CITY MANAGER REPORT/CITY STAFF REPORT
Interim City Manager Garcia provided an update on upcoming City events.
15. CITY COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS/COMMITTEE REPORTS
15.1 League of California Cities
No report was provided.
15.2 Southern California Association of Governments
No report was provided.
11 Eastvale City Council Meeting Minutes
April 27, 2022 Page - 6
15.3 Western Riverside Council of Governments
No report was provided.
15.4 Riverside Transit Agency
Councilmember Yow provided a report.
15.5 Northwest Mosquito and Vector Control District
No report was provided.
15.6 Riverside County Transportation Commission
No report was provided.
15.7 Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority No report was provided.
15.8 Western Community Energy
No report was provided.
15.9 Finance Committee
No report was provided.
15.10 California Contract Cities Association
No report was provided.
15.11 Eastvale Schools Committee
No report was provided.
15.12 City Council Communications
The City Council provided comments.
ADJOURNMENT – Mayor Lorimore adjourned the regular meeting at 8:59 p.m. The next regular meeting of the Eastvale City Council is scheduled for Wednesday, May 11, 2022, at 6:30 p.m. _____________________________________
Marc A. Donohue, MMC
City Clerk/Communications Director
12 AGENDA STAFF REPORT
City Council Meeting
CONSENT CALENDAR
Agenda Item No. 11.2
May 11, 2022
Approval of Construc(on Contract to Elecnor Belco Electric, Inc. for Limonite Avenue Communica(ons Improvement Project in the Amount of $198,160.00
Prepared By:
Jimmy Chung, City Engineer
Recommended Action(s)
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Approve the Construc
on Contract to Elecnor Belco Electric, Inc., the lowest responsible bidder, in accordance with unit bid prices in the amount of $158,528.00 plus 25% con ngency
of $39,632.00 for the Limonite Avenue Communications Improvement Project; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents including No ce of
Completion.
Summary
The Limonite Avenue Communica
ons Improvement Project facilitates the installa
on of all
necessary infrastructure to implement synchroniza
on of traffic signals along Limonite Avenue from
the 15 freeway to Hellman Ave. This is part of City's Capital Improvement Program - Limonite Avenue Signal Synchroniza
on Project (#93004). The scope of work includes, but is not limited to, procurement and installa
on of new conduit, pull boxes, fiber op
c cabling, ethernet switches,
wireless radios, and other necessary equipment and tes
ng to have all infrastructures ready to
implement new synchronized timing of signals along Limonite Avenue.
On March 23, 2022, the City Council awarded a professional services to STC Traffic to analyze the 12363 Limonite Avenue | Suite 910 | Eastvale, CA 91752
951.361.0900 | eastvaleca.gov
13 opera
on and volumes of the intersec
ons and develop synchronized
ming of signals. This task will
be completed prior to comple
on of the Limonite Avenue Communica
ons Improvement project,
and the synchronized timing will be ready to be implemented shortly after the completion.
Due to a shortage of material, there is an expected lead me of twenty-six (26) weeks to receive
material that is needed to synchronize the signals using fiber op c. Therefore, the City plans to
furnish and install addi
onal radios to synchronize the signals as an interim plan. Once the needed materials are delivered, the project will proceed as planned to connect the signals using fiber op c
and relocate the radios to other parts of the City to synchronize other traffic signals. There is also a lead
me of eight (8) weeks for the radios to be delivered. It is es mated that Limonite Avenue
traffic signals wills be synchronized by August 2022 using radios. Once needed materials are delivered to install the fiber optic, Belco has Thirty-five (35) working days to complete the project.
Concurrently with this project, staff is coordina
ng Phase 1 of the Citywide synchroniza
on along
Archibald Avenue, Schleisman Road, Hamner Avenue, and Scholar Way.
Background
Bid solicita
ons were adver
sed on the City's website, Planetbids.com, the local newspaper, bid boards and through emails, on April 6, 2022. Bids were opened on April 25, 2022. A total of six (6) responsive bids were received. The vendor name, location and bid amount are shown below:
VENDOR LOCATION BID AMOUNT
Elecnor Belco Electric, Inc. Chino $ 158,528.00
International Line Builders, Inc. Corona $ 174,182.00
Crosstown Electrical & Data, Inc. Irwindale $ 178,815.00 Econolite Systems, Inc. Anaheim $ 203,830.75
Ferreira Coastal Construction Company Rancho Cucamonga $ 211,920.00 DBX, Inc. Temecula $ 237,484.00
The lowest bid was submiLed by Elecnor Belco Electric, Inc. (Belco) in the amount of $158,528.00.
Belco holds a valid Class A, B and C10 Contractor's license in the State of California. Belco has been a Southern California based commercial electrical contractor for over 15 years and has delivered successful projects to other agencies such as City of Glendale, Hun ngton Beach, Ranch Mirage,
Palm Springs and more. Therefore Belco qualifies as the lowest responsible bidder as required under state law.
Environmental
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed project is exempt from future review. A Notice of Exemption has been filed.
Strategic Plan Action - Priority Level: 2 | Target #: 5 | Goal #: 7 Improve traffic mobility and management throughout the City's major corridors. 12363 Limonite Avenue | Suite 910 | Eastvale, CA 91752
951.361.0900 | eastvaleca.gov
14 Fiscal Impact
There are sufficient funds budgeted in fiscal year 2021-22 for project# 93004 (Gas Tax Fund Account No. 200-510-6660-93004 & Measure A Fund 210-510-6660-93004) to complete the project.
Prior City Council/Commission Action
On March 23, 2022, the City Council awarded a Professional Services Agreement to STC Traffic to analyze and develop synchronized timing of signals along Limonite Avenue.
Attachment(s)
Attachment 1 - Belco Agreement
Attachment 2 - Exhibit B Bid Proposal
Attachment 3 - Notice of Exemption
12363 Limonite Avenue | Suite 910 | Eastvale, CA 91752
951.361.0900 | eastvaleca.gov
15 CONTRACT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE CITY OF EASTVALE
AND
ELECNOR BELCO ELECTRIC, INC.
This Agreement for Construction Services (“Agreement”), is made and entered into this ___ day of ________, 2022, by and between the City of Eastvale, a California general municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of California with its principal place of business at 12363 Limonite Ave., Suite 910, Eastvale, California (“City”) and Elecnor Belco Electric, Inc., a California Corporation (“Contractor”).
SECTION 1. RECITALS
A. City is a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of California, with power to contract for services necessary to achieve its purpose.
B. Contractor is a professional contractor, experienced in providing pavement rehabilitation and overlay services and is familiar with the plans of the City.
C. City desires to engage Contractor to construct public improvements associated with the Limonite Avenue Communication Improvements Project #93004 as set forth herein D. Contractor has obtained, and delivers concurrently herewith, PERFORMANCE
BOND, PAYMENT BOND, INSURANCE DOCUMENTS AND OTHER
CERTIFICATIONS as required by the Contract.
SECTION 2. INCORPORATION OF DOCUMENTS
This Contract includes and hereby incorporates in full by reference the following documents, including all exhibits, drawings, specifications and documents therein, and attachments and addenda thereto: bid document and project plan for the Limonite Avenue Communication Improvements Project.
SECTION 3. SCOPE OF WORK
A. Contractor’s Basic Obligation; Scope of Work. Contractor promises and agrees, at its own cost and expense, to furnish to the Owner all labor, materials, tools, equipment, services, and incidental and customary work necessary to fully and adequately complete the Limonite Avenue Communication Improvement Project, including all structures and facilities necessary for the Project or described in the Contract (hereinafter the "Work" or "Project"), for a Total Contract Price as specified pursuant to this Contract. All Work shall be subject to, and performed in accordance with the above referenced documents, as well as the exhibits attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The plans and specifications for the Work are further described in the Exhibits attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Special conditions, if any, relating to the Work are described in the Exhibits attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
16 2
B. Change in Scope of Work Any change in the scope of the Work, method of performance, nature of materials or price thereof, or any other matter materially affecting the performance or nature of the Work shall not be paid for or accepted unless such change, addition or deletion is approved in advance and in writing by a valid change order executed by the City.
SECTION 4. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE AND LIQUIDATED DAMAGES Contractor shall perform and complete all Work under this Contract within Thirty-Five (35) working days, beginning the effective date of the Notice to Proceed ("Contract Time"). Contractor shall perform its Work in strict accordance with any completion schedule, construction schedule or project milestones developed by the City. Contractor agrees that if such Work is not completed within the aforementioned Contract Time and/or pursuant to any such completion schedule, construction schedule or project milestones developed pursuant to provisions of the Contract, it is understood, acknowledged and agreed that the City will suffer damage. Since it is impractical and infeasible to determine the amount of actual damage, it is agreed that the Contractor shall pay to the City as fixed and liquidated damages, and not as a penalty, the sum of Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000) per day for each and every calendar day of delay beyond the Contract Time or beyond any completion schedule, construction schedule or Project milestones established pursuant to the Contract.
SECTION 5. STANDARD OF PERFORMANCE
Contractor shall perform all Work under this Contract in a skillful and workmanlike manner, and consistent with the standards generally recognized as being employed by professionals in the same discipline in the State of California. Contractor represents and maintains that it is skilled in the professional calling necessary to perform the Work. Contractor warrants that all employees and subcontractors shall have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Work assigned to them.
Finally, Contractor represents that it, its employees and its subcontractors have all licenses, permits, qualifications and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Work, and that such licenses and approvals shall be maintained throughout the term of this Contract. Any employee who is determined by the City to be uncooperative, incompetent, a threat to the safety of persons or the Work, or any employee who fails or refuses to perform the Work in a manner acceptable to the City, shall be promptly removed from the Project by the Contractor and shall not be re-employed on the Work.
SECTION 6. CONTROL AND PAYMENT OF SUBORDINATES; CONTRACTUAL
RELATIONSHIP
City retains Contractor on an independent contractor basis and Contractor is not an employee of City. Any additional personnel performing the work governed by this Contract on behalf of Contractor shall at all times be under Contractor's exclusive direction and control. Contractor shall pay all wages, salaries, and other amounts due such personnel in connection with their performance under this Contract and as required by law. Contractor shall be responsible for all reports and obligations respecting such additional personnel, including, but not limited to: social security taxes, income tax withholding, unemployment insurance, and workers' compensation insurance.
SECTION 7. CITY’S BASIC OBLIGATION
City agrees to engage and does hereby engage Contractor as an independent contractor to furnish all materials and to perform all Work according to the terms and conditions herein contained for the sum set forth above. Except as otherwise provided in the Contract, the City shall pay to Contractor, as full consideration for the satisfactory performance by the Contractor of the services 17 3
and obligations required by this Contract, the above referenced compensation in accordance with compensation provisions set forth in the Contract.
SECTION 8. COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT
A. Amount of Compensation. As consideration for performance of the Work required herein, City agrees to pay Contractor the Total Contract Price of ONE HUNDRED FIFTY EIGHT THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED TWENTY EIGHT Dollars ($158,528.00) ("Total Contract Price") provided that such amount shall be subject to adjustment pursuant to the applicable terms of this Contract or written change orders approved and signed in advance by the City.
B. Payment of Compensation. If the Work is scheduled for completion in thirty (30) or less calendar days, City will arrange for payment of the Total Contract Price upon completion and approval by City of the Work. If the Work is scheduled for completion in more than thirty (30) calendar days, City will pay Contractor on a monthly basis as provided for herein. On or before the fifth (5th) day of each month, Contractor shall submit to the City an itemized application for payment in the format supplied by the City indicating the amount of Work completed since commencement of the Work or since the last progress payment. These applications shall be supported by evidence which is required by this Contract and such other documentation as the City may require. The Contractor shall certify that the Work for which payment is requested has been done and that the materials listed are stored where indicated. Contractor may be required to furnish a detailed schedule of values upon request of the City and in such detail and form as the City shall request, showing the quantities, unit prices, overhead, profit, and all other expenses involved in order to provide a basis for determining the amount of progress payments.
City shall review and pay all progress payment requests in accordance with the provisions set forth in Section 20104.50 of the California Public Contract Code. No progress payments will be made for Work not completed in accordance with this Contract.
SECTION 9. CONTRACT RETENTIONS
From each approved progress estimate, five percent (5%) will be deducted and retained by the City, and the remainder will be paid to Contractor. All Contract retainage shall be released and paid to the Contractor and subcontractors pursuant to California Public Contract Code Section 7107.
SECTION 10. OTHER RETENTIONS
In addition to Contract retentions, the City may deduct from each progress payment an amount necessary to protect City from loss because of: (1) liquidated damages which have accrued as of the date of the application for payment; (2) any sums expended by the City in performing any of Contractor's obligations under the Contract which Contractor has failed to perform or has performed inadequately; (3) defective Work not remedied; (4) stop notices as allowed by state law; (5) reasonable doubt that the Work can be completed for the unpaid balance of the Total Contract Price or within the scheduled completion date; (6) unsatisfactory prosecution of the Work by Contractor; (7) unauthorized deviations from the Contract; (8) failure of the Contractor to maintain or submit on a timely basis, proper and sufficient documentation as required by the Contract or by City during the prosecution of the Work; (9) erroneous or false estimates by the Contractor of the value of the Work performed; (10) any sums representing expenses, losses, or damages as determined by the City, incurred by the City for which Contractor is liable under the Contract; and 18 4
(11) any other sums which the City is entitled to recover from Contractor under the terms of the Contract or pursuant to state law, including Section 1727 of the California Labor Code. The failure by the City to deduct any of these sums from a progress payment shall not constitute a waiver of the City's right to such sums.
SECTION 11. SUBSTITUTIONS FOR CONTRACT RETENTIONS
In accordance with California Public Contract Code Section 22300, the City will permit the substitution of securities for any monies withheld by the City to ensure performance under the Contract. At the request and expense of the Contractor, securities equivalent to the amount withheld shall be deposited with the City, or with a state or federally chartered bank in California as the escrow agent, and thereafter the City shall then pay such monies to the Contractor as they come due. Upon satisfactory completion of the Contract, the securities shall be returned to the Contractor. For purposes of this Section and Section 22300 of the Public Contract Code, the term "satisfactory completion of the contract" shall mean the time the City has issued written final acceptance of the Work and filed a Notice of Completion as required by law and provisions of this Contract. The Contractor shall be the beneficial owner of any securities substituted for monies withheld and shall receive any interest thereon. The escrow agreement used for the purposes of this Section shall be in the form provided by the City.
SECTION 12. PAYMENT TO SUBCONTRACTORS
Contractor shall pay all subcontractors for and on account of work performed by such subcontractors in accordance with the terms of their respective subcontracts and as provided for in Section 10262 of the California Public Contract Code. Such payments to subcontractors shall be based on the measurements and estimates made and progress payments provided to Contractor pursuant to this Contract.
SECTION 13. TITLE TO WORK
As security for partial, progress, or other payments, title to Work for which such payments are made shall pass to the City at the time of payment. To the extent that title has not previously been vested in the City by reason of payments, full title shall pass to the City at delivery of the Work at the destination and time specified in this Contract. Such transferred title shall in each case be good, and free and clear from any and all security interests, liens, or other encumbrances.
Contractor promises and agrees that it will not pledge, hypothecate, or otherwise encumber the items in any manner that would result in any lien, security interest, charge, or claim upon or against said items. Such transfer of title shall not imply acceptance by the City, nor relieve Contractor from the responsibility to strictly comply with the Contract, and shall not relieve Contractor of responsibility for any loss of or damage to items.
SECTION 14. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Any separate demand by Contractor for the payment of money or damages shall be resolved in accordance with Public Contract Code Sections 20104 et seq., if applicable.
SECTION 15. TERMINATION
This Contract may be terminated by City at any time by giving Contractor three (3) days advance written notice. In the event of termination by City for any reason other than the fault of Contractor, City shall pay Contractor for all Work performed up to that time as provided herein. In the event of breach of the Contract by Contractor, City may terminate the Contract immediately without notice, may reduce payment to the Contractor in the amount necessary to offset City's resulting 19 5
damages, and may pursue any other available recourse against Contractor. Contractor may not terminate this Contract except for cause.
In the event this Contract is terminated in whole or in part as provided, City may procure, upon such terms and in such manner as it may determine appropriate, services similar to those terminated. Further, if this Contract is terminated as provided, City may require Contractor to provide all finished or unfinished documents, data, diagrams, drawings, materials or other matter prepared or built by Contractor in connection with its performance of this Contract.
SECTION 16. COMPLETION OF WORK
When the Contractor determines that it has completed the Work required herein, Contractor shall so notify City in writing and shall furnish all labor and material releases required by this Contract.
City shall thereupon inspect the Work. If the Work is not acceptable to the City, the City shall indicate to Contractor in writing the specific portions or items of Work which are unsatisfactory or incomplete. Once Contractor determines that it has completed the incomplete or unsatisfactory Work, Contractor may request a re-inspection by the City. Once the Work is acceptable to City, City shall pay to Contractor the Total Contract Price remaining to be paid, less any amount which City may be authorized or directed by law to retain. Payment of retention proceeds due to Contractor shall be made in accordance with Section 7107 of the California Public Contract Code.
SECTION 17. CITY’S REPRESENTATIVE
The City hereby designates the City Engineer, or his or her designee, to act as its representative for the performance of this Contract ("City's Representative"). City's Representative shall have the power to act on behalf of the City for all purposes under this Contract. Contractor shall not accept direction or orders from any person other than the City's Representative or his or her designee.
SECTION 18. CONTRACTOR’S REPRESENTATIVE
Before starting the Work, Contractor shall submit in writing the name, qualifications and experience of its proposed representative who shall be subject to the review and approval of the City ("Contractor's Representative"). Following approval by the City, the Contractor's Representative shall have full authority to represent and act on behalf of the Contractor for all purposes under this Contract. The Contractor's Representative shall supervise and direct the Work, using his best skill and attention, and shall be responsible for all construction means, methods, techniques, sequences and procedures and for the satisfactory coordination of all portions of the Work under this Contract. Contractor's Representative shall devote full time to the Project and either he or his designee, who shall be acceptable to the City, shall be present at the Work site at all times that any Work is in progress and at any time that any employee or subcontractor of Contractor is present at the Work site. Arrangements for responsible supervision, acceptable to the City, shall be made for emergency Work which may be required. Should Contractor desire to change its Contractor's Representative, Contractor shall provide the information specified above and obtain the City's written approval.
SECTION 19. CONTRACT INTERPRETATION
Should any question arise regarding the meaning or import of any of the provisions of this Contract or written or oral instructions from City, the matter shall be referred to City's Representative, whose decision shall be binding upon Contractor.
20 6
SECTION 20. LOSS AND DAMAGE
Contractor shall be responsible for all loss and damage which may arise out of the nature of the Work agreed to herein, or from the action of the elements, or from any unforeseen difficulties which may arise or be encountered in the prosecution of the Work until the same is fully completed and accepted by City. However, Contractor shall be responsible for damage proximately caused by Acts of God, within the meaning of Section 4150 of the Government Code, only to the extent of five percent (5%) of the Total Contract Price as specified herein. In the event of damage proximately caused by "Acts of God," the City may terminate this Contract upon three (3) days advanced written notice.
SECTION 21. INDEMNIFICATION
A. Indemnification. Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officials, officers, employees, volunteers and agents free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of or incident to any alleged acts, omissions or willful misconduct of Contractor, its officials, officers, employees, agents, consultants and contractors arising out of or in connection with the performance of the Services, the Project or this Agreement, including without limitation the payment of all consequential damages and attorneys fees and other related costs and expenses. Contractor shall defend, at Contractor’s own cost, expense and risk, any and all such aforesaid suits, actions or other legal proceedings of every kind that may be brought or instituted against City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents or volunteers. Contractor shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against City or its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents or volunteers, in any such suit, action or other legal proceeding. Contractor shall reimburse City and its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and/or volunteers, for any and all legal expenses and costs incurred by each of them in connection therewith or in enforcing the indemnity herein provided. Contractor’s obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by the City, its directors, officials officers, employees, agents or volunteers.
B. General Indemnification. Contractor agrees to obtain executed indemnity agreements with provisions identical to those set forth here in this section from each and every subcontractor or any other person or entity involved by, for, with or on behalf of Contractor in the performance of this Agreement. In the event Contractor fails to obtain such indemnity obligations from others are required here, Contractor agrees to be fully responsible according to the terms of this section. Failure of City to monitor compliance with these requirements imposes no additional obligations on City and will in no way act as a waiver of any rights hereunder. This obligation to indemnify and defend City as set forth here is binding on the successors, assigns or heirs of Contractor and shall survive the termination of this Agreement or this section.
SECTION 22. INSURANCE
Prior to the beginning of and throughout the duration of the Work, Contractor will maintain insurance in conformance with the requirements set forth below. Contractor will use existing coverage to comply with these requirements. If that existing coverage does not meet the requirements set forth here, Contractor agrees to amend, supplement or endorse the existing coverage to do so. Contractor acknowledges that the insurance coverage and policy limits set forth in this section constitute the minimum amount of coverage required. Any insurance proceeds in excess of the limits and coverage required in this Agreement and which are applicable to a given loss, will be available to the City. Contractor shall provide the following types and amounts of 21 7
insurance:
A. Commercial General Liability Insurance using Insurance Services Office “Commercial General Liability” policy form CG 00 01 or the exact equivalent. Defense costs must be paid in addition to limits. There shall be no cross liability exclusion for claims or suits by one insured against another. Limits are subject to review but in no event less than $1,000,000 per occurrence for all covered losses and no less than $2,000,000 general aggregate.
B. Business Auto Coverage on ISO Business Auto Coverage form CA 00 01 including symbol 1 (Any Auto) or the exact equivalent. Limits are subject to review, but in no event to be less than $1,000,000 per accident. If Contractor owns no vehicles, this requirement may be satisfied by a non-owned auto endorsement to the general liability policy described above. If Contractor or Contractor’s employees will use personal autos in any way on this project, Contractor shall provide evidence of personal auto liability coverage for each such person.
C. Workers Compensation on a state-approved policy form providing statutory benefits as required by law with employer’s liability limits no less than $1,000,000 per accident or disease.
D. Excess or Umbrella Liability Insurance (Over Primary) if used to meet limit requirements, shall provide coverage at least as broad as specified for the underlying coverages.
Any such coverage provided under an umbrella liability policy shall include a drop down provision providing primary coverage above a maximum $25,000 self-insured retention for liability not covered by primary but covered by the umbrella. Coverage shall be provided on a “pay on behalf” basis, with defense costs payable in addition to policy limits. Policy shall contain a provision obligating insurer at the time insured’s liability is determined, not requiring actual payment by the insured first. There shall be no cross liability exclusion precluding coverage for claims or suits by one insured against another. Coverage shall be applicable to City for injury to employees of Contractor, subcontractors or others involved in the Work. The scope of coverage provided is subject to approval of City following receipt of proof of insurance as required herein. Insurance procured pursuant to these requirements shall be written by insurers that are admitted carriers in the State of California and with an A.M. Best rating of A or better and a minimum financial size VII.
E. General conditions pertaining to provision of insurance coverage by Contractor.
Contractor and City agree to the following with respect to insurance provided by Contractor:
(1) Contractor agrees to have its insurer endorse the third party general liability coverage required herein to include as additional insureds City, its officials, employees and agents, using standard ISO endorsement No. CG 2010 with an edition prior to 1992. Contractor also agrees to require all contractors, and subcontractors to do so likewise. (2) No liability insurance coverage provided to comply with this Agreement shall prohibit Contractor, or Consultant’s employees, or agents, from waiving the right of subrogation prior to a loss. Contractor agrees to waive subrogation rights against City regardless of the applicability of any insurance proceeds, and to require all contractors and subcontractors to do likewise.
(3) All insurance coverage and limits provided by Contractor and available or applicable to this Agreement are intended to apply to the full extent of the policies. Nothing 22 8
contained in this Agreement or any other agreement relating to the City or its operations limits the application of such insurance coverage.
(4) None of the coverages required herein will be in compliance with these requirements if they include any limiting endorsement of any kind that has not been first submitted to City and approved in writing.
(5) No liability policy shall contain any provision or definition that would serve to eliminate so-called “third party action over” claims, including any exclusion for bodily injury to an employee of the insured or any contractor or subcontractor. (6) All coverage types and limits required are subject to approval, modification and additional requirements by the City, as the need arises. Contractor shall not make any reductions in scope of coverage (e.g. elimination of contractual liability or reduction of discovery period) that may affect City’s protection without City’s prior written consent. (7) Proof of compliance with these insurance requirements, consisting of certificates of insurance evidencing all of the coverages required and an additional insured endorsement to Contractor’s general liability policy, shall be delivered to City at or prior to the execution of this Agreement. In the event such proof of any insurance is not delivered as required, or in the event such insurance is canceled at any time and no replacement coverage is provided, City has the right, but not the duty, to obtain any insurance it deems necessary to protect its interests under this or any other agreement and to pay the premium. Any premium so paid by City shall be charged to and promptly paid by Contractor or deducted from sums due Contractor, at City option. (8) Certificate(s) are to reflect that the insurer will provide 30 days notice to City of any cancellation of coverage. Contractor agrees to require its insurer to modify such certificates to delete any exculpatory wording stating that failure of the insurer to mail written notice of cancellation imposes no obligation, or that any party will “endeavor” (as opposed to being required) to comply with the requirements of the certificate. (9) It is acknowledged by the parties of this Agreement that all insurance coverage required to be provided by Contractor or any subcontractor, is intended to apply first and on a primary, non-contributing basis in relation to any other insurance or self insurance available to City.
(10) Contractor agrees to ensure that subcontractors, and any other party involved with the project that is brought onto or involved in the project by Contractor, provide the same minimum insurance coverage required of Contractor. Contractor agrees to monitor and review all such coverage and assumes all responsibility for ensuring that such coverage is provided in conformity with the requirements of this section. Contractor agrees that upon request, all agreements with subcontractors and others engaged in the project will be submitted to City for review.
(11) Contractor agrees not to self-insure or to use any self-insured retention’s or deductibles on any portion of the insurance required herein except as disclosed to and approved by the City and further agrees that it will not allow any contractor, subcontractor, Architect, Engineer or other entity or person in any way involved in the performance of work on the project contemplated by this Agreement to self-insure its obligations to City. City expressly approves 23 9
maintenance by the Contractor of a $100,000 deductible on its current Professional Liability insurance policy.
(12) The City reserves the right at any time during the term of the contract to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving the Contractor ninety (90) days advance written notice of such change. If such change results in substantial additional cost to the Contractor, the City will negotiate additional compensation proportional to the increased benefit to City.
(13) For purposes of applying insurance coverage only, this Agreement will be deemed to have been executed immediately upon any party hereto taking any steps that can be deemed to be in furtherance of or towards performance of this Agreement. (14) Contractor acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of City to inform Contractor of non-compliance with any insurance requirement in no way imposes any additional obligations on City nor does it waive any rights hereunder in this or any other regard.
(15) Contractor will renew the required coverage annually as long as City, or its employees or agents face an exposure from operations of any type pursuant to this Agreement.
This obligation applies whether or not the Agreement is canceled or terminated for any reason.
Termination of this obligation is not effective until City executes a written statement to that effect. (16) Contractor shall provide proof that policies of insurance required herein expiring during the term of this Agreement have been renewed or replaced with other policies providing at least the same coverage. Proof that such coverage has been ordered shall be submitted prior to expiration. A coverage binder or letter from Contractor’s insurance agent to this effect is acceptable. A certificate of insurance and/or additional insured endorsement as required in these specifications applicable to the renewing or new coverage must be provided to City within five days of the expiration of the coverages.
(17). The provisions of any workers’ compensation or similar act will not limit the obligations of Contractor under this Agreement. Contractor expressly agrees not to use any statutory immunity defenses under such laws with respect to City, its employees, officials and agents.
(18) Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this section are not intended as limitations on coverage, limits or other requirements nor as a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any given policy. Specific reference to a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue, and is not intended by any party or insured to be limiting or all-inclusive.
(19) These insurance requirements are intended to be separate and distinct from any other provision in this Agreement and are intended by the parties here to be interpreted as such.
(20). The requirements in this Section supersede all other sections and provisions of this Agreement, except Exhibit “D” “Modifications to Contract Documents”, to the extent that any other section or provision conflicts with or impairs the provisions of this Section. 24 10
(21) Contractor agrees to be responsible for ensuring that no contract used by any party involved in any way with the project reserves the right to charge City or Contractor for the cost of additional insurance coverage required by this Agreement. Any such provisions are to be deleted with reference to City. It is not the intent of City to reimburse any third party for the cost of complying with these requirements. There shall be no recourse against City for payment of premiums or other amounts with respect thereto.
(22) Contractor agrees to provide immediate notice to City of any claim or loss against Contractor arising out of the work performed under this Agreement. City assumes no obligation or liability by such notice, but has the right (but not the duty) to monitor the handling of any such claim or claims if they are likely to involve City.
SECTION 23. BONDS
A. Performance Bond. If specifically requested by City in the Bidding Documents, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, Contractor shall execute and provide to City concurrently with this Agreement a Performance Bond in the amount of the total, not-to-exceed compensation indicated in this Agreement, and in a form provided or approved by the City. If such bond is required, no payment will be made to Contractor until it has been received and approved by the City.
B. Payment Bond. If required by law or otherwise specifically requested by City in the Bidding Documents, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, Contractor shall execute and provide to City concurrently with this Agreement a Payment Bond in the amount of the total, not-to-exceed compensation indicated in this Agreement, and in a form provided or approved by the City. If such bond is required, no payment will be made to Contractor until it has been received and approved by the City.
C. Bond Provisions. Should, in City's sole opinion, any bond become insufficient or any surety be found to be unsatisfactory, Contractor shall renew or replace the affected bond within 10 days of receiving notice from City. In the event the surety or Contractor intends to reduce or cancel any required bond, at least thirty (30) days prior written notice shall be given to the City, and Contractor shall post acceptable replacement bonds at least ten (10) days prior to expiration of the original bonds. No further payments shall be deemed due or will be made under this Agreement until any replacement bonds required by this Section are accepted by the City. To the extent, if any, that the total compensation is increased in accordance with the Agreement, the Contractor shall, upon request of the City, cause the amount of the bonds to be increased accordingly and shall promptly deliver satisfactory evidence of such increase to the City. To the extent available, the bonds shall further provide that no change or alteration of the Agreement (including, without limitation, an increase in the total compensation, as referred to above), extensions of time, or modifications of the time, terms, or conditions of payment to the Contractor, will release the surety. If the Contractor fails to furnish any required bond, the City may terminate this Agreement for cause.
D. Surety Qualifications. Only bonds executed by an admitted surety insurer, as defined in Code of Civil Procedure Section 995.120, shall be accepted. The surety must be a California-admitted surety with a current A.M. Best’s rating no less than A:VIII and satisfactory to the City. If a California-admitted surety insurer issuing bonds does not meet these requirements, the insurer will be considered qualified if it is in conformance with Section 995.660 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, and proof of such is provided to the City. 25 11
SECTION 24. SAFETY
Contractor shall execute and maintain its work so as to avoid injury or damage to any person or property. Contractor shall comply with the requirements of the specifications relating to safety measures applicable in particular operations or kinds of work. In carrying out its Work, the Contractor shall at all times be in compliance with all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations, and shall exercise all necessary precautions for the safety of employees appropriate to the nature of the Work and the conditions under which the Work is to be performed.
Safety precautions as applicable shall include, but shall not be limited to, adequate life protection and life saving equipment; adequate illumination for underground and night operations; instructions in accident prevention for all employees, such as machinery guards, safe walkways, scaffolds, ladders, bridges, gang planks, confined space procedures, trenching and shoring, fall protection and other safety devices, equipment and wearing apparel as are necessary or lawfully required to prevent accidents or injuries; and adequate facilities for the proper inspection and maintenance of all safety measures. Furthermore, Contractor shall prominently display the names and telephone numbers of at least two medical doctors practicing in the vicinity of the Project, as well as the telephone number of the local ambulance service, adjacent to all telephones at the Project site.
SECTION 25. WARRANTY
Contractor warrants all Work under the Contract (which for purposes of this Section shall be deemed to include unauthorized work which has not been removed and any non-conforming materials incorporated into the Work) to be of good quality and free from any defective or faulty material and workmanship. Contractor agrees that for a period of one year (or the period of time specified elsewhere in the Contract or in any guarantee or warranty provided by any manufacturer or supplier of equipment or materials incorporated into the Work, whichever is later) after the date of final acceptance, Contractor shall within ten (10) Days after being notified in writing by the City of any defect in the Work or non-conformance of the Work to the Contract, commence and prosecute with due diligence all Work necessary to fulfill the terms of the warranty at his sole cost and expense. Contractor shall act sooner as requested by the City in response to an emergency.
In addition, Contractor shall, at its sole cost and expense, repair and replace any portions of the Work (or work of other contractors) damaged by its defective Work or which becomes damaged in the course of repairing or replacing defective Work. For any Work so corrected, Contractor's obligation hereunder to correct defective Work shall be reinstated for an additional one year period, commencing with the date of acceptance of such corrected Work. Contractor shall perform such tests as the City may require verifying that any corrective actions, including, without limitation, redesign, repairs, and replacements comply with the requirements of the Contract. All costs associated with such corrective actions and testing, including the removal, replacement, and reinstitution of equipment and materials necessary to gain access, shall be the sole responsibility of the Contractor. All warranties and guarantees of subcontractors, suppliers and manufacturers with respect to any portion of the Work, whether express or implied, are deemed to be obtained by Contractor for the benefit of the City, regardless of whether or not such warranties and guarantees have been transferred or assigned to the City by separate agreement and Contractor agrees to enforce such warranties and guarantees, if necessary, on behalf of the City. In the event that Contractor fails to perform its obligations under this Section, or under any other warranty or guaranty under this Contract, to the reasonable satisfaction of the City, the City shall have the right to correct and replace any defective or non-conforming Work and any work damaged by such work or the replacement or correction thereof at Contractor's sole expense. Contractor shall be obligated to fully reimburse the City for any expenses incurred hereunder upon demand. 26 12
SECTION 26. LAWS AND REGULATIONS
Contractor shall keep itself fully informed of and in compliance with all local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations in any manner affecting the performance of the Contract or the Work, including all Cal/OSHA requirements, and shall give all notices required by law. Contractor shall be liable for all violations of such laws and regulations in connection with Work. If the Contractor observes that the drawings or specifications are at variance with any law, rule or regulation, it shall promptly notify the City in writing. Any necessary changes shall be made by written change order.
If the Contractor performs any work knowing it to be contrary to such laws, rules and regulations and without giving written notice to the City, the Contractor shall be solely responsible for all costs arising there from. Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold City, its officials, directors, officers, employees and agents free and harmless, pursuant to the indemnification provisions of this Contract, from any claim or liability arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with such laws, rules or regulations.
SECTION 27. PERMITS AND LICENSES
Contractor shall be responsible for securing, at its own expense, and paying for all permits and licenses necessary to perform the Work described herein.
SECTION 28. TRENCHING WORK
If the Total Contract Price exceeds $25,000 and if the Work governed by this Contract entails excavation of any trench or trenches five (5) feet or more in depth, Contractor shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Labor Code, including Section 6705. To this end, Contractor shall submit for City's review and approval a detailed plan showing the design of shoring, bracing, sloping, or other provisions to be made for worker protection from the hazard of caving ground during the excavation of such trench or trenches. If such plan varies from the shoring system standards, the plan shall be prepared by a registered civil or structural engineer.
SECTION 29. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND DIFFERING CONDITIONS As required by Public Contract Code Section 7104, if this Contract involves digging trenches or other excavations that extend deeper than four (4) feet below the surface, Contractor shall promptly, and prior to disturbance of any conditions, notify City of: (1) any material discovered in excavation that Contractor believes to be a hazardous waste that is required to be removed to a Class I, Class II or Class III disposal site; (2) subsurface or latent physical conditions at the site differing from those indicated by City; and (3) unknown physical conditions of an unusual nature at the site, significantly different from those ordinarily encountered in such contract work. Upon notification, City shall promptly investigate the conditions to determine whether a change order is appropriate. In the event of a dispute, Contractor shall not be excused from any scheduled completion date and shall proceed with all Work to be performed under the Contract, but shall retain all rights provided by the Contract or by law for making protests and resolving the dispute.
SECTION 30. UNDERGROUND UTILITY FACILTIES
To the extent required by Section 4215 of the Government Code, City shall compensate Contractor for the costs of: (1) locating and repairing damage to underground utility facilities not caused by the failure of Contractor to exercise reasonable care; (2) removing or relocating underground utility facilities not indicated in the construction drawings; and (3) equipment necessarily idled during such work. Contractor shall not be assessed liquidated damages for delay caused by failure of City to provide for removal or relocation of such utility facilities. 27 13
SECTION 31. PREVAILING WAGES
Contractor is aware of the requirements of California Labor Code Section 1720, et seq., and 1770, et seq., as well as California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 1600, et seq., ("Prevailing Wage Laws"), the Davis-Bacon Act of 1931 and 23 USC 113, which require the payment of prevailing wage rates and the performance of other requirements on "public works" and "maintenance" projects. Contractor agrees to fully comply with such Prevailing Wage Laws.
The federal minimum wage rates are available directly from the Department of Labor Website at:
http://www.wdol.gov/wdol/scafiles/davisbacon/ca.html, and they will be included in this Agreement as Exhibit “F.” Contractor shall make copies of the prevailing rates of per diem wages for each craft, classification or type of worker needed to execute the Services available to interested parties upon request, and shall post copies at the Contractor's principal place of business and at the project site. Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its elected officials, officers, employees and agents free and harmless from any claim or liability arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with the Prevailing Wage Laws.
SECTION 32. APPRENTICEABLE CRAFTS
When Contractor employs workmen in an apprenticed craft or trade, Contractor shall comply with the provisions of Section 1777.5 of the Labor Code with respect to the employment of properly registered apprentices upon public works. The primary responsibility for compliance with said section for all apprenticed occupations shall be with Contractor.
SECTION 33. HOURS OF WORK
Contractor is advised that eight (8) hours labor constitutes a legal day's work. Pursuant to Section 1813 of the Labor Code, Contractor shall forfeit a penalty of $25.00 per worker for each day that each worker is permitted to work more than eight (8) hours in any one calendar day and forty (40) hours in any one calendar week, except when payment for overtime is made at not less than one and one-half (1-1/2) times the basic rate for that worker.
SECTION 34. PAYROLL RECORDS
In accordance with the requirements of Labor Code Section 1776, Contractor shall keep accurate payroll records which are either on forms provided by the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement or which contain the same information required by such forms. Responsibility for compliance with Labor Code Section 1776 shall rest solely with Contractor, and Contractor shall make all such records available for inspection at all reasonable hours.
SECTION 35. CONTRACTOR’S LABOR CERTIFICATION
By its signature hereunder, Contractor certifies that he is aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and agrees to comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Work. A certification form for this purpose, which is attached to this Contract as Exhibit "C" and incorporated herein by reference, shall be executed simultaneously with this Contract.
SECTION 36. LABOR AND MATERIAL RELEASES
Contractor shall furnish City with labor and material releases from all subcontractors performing work on, or furnishing materials for, the work governed by this Contract prior to final payment by City.
28 14
SECTION 37. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYMENT
Contractor represents that it is an equal opportunity employer and that it shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, sex, age or other interests protected by the state or Federal Constitutions. Such nondiscrimination shall include, but not be limited to, all activities related to initial employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination.
SECTION 38. ANTI-TRUST CLAIMS
This provision shall be operative if this Contract is applicable to California Public Contract Code Section 7103.5. In entering into this Contract to supply goods, services or materials, the Contractor hereby offers and agrees to assign to the City all rights, title, and interest in and to all causes of action it may have under Section 4 of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. Section 15) or under the Cartwright Act (Chapter 2, commencing with Section 16700, of Part 2 of Division 7 of the Business and Professions Code) arising from purchases of goods, services, or materials pursuant to the Contract. This assignment shall be made and become effective at the time the City tender final payment to the Contractor, without further acknowledgment by the parties.
SECTION 39. NOTICES
All notices hereunder and communications regarding interpretation of the terms of the Contract or changes thereto shall be provided by the mailing thereof by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid and addressed as follows:
CITY CONTRACTOR
City of Eastvale Elecnor Belco Electric, Inc.
12363 Limonite Ave., Suite910 14320 Albers Way
Eastvale, CA 91752 Chino, CA 91710
Attn: Jimmy Chung, City Engineer Attn: John Wong, Vice President Any notice so given shall be considered received by the other party three (3) days after deposit in the U.S. Mail as stated above and addressed to the party at the above address. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred, regardless of the method of service.
SECTION 40. ENTIRE CONTRACT; MODIFICATION
This Agreement, including the attached Exhibits “A” through “G”, the advertised bid documents, associated addendas, is the entire, complete, final and exclusive expression of the parties with respect to the matters addressed therein and supersedes all other agreement or understandings, whether oral or written, or entered into between Contractor and City prior to the execution of the agreement. No prior statements, representations or other agreements, whether oral or written, made by any parties which are not embodied herein shall be valid and binding. No amendment to this Agreement shall be valid and binding unless in writing duly executed by the parties or their authorized representatives.
SECTION 41. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE
Time is of the essence in the performance of this Contract. 29 15
SECTION 42. ASSIGNMENT FORBIDDEN
Contractor shall not, either voluntarily or by action of law, assign or transfer this Contract or any obligation, right, title or interest assumed by Contractor herein without the prior written consent of City. If Contractor attempts an assignment or transfer of this Contract or any obligation, right, title or interest herein, City may, at its option, terminate and revoke the Contract and shall thereupon be relieved from any and all obligations to Contractor or its assignee or transferee.
SECTION 43. GOVERNING LAW
This Contract shall be governed by the laws of the State of California.
SECTION 44. COUNTERPARTS
This Contract may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original.
SECTION 45. SUCCESSORS
The parties do for themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns agree to the full performance of all of the provisions contained in this Contract.
SECTION 46. ATTORNEYS’ FEES
If either party commences an action against the other party, either legal, administrative or otherwise, arising out of or in connection with this Contract, the prevailing party in such action shall be entitled to have and recover from the losing party reasonable attorneys' fees and all other costs of such action.
SECTION 47. CLAIMS OF $375,000 OR LESS
Notwithstanding any other provision herein, claims of $375,000 or less shall be resolved pursuant to the alternative dispute resolution procedures set forth in Public Contracts Code 20104, et seq.
SECTION 48. PROHIBITED INTERESTS
A. Solicitation. Contractor maintains and warrants that it has not employed nor retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Contractor, to solicit or secure this Contract. Further, Contractor warrants that it has not paid nor has it agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Contractor, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Contract. For breach or violation of this warranty, City shall have the right to terminate this Contract without liability.
B. Conflict of Interest. For the term of this Contract, no member, officer or employee of City, during the term of his or her service with City, shall have any direct interest in this Contract, or obtain any present or anticipated material benefit arising there from. 30 SECTION 49. CERTIFICATION OF LICENSE
Contractor certifies that as of the date of execution of this Contract, Contractor has a current contractor's license of the classification indicated below under Contractor's signature.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the parties has caused this Contract to be executed on the day and year first above written.
CITY OF EASTVALE INSERT CONTRACTOR’S NAME
By: _________________________ By: _________________________ Signature Signature
_________________________ _________________________
Name Name
_________________________ _________________________
Title Title
Attest: Attest:
_________________________ _________________________
City Clerk Secretary
_________________________
Classification of Contractor’s License
_________________________
Contractor’s License Number
31 17
EXHIBIT "A" PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
The following plans and specifications are incorporated into this Contract herein by this reference:
The work for which this proposal is submitted is for construction in conformance with the project plans described below, including any addenda thereto, the contract annexed hereto, and also in conformance with the Riverside County Road Improvement Standards and Specifications, dated December 20, 2007 (herein referred to as the Standard Construction Specifications), California Department of Transportation Standard Plans, dated 2010, the Standard Specifications, dated 2015 (herein referred to as the State Standard Specifications), and the Labor Surcharge and Equipment Rental Rates in effect on the date the work is accomplished.
The Plans and Specifications for the work are as follows:
Advertised bid documents and associated Addendas for: Limonite Avenue Communication Improvements & Project # 93004
Plans titled “Limonite Avenue Communication Improvements & Project # 93004” 32 18
EXHIBIT "B" BID PROPOSAL
The following Bid Proposal from (Contractor’s name) are incorporated into this Contract. [INSERT BID PROPOSAL]
33 19
EXHIBIT "C" SPECIAL CONDITIONS
Standard Erosion and Sediment Control Plan Notes:
1. Dust control shall conform to Section 10, “Dust Control”, Section 7-1.01F, “Air Pollution Control”, Section 17, “Watering”, and Section 18 “Dust Palliative” of the State Standard Specifications, Rules no. 401, 402, 403 and 403.1 of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD), Riverside County Code, Chapter 8.52, “Fugitive Dust Reduction Program For Coachella Valley”, all other applicable Federal and State laws, and the requirements set forth herein.
2. The Contractor is cautioned that failure to control fugitive dust may result in fines being levied by the South Coast Air Quality Management District to both the Contractor and the City of Eastvale, as owner. The Contractor shall be fully responsible for payment of all fines pertaining to air pollution control violations, resulting from Contractor’s operations related to the construction contract, which may be levied against both the Contractor and the City of Eastvale by the AQMD or other regulatory agencies. The Contractor’s attention is directed to Section 7-1.01, “Laws to be Observed” of the State Standard Specifications.
The cost of all fines levied against the City of Eastvale will be deducted from any moneys due or which may become due to the Contractor, unless other payment arrangements are made by the Contractor.
3. Dust control of all of the contractor’s operations is required 24 hours per day, 7 days a week for the duration of the contract, and until the disturbed soil is permanently stabilized.
The Contractor shall take every precaution to prevent emissions of fugitive dust from the project site, from locations of stockpiled materials, from unpaved driving surfaces, from haul vehicles, from inactive construction areas, and from all other operations of the Contractor. The Contractor shall plan for and carry out proper and efficient measures to prevent his operations from producing dust in amounts damaging to property or which constitute a public nuisance, or which cause harm to person living or working in the vicinity of the work. Of particular concern are emissions of PM10 particles, which are fine particulate matter of 10 microns or less and which are associated with sickness and death from respiratory disease.
4. The Contractor shall respond to complaints by mobilizing equipment and personnel at the construction site within 2 hours of each complaint to control fugitive dust.
5. Attention is directed to AQMD Rule 403.1, which applies to all contracts within the City of Eastvale. That AQMD Rule requires the Contractor to take specified dust control actions when prevailing wind speeds exceed 25 miles per hour. Wind forecasts, AQMD Rules and other related information are provided by AQMD at 1-800-CUT-SMOG and at www.aqmd.gov.
6. The Contractor shall utilize the “Best Available Control Measures” of controlling fugitive dust, as prepared by the AQMD. However, if fugitive dust crosses the project boundary, more effective control measures, including the “Best Available Control Measures” shall be implemented.
7. A site specific fugitive dust control plan shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval at least 10 days prior to the start of construction.
8. The fugitive dust control plan shall include the “Reasonably Available Control Measures” and “Best Available Control Measures” of controlling fugitive dust, as may be appropriate 34 20
and necessary, including by not limited to watering, application of chemical dust suppressants, wind fencing, covering of haul vehicles, haul vehicle bed-liners, grading, planting of vegetation, the use of a 24 hour environmental observer, and track-out controls at locations where unpaved construction accesses intersect with paved roads. The use of chemical stabilizers, which are approved by all environmental regulatory agencies, and the use of reclaimed water is encouraged. If water is intended as a primary dust control tool, the dust control plan shall provide for at least one 2,000 gallon water truck for every 4 acres of disturbed soil, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
9. If the Project Inspector determines that the project scope and the forecasted weather conditions are such that the Contractor’s work is unlikely to be a source of dust emissions, the Construction Engineer has the authority to waive the requirements for submittal of a dust control plan and for placement of the dust control signs described herein. However, the Contractors responsibilities for the control of fugitive dust and the other requirements of this section may not be waived.
10. A completion notice will not be filled, and the final payment will not be made to the Contractor until the areas of disturbed soil on the construction site, including roadway shoulders, are suitable stabilized for long term control of fugitive dust.
11. This signature of the Contractor on the Proposal constitutes acknowledgement by the Contractor of the dust control enforceability of those requirements.
12. Full compensation for conformance with these dust abatement requirements, including lab equipment and materials, developing water supply and incidentals, shall be considered as included in items of work, and no additional compensation will be allowed therefore.
13. The successful Contractor shall attend an AQMD PM10 Dust Control Program training session, and furnish evidence of attendance to the City Engineer. Attendance at AQMD training seminars can be scheduled the AQMD at 1-866-861-DUST or by email to [email protected]. Current AQMD certification of previous attendance will be accepted. At that training session, the successful Contractor will be furnished with the AQMD prepared Rule 403 and Rule 403.1 implementation handbooks, which include the Best Available Control Measures” and “Reasonably Available Control Measures”, and other associated information, including a listing of suggested dust control related to devices, material and chemicals.
14. Any days on which the Contractor is prevented from working, due to the requirements of AQMD Rules, will be considered as non-working days, in accordance with Section 8-1.06, “Time of Completion” of the State Standard Specification. 35 21
EXHIBIT "D" CERTIFICATION LABOR CODE-SECTION 1861
I, the undersigned Contractor, am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 et seq. of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of the Code, and I, the undersigned Contractor, agree to and will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Work on this Contract.
Elecnor Belco Electric, Inc,
By:
John Wong
Vice President
36 22
EXHIBIT “E” CONTRACT MODIFICATIONS
None
37 23
EXHIBIT “F” SUPPLEMENTAL REQUIREMENTS
38 24
FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
THAT, WHEREAS, THE CITY OF EASTVALE, hereinafter designated as the “City”, entered into a Contract dated ____________________________________, 20__, with ________________________________________________ hereinafter designated as the “Contractor” for the work described as follows:
______________________________ Project
WHEREAS, the said Contractor is required under terms of said Contract to furnish a bond for the faithful performance of said Contract;
WHEREAS, the Contract is by reference made a part hereof; NOW, THEREFORE, we, ________________________________________________ the undersigned Contractor, as Principal, and ____________________________________ (corporate surety), a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of ________________________, and duly authorized to transact business under the laws of the State of California, as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City in the penal sum of __________________________________ dollars ($___________________), lawful money of the United States, said sum being not less than one hundred (100) percent of the total Contract amount, for the payment of which sum well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, and successors, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents.
THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, THAT, if the above bounded Contractor, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors or assigns, shall in all things stand to and abide by, and well and truly keep and perform the covenants, conditions, and agreements in the said Contract and any alterations thereof made as therein provided, on his or their part, to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save harmless the City, its officers and agents, as therein stipulated, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and virtue.
As a condition precedent to the satisfactory completion of the said Contract, the above obligation in said amount shall hold good for a period of one (1) year after the completion and acceptance of the said work, during which time if the above bounded Contractor, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors or assigns shall fail to make full, complete, and satisfactory repair and replacements or totally protect the City from loss or damage made evident during said period of one year from the date of acceptance of said work, and resulting from or caused by defective materials or faulty workmanship in the prosecution of the work done, the above obligation in the said sum shall remain in full force and effect. However, anything in this paragraph to the contrary notwithstanding, the obligation of the Surety hereunder shall continue so long as any obligation of the Contractor remains.
39 25
And the Surety, for value received, hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Contract or to the work to be performed thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall, in any way, affect its obligations on this bond and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Contract or to the work or the specifications. Said Surety hereby waives the provisions of Sections 2819 and 2845 of the Civil Code of the State of California.
In the event suit is brought upon this bond by the City and judgment is recovered, the Surety shall pay all costs incurred by the City in such suit, including reasonable attorney’s fees to be fixed by the Court.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and seals this _______ day of _______________________, 20__.
____________________________________ ____________________________________ Name of Surety Contractor
By:_________________________________
Title: _______________________________
____________________________________
Mailing Address of Surety and
_____________________________________ By:_________________________________ Telephone No. of Surety Title: _______________________________ By: _________________________________
Attorney in Fact
NOTE: If Contractor is Partnership, all parties must execute Bond.
IMPORTANT: Surety companies executing Bonds must appear on the Treasury Department’s most current list (Circular 570 as amended) and be authorized to transact business in California.
NOTICE: The signature of the Surety on this bond must be acknowledged before a notary public, and this bond must be accompanied by evidence of the signatory’s appointment as attorney in fact and authority to bind the Surety.
MANDATORY: The Surety shall be authorized and licensed by the California Insurance Commissioner as an “admitted surety insurer.” (See Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § § § 995.310, 995.311, 995.320) APPROVAL: Bonds must be approved by the City. In order to verify the status of the Surety as an admitted surety, the Surety shall provide the City with at least one of the following: (1) a print-out of information from the web-site of the Department of Insurance confirming the Surety is an admitted surety insurer and attaching it to the bond; or (2) a certificate from the Riverside County Clerk that the certificate of authority of the Surety has not been surrendered, revoked, cancelled, annulled or suspended and confirming that the Surety is an admitted surety and attaching the certificate to the bond. (See Cal. Code Civ. Proc. Code § 995.311). 40 26
PAYMENT BOND
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
THAT, WHEREAS, THE CITY OF EASTVALE, hereinafter designated as the “City”, has awarded to _______________________________________________, hereinafter designated as the “Contractor” a Contract for the work described as follows:
_________________________________ Project
WHEREAS, the Contractor is required by the Contract and by the provisions of Division Third, Part 4, Title 15, Chapter 7 of the Civil Code to furnish a bond in connection with the Contract, as hereinafter set forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, we, ________________________________________________, the undersigned Contractor, as Principal, and ______________________________________, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of ______________________ duly authorized to transact business under the laws of the State of California, as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto the ________________________ in the sum of _____________________ dollars ($____________________) said sum being not less than one hundred (100) percent of the total Contract amount payable by the city, under the terms of the Contract, for which payment well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors and administrators, successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents.
THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, THAT, if the Contractor, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns or subcontractors shall fail to pay for any materials, provisions, provender or other supplies or teams, implements or machinery used in, upon, for or about the performance of the work contracted to be done, or shall fail to pay for any work or labor thereon of any kind, or shall fail to pay any persons named in Civil Code section 3181, or shall fail to pay for amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Code with respect to such work or labor as required by the provisions of Division Third, Part 4, Title 15, Chapter 7 of the Civil Code, or shall fail to pay for any amounts required to be deducted, withheld, and paid over to the Employment Development Department from the wages of employees of the Contractor and subcontractors pursuant to Section 13020 of the Unemployment Insurance Code with respect to such work or labor, and provided that the claimant shall have complied with the provisions of that Code, the Surety or Sureties hereon will pay for the same in amount not exceeding the sum specified in the Contract, otherwise the above obligation shall be void. In case suit is brought upon this bond, the Surety will pay all court costs, expenses and reasonable attorney’s fee to the prevailing party to be fixed by the court.
This bond shall inure to the benefit of any and all persons, companies and corporations entitled to file claims under Section 3181 of the Civil Code, so as to give a right of action to them or to their assigns in any suit brought upon this bond.
And the Surety, for value received, hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Contract or to the work to be performed thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall in any way affect its obligation on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Contractor to the work or to the specifications. 41 27
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and seals this _________ day of ___________________________, 20__.
____________________________________ ____________________________________ Name of Surety Contractor
By:_________________________________
Title: _______________________________
____________________________________
Mailing Address of Surety and
_____________________________________ By:_________________________________ Telephone No. of Surety Title: _______________________________ By: _________________________________
Attorney in Fact
NOTE: If Contractor is Partnership, all parties must execute Bond.
IMPORTANT: Surety companies executing Bonds must appear on the Treasury Department’s most current list (Circular 570 as amended) and be authorized to transact business in California.
NOTICE: The signature of the Surety on this bond must be acknowledged before a notary public, and this bond must be accompanied by evidence of the signatory’s appointment as attorney in fact and authority to bind the Surety.
MANDATORY: The Surety shall be authorized and licensed by the California Insurance Commissioner as an “admitted surety insurer.” (See Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 995.311) APPROVAL: Bonds must be approved by the City. In order to verify the status of the Surety as an admitted surety, the Surety shall provide the City with at least one of the following: (1) a print-out of information from the web-site of the Department of Insurance confirming the Surety is an admitted surety insurer and attaching it to the bond; or (2) a certificate from the Riverside County Clerk that the certificate of authority of the Surety has not been surrendered, revoked, cancelled, annulled or suspended and confirming that the Surety is an admitted surety and attaching the certificate to the bond. (See Cal. Code Civ. Proc. Code § 995.311). 42 43
44 45
46 47
48 49
50 51
52 53
54 55
56 57
58 59
60 61
62 63
64 65
66 67
68 69
70 71
72 73
74 75
76 77
78 79
80 81
82 83
84 85
AGENDA STAFF REPORT
City Council Meeting
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Agenda Item No. 12.1
May 11, 2022
A Request (PLN21-20039) by The New Home Company for
Approval of the Following En4tlements Related to the 158.6 Acre Site Located at the Northwest Corner of Hamner Avenue and Limonite Avenue Commonly Known as the Leal Property: an Addendum to the Cer4fied Program Environmental Impact Report for the Leal Master Plan, Leal Master Plan Amendment (SPA001), a Development Agreement (DA003), a Tenta4ve Tract Map (TTM 38290) to Create 14 Developable Lots, 19 Lots for Infrastructure, Trails and Open Space and a Major Development Plan Review (PLN22-20020 DR001) to Facilitate the Development of 2,500 Residen4al Units and 595,000 Square Feet of Commercial
Development Including a Hotel, a Civic Center (City Hall, Library, Police Station) and a Fire Station
Prepared By:
Gina Gibson-Williams, Community Development Director
Recommended Action(s)
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Conduct a public hearing;
2. Approve PLN21-20039 and the following:
12363 Limonite Avenue | Suite 910 | Eastvale, CA 91752
951.361.0900 | eastvaleca.gov
86 A Resolu0on approving an Addendum to the Cer0fied Program Environmental Impact Report for the Leal Master Plan;
Introduc0on of An Ordinance approving an Amendment to the Leal Master Plan (SPA001), Reading the Ordinance by Title and Waiving Further Reading of the Ordinance; Introduc0on of An Ordinance approving a Development Agreement (DA003), Reading the Ordinance by Title and Waiving Further Reading of the Ordinance; A Resolution approving a Tentative Tract Map (TTM 38290) and; A Resolution approving a Major Development Plan Review (PLN22-20020 DR001).
Summary
In December of 2017, the City of Eastvale adopted the Leal Master Plan and cer0fied the Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) to facilitate the development of the Leal property. The Leal property is approximately 158.6 acres in size. The boundaries are 58th Street, Hamner Avenue, Limonite Avenue, and Scholar Way (Assessor Parcel Nos. 164030010; 164030012-14; 164030024- 25). The Leal property is a former dairy and agricultural site that is no longer in use. The Leal Master Plan establishes Eastvale's vision to create a dynamic, dis0nc0ve downtown with mixed-use, retail, office, hotel, housing, public spaces and a civic center. In 2021, the property owner entered into escrow with the developer, The New Home Company, to purchase the land and develop the site as a comprehensive, integrated community.
On April 25, 2022 the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the Project.
Background
Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning
The Project site is surrounded by the following uses and zoning designations:
Location Land Use Zoning
North Residential
Planned Residential/ Single Family
Residential (PRD/R-1)
East
Swan Lake/Eastvale Gateway
Center
Mobile Home Park (R-T)/Specific
Plan (S-P)
South
Single Family
Residential/Cloverdale
Marketplace
Planned Residential (PRD)/General
Commercial (C-1/C-P)
West Residential/The Lodge General Residential (R-3)
The developer submitted the following applications to the City for review:
1. An Addendum to the Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) for the Leal Master Plan;
2. An Amendment to the Leal Master Plan;
3. A Development Agreement;
4. A Tentative Tract Map; and
5. A Major Development Plan Review.
The applica0ons support development of the Leal property to analyze the impacts associated with 12363 Limonite Avenue | Suite 910 | Eastvale, CA 91752
951.361.0900 | eastvaleca.gov
87 the development, vest the en0tlement rights for a twenty year period, subdivide the property to create 14 developable lots, 19 lots for infrastructure, trails and open space and facilitate the development of 2,500 residen0al units, 595,000 square feet of commercial development including a hotel, a civic center (City Hall, Library, Police Sta0on) and Fire Sta0on hereaDer referred to as the "Project". Staff recommends that the City Council consider the merits of applica0ons filed by the developer, the analysis in the agenda report, wriGen and oral public tes0mony and approve the Project.
Leal Master Plan Amendment
The Leal Master Plan is the City's vision for a vibrant Downtown, entertainment/lifestyle, mixed use development. The applicant filed an applica0on to modify the approved Leal Master Plan. This request is the first amendment to the Leal Master Plan (SPA001). The proposed amendment establishes a land use map, specifies backbone streets, iden0fies planning areas, parks, and open space, lists development standards such as setbacks, height limits, and design guidelines to facilitate development of the Project. The modified plan consists of several land uses including:
Civic Center
Library
Police Station
Fire Station
14 acres of parks/open space and a private recreation center up to 595,000 square feet of retail/commercial and lifestyle center including a hotel up to 2,500 homes.
The proposed amendment is designed to: Refine land use and zoning designa0ons within the Master Plan; Establish project-wide Land Use Plan, Circula0on Plan, and Infrastructure Plans; Determine project-wide development standards, design guidelines and site characteris0cs. The proposed Master Plan Amendment eliminates the commercial phasing obliga0ons contained in the original Leal Master Plan (construct 325,000 square feet of commercial uses within a Lifestyle Center before the total development of other uses reaches 40 acres). The Master Plan Amendment has four (4) land use designa0ons, Residen0al, Downtown, Parks/Open Space and Public Facility. The Land Use Plan is included with the report as Attachment E.
Land Use
Residential
Residen0al Planning Areas are iden0fied as 1, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 13, which are approximately 87 acres. The residen0al land use areas will accommodate up to 1,840 units and will feature six dis0nct home types:
1. Conventional Single Family Homes
2. Zero-Lot Line Homes
3. Rear Loaded Homes
4. Row Townhomes
5. Attached Motor Court Homes
6. Apartments/Flats
12363 Limonite Avenue | Suite 910 | Eastvale, CA 91752
951.361.0900 | eastvaleca.gov
88 Downtown
Downtown Planning Areas are iden0fied as 2,3,4,5 and 10, which are approximately 52 acres.
Downtown will accommodate 595,000 square feet of commercial use, 660 residen0al units, and the Civic Center.
Parks and Open Space
Parks and Open Space are located along 58th, Hamner and Limonite Avenues and Planning Areas J, K and L, which are approximately 14 acres. Open space, trails and linear parks are shown on Attachment E to this report.
Fire Station
Planning Area 14 is 1.2 acres in size and is designated as public facility for the Fire Station.
Circulation
There are six (6) major points of vehicular access to the site: two from Limonite Avenue, one of which is signalized; two from Hamner Avenue, one of which is also signalized; one on 58th Street, and one on Scholar Way. Limonite and Hamner Avenues will be dedicated, widened with an addi0onal travel lane and fully improved. Scholar Way and 58th street will be fully improved. The major backbone streets will support walking and biking with an extensive network of trails and pathways.
Authority to Amend a Master Plan
Sec0on 120.02.060 of the Code specifies the requirements to amend a Master Plan are the same as those to amend the Zoning Code.
According to Sec. 120.01.070. - Zoning Code and Map Amendments, the designated approving authority for zoning amendments is the City Council. The Planning Director (Community Development Director) and Planning Commission provide recommenda0ons and the City Council approves, condi0onally approves, or denies the zoning amendment in accordance with the requirements of this title.
Approval or Amendment of a Master Plan.
Prior to adopting or amending a master plan, the City Council shall make the following findings:
(1) That the proposed master plan is consistent with the goals, policies, and objec0ves of the general plan.
The Eastvale General Plan iden0fied the Leal Property as a "significant development opportunity".
The General Plan designates the site for mixed development. All of the land uses iden0fied in the General Plan Land Use Policy 19 are retained and refined in the proposed Project. The proposed Project as condi0oned, will implement the General Plan policies for the Leal site and is therefore consistent with the goals, policies and objectives of the General Plan. (2) That the proposed master plan meets the requirements set forth for a Master Plan.
As condi0oned, the proposed Amendment meets the requirements for a Master Plan according to the Eastvale Municipal Code. The Plan will contain sufficient detail to allow city staff to implement its provisions and to describe to developers how proper0es within a master plan may be developed.
The Plan will contain mandatory contents of the master plan including a schedule or program of existing services and facilities including transit.
12363 Limonite Avenue | Suite 910 | Eastvale, CA 91752
951.361.0900 | eastvaleca.gov
89 (3) If the master plan site, or any por0on thereof, is located within the Chino Airport influence area, the city council must find that:
a. The master plan and amendment has been reviewed by the airport land use commission; and b.The master plan is consistent with the most recently adopted version of the Chino Airport land use compatibility plan.
The Leal Master Plan is not located within the Chino Airport Land Use Compa0bility zone and is not subject to review by the airport commission or consistency with the airport compatibility plan. (4) The language and contents of the master plan shall be acceptable and must meet all applicable city standards.
The Master plan was reviewed by the City of Eastvale Community Development Department and the City's planning consultant team. As condi0oned, the Master plan is acceptable and will meet all applicable city standards in terms of design, architecture, land use standards, circula0on, permiGed uses, development standards, public services, administration, and implementation.
Development Agreement
The Development Agreement is a voluntary contract between the City of Eastvale and The New Home Company which provides security for both sides 0ed to a development project and confers economic benefit to each party. The Development Agreement is a legisla0ve act authorized by the California Government Code 65864 and the Eastvale Municipal Code. With a Development Agreement, the City realizes benefits it could not normally secure via the tradi0onal approval process. The Developer mi0gates risk against future changes to the rules governing land use en0tlements. In addi0on, the Development Agreement ensures development of the Project, which creates regional economic benefits, including new construc0on and commercial employment opportunities.
The Developer submiGed applica0ons to consider Leal Master Plan Amendment (SPA 01) and related documents and a Development Agreement (DA003) to govern development of certain property owned by the Leal Family Trust. The Developer is under contract with the property owner to acquire the property in three (3) phases. The Phasing Map is include with this report as Attachment F.
California Government Code Sec0on 65864 authorizes ci0es to enter into development agreements.
Development Agreements eliminate uncertainty with respect to the development process and promote orderly and efficient development, thereby improving the local economy, and promo0ng the City’s development goals and objec0ves. Because large, mul0-phase projects require substan0al up-front capital investments in land or public infrastructure, developers and ci0es seek certainty with respect to land use en0tlements and the cost of development. Because the City mi0gates development risk by limi0ng its ability to change the regula0ons and fees or exac0ons applicable to the Project, the City may nego0ate considera0on for the Development Agreement that exceeds the normal boundaries established by statute and case law. The DraD Development Agreement is included as Attachment H to this report.
City Council Development Agreement Goals
On August 25, 2021, the City Council established the Real Property Ad-Hoc CommiGee. The CommiGee met regularly from Fall 2021 to April 2022 and provided guidance to staff for the Master 12363 Limonite Avenue | Suite 910 | Eastvale, CA 91752
951.361.0900 | eastvaleca.gov
90 Plan Amendment and the proposed terms of the Development Agreement. The key goals established by the City Council and the Ad Hoc CommiGee for the Development Agreement included:
1. Encourage development of a mixed-use community, including retail, office, and general commercial services along with a range of housing products fulfilling the City’s Housing Element burdens, and
2. Create a vibrant, urban downtown with a future civic center including a City Hall, Library, and Police Station as a catalyst anchor, and
3. Secure a site for a future fire station to service the needs of the broader community, and
4. Assume responsibility for the determina0on of park and recrea0on needs and facility requirements, and
5. Ensure that the completed Project has a neutral or posi0ve opera0ng fiscal impact on the City, assuming current service levels.
6. Create a fair and reasonable exchange of value between the City and Developer.
Development Agreement Term
The Term of the Development Agreement is twenty (20) years from the Effec0ve Date. The Effec0ve Date means the later of (i) 30 days aDer adop0on of the Ordinance approving the Development Agreement and (ii) the date the Developer acquires any por0on of the Property, but in any event not later than one year aDer the adop0on of the Ordinance. The Development Agreement may be terminated prior to the end of the Term, in whole or in part, under the various condi0ons specified in the terms of the Agreement. The Development Agreement requires that the City Council conduct a periodic review of Developer’s compliance with the terms, condi0ons, and covenants of the Development Agreement at least once every 12 months commencing on the Effective Date.
Development Agreement En"tlements (Exis"ng Land Use Regula"ons and Exis"ng Development Approvals)
The Development Agreement incorporates the provisions of the adopted Leal Master Plan and Environmental Impact Report as modified by the Master Plan Amendment No. 1, the Addendum to the Leal Master Plan EIR, the Tenta0ve Tract Map, Major Development Review, and all other land use permits or approvals issued by the City of Eastvale (defined as the “Exis0ng Development Approvals”). In addi0on, the Development Agreement defines the “Exis0ng Land Use Regula0ons” to include the codes, rules, and regula0ons (such as the General Plan, Zoning, and Building Codes) enforced as of the Entry Date (the date of Approval for the Development Agreement). The City of Eastvale may not alter the Exis0ng Land Use Regula0ons with respect to the Project during the Term. The Developer will have a vested right to develop the Project in accordance with the Exis0ng Land Use Regula0ons and Exis0ng Development Approvals, notwithstanding any future changes initiated by the City Council or the voters of the City.
The Project may require subsequent ministerial or discre0onary permits, licenses or other similar approvals to develop the Project. The City must impose Condi0ons of Approval consistent with the Exis0ng Land Use Regula0ons and the Exis0ng Development Approvals unless otherwise agreed by the Developer. However, the Project remains subject to all Federal and State Laws, Police Powers, and Uniform Codes as they exist today or as modified in the future. These include building codes, public improvement construc0on standards, and other health and safety regula0ons applicable citywide. It is primarily the permiGed land uses, parking, landscaping, and related development standards that the Agreement fixes for the Term.
12363 Limonite Avenue | Suite 910 | Eastvale, CA 91752
951.361.0900 | eastvaleca.gov
91 The Developer and Project shall be subject to any lawfully imposed condi0ons of approval imposed by other governmental agencies. The Project and its occupants remain subject to all taxes of general applicability (such as sales taxes, transient occupancy taxes, or property taxes). The Developer must also pay all customary fees for processing development applications.
The Development Agreement does not bind the Developer to any specific schedule of performance for the private improvements, including the residen0al and commercial uses. The Developer is not subject to any commercial phasing obliga0ons as a condi0on for pulling residen0al permits as previously required in the Leal Master Plan.
Consideration of a Development Agreement
In reviewing an applica0on for a development agreement, the City Council shall give considera0on to:
(a)Other pending applications and approved projects;
(b)The traffic, parking, public service, visual, and other impacts of the proposed development project upon abutting properties and the community;
(c)Ability of the applicant to address public facility needs and financing obligations; (d)The rela0onship of the project to the city's growth management program in the general plan and applicable specific plan;
(e)The provisions included, if any, for reserva0on, dedica0on, or improvement of land for public purposes or accessibility to the public;
(f)The type and magnitude of the project's economic effects to the City of Eastvale through a fiscal impact analysis, and of its contribu0on, if any, toward mee0ng the city's housing needs, including affordable housing; and
(g)Any other comparable, relevant factor or factors.
This staff report and attachments address the required considerations listed herein.
Tentative Tract Map
According to the Assessor's Map, the property consists of six parcels. The proposed Tenta0ve Map will divide the six parcels into 14 developable lots and 19 lots for infrastructure. The table below shows each numbered lot and the corresponding acreage:
Numbered Lots
Lot # S.F Acres
1 315,892.10 7.252
2 550,731.85 12.643
3 426,869.17 9.8
4 279,624.41 6.419
5 198,540.25 4.558
6 244,324.99 5.609
7 613,599.82 14.086
8 171,451.45 3.936
9 191,384.23 4.394
10 195,395.18 4.486
12363 Limonite Avenue | Suite 910 | Eastvale, CA 91752
951.361.0900 | eastvaleca.gov
92 11 724,736.51 16.638
12 754,749.47 17.327
13 574,268.61 13.183
14 53,083.07 1.219
TOTAL 5,294,651.11 121.548
Residen0al lots in the Leal Master Plan range in size from 1 acre to 1,500 square feet. Lots 1, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 13 are designated for residen0al use and meet the size requirements specified in the Master Plan. Lots 2, 3, 4, 5 and 10 are designated for mixed use or Downtown core. No lot size, or lot specifica0ons are specified for the Downtown in the proposed Amendment to the Leal Master Plan. The developable lots meet or exceed the specifica0ons in the Master Plan. The table below shows each numbered lot and the corresponding acreage:
Lettered Lots
Lot # S.F Acres
A 139,937.69 3.213
B 147,811.51 3.393
C 84,478.50 1.939
D 38,267.77 0.879
E 246,244.32 5.653
F 44,673.74 1.026
G 113,590.68 2.608
H 115,905.65 2.661
I 67,321.01 1.545
J 89,220.27 2.048
K 68,998.58 1.584
L 153,611.43 3.526
M 44,835.28 1.029
N 31,408.46 0.721
O 32,546.77 0.747
P 84,078.57 1.93
Q 46,663.19 1.071
R 42,155.07 0.968
S 21,801.21 0.50
TOTAL 1,613,549.70
37.042
The en0re site will be developed in three phases. A copy of the phasing map is included with this report as Attachment F. The Tentative Map is included with this report as Attachment G.
All exis0ng streets that will be improved meet with the requirements of the General Plan. All proposed streets will meet the requirements of the General Plan. Hamner and Limonite Avenues will be dedicated, widened and fully improved. Scholar and 58th will be dedicated and fully 12363 Limonite Avenue | Suite 910 | Eastvale, CA 91752
951.361.0900 | eastvaleca.gov
93 improved.
The Tenta0ve Map will be condi0oned so that internal roadways within the proposed phase will be constructed to provide adequate ingress/egress to all proposed development . Roadways in the undeveloped portions of the site shall be constructed to provide adequate emergency access.
Findings for Approval of a Tentative Tract Map
Prior to approval of a tentative map, the following findings must be made:
(1)The proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and Master plans The site has a General Plan designa0on of Leal Master Plan. This designa0on permits the proposed land uses in the revised Master Plan.
(2)The design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and Master Plans
As condi0oned, the proposed subdivision will be designed to meet City standards which provide sa0sfactory pedestrian and vehicular circula0on, including emergency vehicle access and on site improvements, such as streets, u0li0es, and drainage facili0es have been designed and are conditioned to be constructed in conformance with City standards. (3)The site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the type of development.
The site is generally flat and consists of approximately 158.6 acres. The site is not located within a flood plain and no major geologic hazards have been reported on the site or other limited condi0ons that would render it unsuitable for residential and commercial development. (4)The site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the proposed density of the development;
The site is rectangular shaped and accessible from major streets. The size, 158.6 acres will accommodate the proposed density of the Project.
(5)The design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to cause substan0al environmental damage or substan0ally and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
CSLS biologists conducted an analysis of biological resources and jurisdic0onal waters within the Project Area on June 9, 2021, and focused burrowing owl surveys and narrow endemic plant surveys were conducted on June 16, 23, July 1 and 13, 2021. A Delhi Sands Flower Loving Fly Assessment was performed on June 18, 2021. Based on the updated 2021 detailed Biological Surveys, the Project is not an0cipated to have a greater impact than what was originally analyzed in the 2015 EIR and is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. (6)The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems;
The design of the subdivision is in conformance with the City's General Plan, Master Plan, and Subdivision Ordinance, the construc0on of all improvements on the site has been condi0oned to comply with all applicable City of Eastvale ordinances, codes, and standards including, but not limited to, the California Uniform Building Code, the City's Ordinances rela0ng to stormwater runoff management and controls. In addi0on, the design and construc0on of all improvements for the subdivision has been condi0oned to be in conformance with adopted public works standards. The 12363 Limonite Avenue | Suite 910 | Eastvale, CA 91752
951.361.0900 | eastvaleca.gov
94 City's ordinances, codes, and standards have been created based on currently accepted standards and prac0ces for the preserva0on of the public health, safety and welfare. Finally, the proposed street system throughout the subdivision will provide emergency vehicular access in the immediate neighborhood.
(7)The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed land division.
Easements Nos.6 and 4 will be vacated prior to construc0on of Planning Areas 12 and 8 respec0vely. No other easements of record or easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdic0on for public access across the site have been disclosed in a search of the 0tle records for the site and the City does not otherwise have any construc0ve or actual knowledge of any such easements.
Development Plan Review and Findings
A Major Development Plan applica0on establishes the conceptual site plan and development standards for the project in conjunction with the revised Leal Master plan.
Major development review shall be granted only when all of the following findings are made:
a. The proposed project is consistent with the objec0ves of the general plan, and complies with applicable zoning regula0ons, specific plan provisions, special planning area provisions, design guidelines, and improvement standards adopted by the city; The proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan and when developed will be consistent with the Master Plan Amendment site characteris0cs, design guidelines and development standards.
b. The proposed architecture, site design, and landscape are suitable for the purposes of the building and the site and will enhance the character of the neighborhood and community; The proposed architecture, site design, and landscape are suitable for the purposes of the mixeduse, downtown, lifestyle center contemplated for the site in the General Plan Master Plan and will enhance the character of the neighborhood and community with novel architecture and a medley of housing options;
c. The architecture, including the character, scale and quality of the design, rela0onship with the site and other buildings, building materials, colors, screening of exterior appurtenances, exterior ligh0ng and signing and similar elements, establishes a clear design concept and is compa0ble with the character of buildings on adjoining and nearby properties; The proposed land uses in the Master plan are harmonious with the exis0ng land uses along 58th Street and Hamner Avenue. As condi0oned, the color pallet and materials in the Master Plan will establish a clear, unparalleled design concept to Eastvale. There are six dis0nct residen0al product types that will create unique neighborhood environments and add to the variety of housing op0ons in Eastvale. As condi0oned, the site characteris0cs and development standards in the amended Master Plan will complement tradi0onal architectural styles and introduce novel design features that will create an array of housing options in Eastvale. d. The proposed project will not create conflicts with vehicular, bicycle, or pedestrian transporta0on modes of circulation;
The Tenta0ve Tract Map and circula0on plan show that the Project will not create conflicts with 12363 Limonite Avenue | Suite 910 | Eastvale, CA 91752
951.361.0900 | eastvaleca.gov
95 vehicles, people who walk and bike or use other transportation modes. e. For residen0al subdivisions, the subdivision is well-integrated with the city's street network, creates unique neighborhood environments, reflects tradi0onal architectural styles, and establishes a pedestrian-friendly environment; and
The Tenta0ve Tract Map u0lizes the City's exis0ng street network for entrance and exit to and from the Project site and as such is well integrated with the City's street network. There are six dis0nct residen0al product types that will create unique neighborhood environments and add to the variety of housing op0ons in Eastvale. As condi0oned, the site characteris0cs and development standards in the amended Master Plan will complement tradi0onal architectural styles and introduce novel design features that will create an array of housing op0ons in Eastvale. The network of linear parks, pathways and open space in the Master Plan are integrated and friendly to people who wish to walk.
f. If the project is located within the Chino Airport influence area, the proposed project is consistent with the most recently adopted version of the airport land use compatibility plan.
The project is not located within the China Airport influence area and no consistency analysis is required.
Public Meetings
Information about Downtown Eastvale was available to the public on:
March 20, 2022 at a joint Planning Commission/City Council workshop; April 6, 2022 at a Town Hall community meeting at Vantage Point church; and April 23, 2022 at a Town Hall community meeting at Eastvale City Hall.
During the joint workshop, both City staff and the developer made presenta0ons which are included as aGachments to this report as AGachments I and J. Members of the City Council the Planning Commission, and the public asked ques0ons about the project and received responses. The Town Hall community mee0ngs were dedicated to an in depth 1:1 ques0on and answer format on 7 key areas of the plan: 1) rooDop gardens; 2) city library, 3) park ameni0es; 4) en0tlement history of the project; 5) missing retail opportuni0es in Eastvale; 6) safer streets and 7) architectural design for residential property.
Community Outreach
In addi0on to the public mee0ngs, the developer presented the project at the Eastvale Chamber of Commerce Business and Breakfast on April 7, 2022, the Lodge Home Owners Association on April 13, 2022 and the Eastvale Kiwanis on May 2, 2022. Property owners and business owners asked ques0ons about the development and received answers. Downtown Eastvale has the full support of the Eastvale Chamber of Commerce.
Social Media
The developer launched a dedicated website for the project at www.downtowneastvale.com The website has links that provide a summary of the project, informa0on about the developer, a 0meline and an opportunity to leave feedback. The website also has a link to public informa0on documents en0tled “What we heard from the community” and “Frequently asked ques0ons”.
These documents provide responses to ques0ons asked on social media, during the public mee0ngs 12363 Limonite Avenue | Suite 910 | Eastvale, CA 91752
951.361.0900 | eastvaleca.gov
96 and or community outreach mee0ngs. Informa0on about Downtown Eastvale was also available on Facebook and Instagram.
School District
The project falls within the Corona Norco Unified School District. The City and the Developer met with the Facilities District staff on March December 2, 20021, March 22, 2022 and May 2, 2022.
Findings
All required findings for Project have been made in a posi0ve manner. The Resolu0ons and Ordinances with the required findings and Condi0ons of Approval are included with this report as Attachments K-O.
Environmental
Addendum to the Previously Certified Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) The previously cer0fied PEIR concluded that impacts from the original project would result in significant unavoidable impacts in Transporta0on / Traffic, Air Quality and Noise. The City Council determined that the benefits of the project outweighed the significant unavoidable impacts and adopted a Statement of Overriding Considera0ons. An Addendum to the Cer0fied PEIR for the Leal Master Plan (State Clearinghouse No. 2015031028) for up to 2,500 residen0al units and 595,000 square feet of commercial space including a hotel, a civic center (City Hall, Library, Police Sta0on) and Fire Station, (the “Project”).
The purpose of the Addendum is to analyze any poten0al differences between impacts iden0fied in the cer0fied Final PEIR and poten0al impacts that may be associated with the proposed Project.
Sec0ons 21166 and 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) iden0fy the condi0ons for prepara0on of an addi0onal environmental document when the Lead Agency has previously certified an EIR.
The Addendum to the PEIR consists of an environmental analysis and eleven technical studies: Air Quality/GHG/Energy Impact Study; Biological Assessment; Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment; Preliminary Geotechnical Evalua0on; Environmental Site Assessment (Phase I and Limited Phase II); Preliminary Hydrology Analysis; Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan; Noise Impact Study; Traffic Study; Sewer System Development Analysis; and a Water Supply Assessment.
The Addendum and technical studies were reviewed by the Community Development Director. A peer review of the technical studies and the Addendum was performed by the City's planning consultant, Michael Baker Interna0onal. The traffic analysis peer review was performed by the City Engineer and the City's traffic consultant, Fehr and Peers.
Requirements to adopt an Addendum
According to CEQA, an Addendum to a previously certified EIR may be prepared if:
1. No substan0al changes are proposed in the Project which will require major revisions of a previous EIR due to an involvement of new significant environmental effects, or a substan0al increase in the severity of previously iden0fied significant effects. Table 7 in the Addendum compares the original project analyzed under the cer0fied PEIR with the revised Project in the Leal Master Plan Amendment. The table shows that construc0on and opera0ons for the revised Project 12363 Limonite Avenue | Suite 910 | Eastvale, CA 91752
951.361.0900 | eastvaleca.gov
97 have similar or less impacts than what was contemplated in the original PEIR and as such, no new or increased significant impacts will occur.
2. No substan0al changes will occur with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR. There have been no changes to the project boundary or size. Given that construc0on and opera0ons for the revised Project have similar or less impacts than what was contemplated in the original PEIR, no substan0al changes have occurred in the circumstances for the proposed Project that require revisions to the previous PEIR.
3. No new informa0on of substan0al importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the 0me the previous EIR was cer0fied has been identified. The Addendum, technical studies have not iden0fied any new informa0on of substan0al importance, which was known or could have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous PEIR was certified.
4. The Project will have not have any significant effects that are not discussed in the previous EIR, and there are no newly feasible, or considerably different, mi0ga0on measures or alterna0ves which would substan0ally reduce one or more significant effects of the Project which the applicant declines to adopt. All significant impacts were iden0fied in the original PEIR. Poten0al impacts associated with the proposed Project are iden0fied in the Mi0ga0on Monitoring and Repor0ng Program. The Project will not result in new mi0ga0on measures. All Mi0ga0on Measures are included in the Resolution and Conditions of Approval and the applicant agrees to comply.
The Addendum and technical studies contain analysis to support theses findings.
Pursuant to Sec0on 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, it is the independent judgement of the Lead Agency that the Project will not result in any new or more significant impacts to the environment other than those which have already been assessed under the cer0fied PEIR and no further environmental review is required.
Addendum to the PEIR for the Leal Master Plan has been prepared for the Project in accordance with Sec0ons 15162 and 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines. Pursuant to Sec0on 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, it is the independent judgement of the Lead Agency that the Project will not result in any new or more significant impacts to the environment other than those which have already been assessed under the cer0fied PEIR. The Addendum, technical studies and Mi0ga0on Monitoring and Reporting Program are included with this report as Attachments A, B, and C.
Strategic Plan Action - Priority Level: 1 | Target #: 2 | Goal #: 3 As proposed, the project will meet several of the goals outlined in the 2021 Eastvale Strategic Plan:
1. Attract and retain businesses that align with
diverse community needs and provide choices;
2. Create “Destination Eastvale” with high quality and unique businesses;
3. Develop and Construct Civic Center (City Hall,
Library, Police substation, and 3rd Fire Station); and
4. Diversify the housing stock with more options
12363 Limonite Avenue | Suite 910 | Eastvale, CA 91752
951.361.0900 | eastvaleca.gov
98 Fiscal Impact
Development Impact Fees
The City currently levies three dis0nct capital facility impact fees for Transporta0on, Fire, and General Facili0es to mi0gate the costs of growth upon the City’s infrastructure and burden development for its fair share of those costs ("Development Impact Fees”). The City levies all capital facility fees at the issuance of a building permit. The Developer requested that the City fix the Development Impact Fees applicable to the residen0al development (including the residen0al por0ons of Mixed Use areas) within the Project for the Term to establish certainty regarding the development economics. The Agreement does not fix the Development Impact Fees applicable to non-residen0al development within the Project. The Development Agreement establishes the following terms with respect to the Development Impact Fees:
The City fixes the Development Impact Fees at the current scheduled rates for the Term.
The City may not increase the current scheduled Development Impact Fees for the Term.
The City may not levy any new Development Impact Fees against the Project for the Term.
In exchange for the Public Benefits subsequently described, the Development Agreement credits the Developer for all City Development Impact Fees for the residen0al units within the Project (commercial uses remain subject to the City’s then applicable Development Impact Fees). The current value of this credit is $4,862,980 assuming 1,840 single-family units and 660 mul0-family units (which is subject to change).
The Developer shall pay all lawfully imposed fees directly levied by governmental en00es other than the City. For example, the Developer shall pay the Transporta0on Uniform Mi0ga0on Fee (TUMF), the Mul0ple Species Habitat Conserva0on Plan Fee, and the Mira Loma Road and Bridge Benefit Assessment District Fee. The Developer may seek credit or reimbursement for eligible costs incurred under these programs and the City will cooperate in that endeavor.
The City adopted its current schedule of Development Impact Fees in 2012 without adjustment over the last 10 years. Under recently adopted legisla0on (AB 602), the City must update the schedule of Development Impact Fees at least once every 8 years. ADer comple0on of required capital facility plans and nexus repor0ng, the recommended fees may be substan0ally higher to reflect land and construc0on cost infla0on and expanded facility requirements. The Developer mi0gates this uncertainty related to the levy of future impact fees with this Development Agreement.
Parkland Dedication and Improvements
The Development Agreement fulfills a key goal of the City to assume responsibility for determining park and recrea0on needs and facility requirements. The Development Agreement establishes special parkland dedica0on and improvement obliga0ons for the Project in accordance with Government Code Sec0on 66477 (the “Quimby Act”), City Land and Development Code Sec0on 130.20.020, and Government Code Sec0on 66000et seq. The Development Agreement establishes the Project’s parkland dedica0on requirements, determines the eligibility for on-site facility credits, grants addi0onal credits for specific civic dedica0ons, and establishes in-lieu fees for land acquisi0on and park improvements.
The Development Agreement and the Exis0ng Development Approvals establish the Quimby Act 12363 Limonite Avenue | Suite 910 | Eastvale, CA 91752
951.361.0900 | eastvaleca.gov
99 dedica0on requirement at 3.5 acres for each 1,000 projected residents within the Project (the Leal Master Plan established a standard of 5 acres for 1,000 projected residents). The City computed this factor based upon the ra0o of exis0ng parkland within the City rela0ve to the current popula0on.
The Quimby Act established this methodology to prevent ci0es from requiring excessive parkland dedica0ons from developers to correct exis0ng parkland deficiencies. The City could set a higher standard under the Quimby Act (up to five acres per 1,000 residents) but then it must develop a realis0c implementa0on plan to achieve the higher ra0o by iden0fying land and securing financing for acquisi0on and construc0on. This could create a substan0al financial burden for the City since the City is currently 100+ acres short of the 5-acre standard and at $1 million per acre for land and improvements the cost of resolving the exis0ng deficiency approximates $100 million. Furthermore, the City may have difficulty identifying suitable sites totaling 100 acres.
Based upon the ini0al development plan, the Project owes a maximum total of 31.33 acres of parkland by applica0on of the 3.5-acre standard and the popula0on factors of 3.9 PPH for single family units and 2.69 PPH for mul0-family units. The household popula0on factors derive from the City’s 2012 Nexus Study performed by NBS. Sec0on 130.20.020 (h)(2) sets a much lower standard in the absence of an approved community park and recrea0on plan. JCSD currently uses 2.90 persons per household for all dwelling unit types in its Quimby methodology. The Quimby Act authorizes the use of the average household size based upon the most recent federal census (2020, results not yet available). For comparison, the Department of Finance reports the January 1, 2021, average household size for Eastvale as 4.05. The Development Agreement provides the City with la0tude to establish reasonable household population factors based upon available data.
The Leal Master Plan Amendment No. 1 proposes a total of 14.12 acres of on-site park, trail, open space, and recrea0on facili0es, with 9.01 acres available for public use (6.96 acres maintained by the HOA and 2.05 acres by the City) and 5.110 acres restricted to the residents of the Project. The Development Agreement grants credit for private recrea0onal facili0es at a 50% rate, consequently the on-site eligible parkland dedica0on is ini0ally 11.57 acres. In addi0on, the Development Agreement grants parkland dedica0on credit for the Op0on Property consis0ng of Lot 5 (4.56 acres). The total land credits are therefore 16.13 acres.
ADer applica0on of the credits for land dedica0ons, the Project owes an addi0onal 15.20 acres of land dedica0on to be sa0sfied by payment of in-lieu fees, acquisi0on and/or improvement of off-site parks, or provision of additional on-site park land or improvements acceptable to City.
Predicated upon a similar methodology in accordance with the Mi0ga0on Fee Act (AB 1600), the Project ini0ally owes a total of 31.33 acres of improved parkland. The Development Agreement grants credit against improvement obliga0ons for the inclusion of Lot 5 (4.56 acres) in the Op0on Property (or by separate conveyance), leaving a residual obliga0on of 26.77 acres. The Development Agreement applies an improvement standard of $500,000 per acre, resul0ng in financial obligations for park improvements of $13,385,950.
The Developer shall receive credits for the value of City approved on-site improvements (with a 50% credit for private improvements), with any residual obliga0ons sa0sfied off-site by separate agreement or by payment of an in-lieu fee to the City.
Sec0on 4.1.6.1.2 of the Development Agreement establishes the procedure for approving credits against the park improvement obliga0ons. At Major Development Review for each phase, the 12363 Limonite Avenue | Suite 910 | Eastvale, CA 91752
951.361.0900 | eastvaleca.gov
100
Developer shall submit a conceptual park improvement plan and a cost es0mate prepared by a reputable landscape contractor. The City will review and approve, condi0onally approve, or disapprove the cost es0mates. Upon approval, the City will grant dollar credit against the total improvement obliga0on for each phase. Under this approach, the City shall not provide direct reimbursements to the Developer for any park improvements.
At Major Development Review for each Phase, the City and Developer would reconcile the amounts required for both parkland and improvements, apply any credits authorized by the Development Agreement, and determine the payments (if any) due for that Phase. If the credits exceed the required dedica0ons or improvements, then the balance carries forward to the subsequent phase.
If the required dedica0ons or improvements exceed the credits, the Developer shall make an in-lieu payment to the City for land dedica0on and/or improvements based upon $500,000 per acre for each. The City will deposit any in-lieu fees in restricted development impact fee account(s) for parkland acquisition and or improvements.
Exhibit E to the Development Agreement describes the methodology for this reconcilia0on on a phase-by-phase basis.
Public Benefits
The Development Agreement conveys significant value to the Developer and to the City. The Development Agreement among other things, vests the land use en0tlements for the Term, fixes the Development Impact Fees at current rates for the Term, and provides flexibility to sa0sfy the parkland dedica0on requirements (for example, allowing for an off-site solu0on). In exchange, the Development Agreement provides the following consideration to the City:
1. Downtown Planning Grant. The City and Developer must undertake detailed planning for the mixed-use areas within the Project. The Developer will plan Lots 2/4/10 (the “Mixed Use Area Plan” in the Development Agreement) and the City will plan Lots 3/5/J (the “Civic Center/Commercial Core Plan”). Both par0es will undertake a concurrent planning process to coordinate planning for these adjacent areas to ensure op0mal synergies. The Development Agreement requires the Developer to contribute $250,000 to the City’s planning program within one month following Project Approval (i.e., upon non-appealable entitlements).
The City must then engage a land planning/urban design team to commence the planning program.
The Developer likewise will engage its own design professionals and the par0es agree to communicate and cooperate during the concurrent processes. This process may require up to 12 months to complete, providing for public par0cipa0on and the normal and customary planning processes.
2. Fire Sta0on Site: The Developer conveys an improved site with adequate ingress and egress (all backbone infrastructure and blue tops) for a 1.2-acre+- fire sta0on at the northeast corner of Scholar Way and 58
th Street by the first Cer0ficate of Occupancy in Phase 2 of the Project.
The City assumes responsibility in coordina0on with its contract service provider to finance the construc0on and opera0on of the fire sta0on. The Developer has no responsibility for the ver0cal construc0on of the fire sta0on. The Development Agreement does not obligate the City to construct or operate the fire station.
3. Op0on Property for Civic Center, Park, and/or Economic Development: Subject to condi0ons 12363 Limonite Avenue | Suite 910 | Eastvale, CA 91752
951.361.0900 | eastvaleca.gov
101
precedent described below, the Developer grants the City a 20-year op0on to purchase Lot 3 within Tenta0ve Tract Map 38290 (9.8 acres) for economic development purposes. The par0es may also amend the Op0on to include Lot J (2.048 acres) and Lot 5 (4.558 acres). The City may acquire any por0on of these lots for development of its Civic Center (City Hall/Police/Library) and any park or open space. The City will establish the precise loca0on of these civic uses during the Downtown Planning Program (or sooner). The Developer will convey the sites fee simple to the City or to the City’s assignee. The City may also receive Lot J and Lot 5 by direct conveyance.
The Developer shall install all backbone infrastructure (streets/curbs/guGers/ligh0ng/landscaping, wet and dry u0li0es stubbed to the property line), and blue tops (i.e., rough grading) for Lots 3, 5 and J by the first building permit in Phase I. Developer shall maintain these lots un0l assignment by the City to third par0es, acquisi0on by the City under the Op0on, or conveyance to the City via conventional dedications.
The City appraised the current fair market value of the 16.41-acres (Lots 3/5/J) at $17,449,000 with a date of value of February 10, 2022; however, the purchase price is Zero Dollars ($0.00). The City receives this value in exchange for the valuable considera0on granted by the City to the Developer under the Development Agreement.
ADer acquiring the civic parcels, the City retains an op0on on the remainder for economic development purposes. The Master Plan calls for approximately 495,000 square feet of commercial development to supplement the approximately 100,000 square feet of civic uses. The Exis0ng Development Approvals plot approximately 397,000 square feet of the commercial square footage on the Commercial Core proper0es for development by the City, with approximately 103,000 square ploGed for the Mixed-Use Areas for development by Developer. ADer comple0ng the Downtown Plan and selec0ng the Civic Center Site, the City will market the residual property to the development community for development in accordance with the Downtown Plan. The Development Agreement provides the City with the op0on to assign its purchase rights under the Op0on to a third party for development. The City will receive compensa0on upon assignment in accordance with the agreements for such conveyances.
The value of land included in the Op0on, par0cularly the Commercial Core proper0es will vary depending upon market condi0ons and the character of development desired by the City. The current appraisals valued the land at the highest and best use in accordance with the proposed zoning for the property. If the City seeks higher quality uses/tenancies or imposes development condi0ons that increase costs without a commensurate increase in rents or sales values, then the value of the land in a resale transac0on may be less than the acquisi0on value. The City accepts this risk to control the des0ny of this key commercial node and avoid development outcomes predicated solely upon the highest value achievable regardless of desirability. The City seeks a unique, pioneering form of development for the Inland Empire.
The City realizes other intangible benefits with the establishment of its Civic Center, future development of an urban community center or downtown, and sa0sfac0on of its obliga0ons to provide a mix of housing opportunities pursuant to the Regional Housing Needs Asessment.
Park Maintenance
The Master Homeowner’s Associa0on will maintain all required on-site parkland, except for Lot J. 12363 Limonite Avenue | Suite 910 | Eastvale, CA 91752
951.361.0900 | eastvaleca.gov
102
ADer ini0al construc0on by the Developer, the HOA will own and maintain the park proper0es in accordance with the Covenants, Condi0ons, and Restric0ons, which are subject to review and approval by the City. The parks must remain available for use by the public in accordance with rules and regula0ons encompassed within the CC & R’s any subsequent opera0ng agreements between the City and the HOA.
The City agrees to maintain Lot J as part of the Civic Center Project. ADer comple0on of the Civic Center/Commercial Plan, the City may relocate or reconsider this park within the acreage controlled by the City. The annual maintenance cost is dependent upon the area of the park and the scope of improvements constructed. Because of the unknown character of this park scope, the Fiscal Impact Report did not factor maintenance costs absorbed by the City into the analysis. If the Developer does not provide all required parkland on-site, and instead acquires land or pays fees for off-site parkland acquisition, the City may have park maintenance responsibilities.
The private recrea0on facili0es proposed for Lots K and L may include a pool, clubhouse, and other communal facili0es for the residents of the Project. The HOA shall exclusively bear the maintenance costs for these improvements via homeowner associa0on assessments. The Developer proposes to construct the private recreation facilities in Phase 3 of the Project.
Operating Fiscal Impacts
The City engaged Kosmont Companies to prepare a Fiscal Impact Report (FIR) determining the net fiscal impact of the Project upon the City’s General Fund. The Project as a whole has a net posi0ve annual impact to the City of approximately $1,213,700.
The City Council and the Ad Hoc CommiGee recommended that the residen0al development pay all public service costs imposed upon the City, thereby allowing any new commercial development to produce surplus revenues to the general fund. The FIR projects revenues based upon a per capita mul0plier or case study methodology as appropriate. The FIR forecasts public service costs by projec0ng the current service standard and cost for all General Fund services using a per capita mul0plier (current cost divided by service popula0on, including residents and employees). This FIR dated May 11, 2022 is included as Attachment P to this report.
The Development Agreement requires the Developer to annex the residen0al tracts into a Community Facili0es District for levying a maximum annual services special tax of $160 per unit, adjusted annually at a maximum rate of two percent. The CFD Services Special Tax will produce revenues to the City of approximately $400,000 per year balancing the residen0al revenues with the forecasted public service costs for residential uses.
The Total Project is an0cipated to produce an approximately $1,213,700 per year posi0ve fiscal impact to the City General Fund at build out. This is based on a variety of factors, including increase property tax, sales tax, poten0al transient occupancy tax and a special services tax through a CFD.
Sales tax from on-site commercial uses and the transient occupancy tax from the an0cipated hotel makes the largest contribution to the positive fiscal performance.
The fiscal impact report makes numerous assumptions regarding future City revenues and expenses.
If the assump0ons significantly change, the Project returns may be more or less than projected. Tax structures may change, the Project may not develop exactly as proposed due to market condi0ons, or public service demands may increase or decrease. The City is also responsible for most of the commercial development within the Project, and market condi0ons may change causing 12363 Limonite Avenue | Suite 910 | Eastvale, CA 91752
951.361.0900 | eastvaleca.gov
103
adjustments to the mix of land uses.
The City funds fire services from a special property tax equal to 6.4% of the 1% levy. The Fiscal Impact Report es0mates build out property tax revenue at approximately $1 million. The Fiscal Impact Report es0mates the cost to provide service to the resident equivalent popula0on of 9,600 from the Project at $880,000 based upon the current citywide service standard. Consequently, the Fiscal Impact Report concludes that the Project pays its fair share toward the City’s cost of providing fire services. However, the Fiscal Impact Report also notes that the cost of opera0ng the new fire sta0on could be approximately $2.5 million annually, and this would require funding from nonProject sources. The new sta0on would improve citywide services levels, correc0ng exis0ng service deficiencies, and serve a population base larger than the Project.
Capital Costs
The City will condi0on the Project to construct public improvements in accordance with the Exis0ng Development Approvals and the Exis0ng Land Use Regula0ons, including streets, traffic signals, storm drains, and related public improvements. The Project will install water and sewer infrastructure under the auspices of the Jurupa Community Services District, and other dry u0li0es as required by the service providers. The Developer es0mated the total value of master improvements and in-tract improvements at $141 million for the Project, a por0on of which the City will recognize in its fixed assets upon comple0on and acceptance. The City is not providing any subsidy to the Project for any of the on or off-site improvements.
The Developer may receive credits against development impact fees levied by other agencies for a por0on of the off-site improvement costs, most notably for traffic improvements on Hamner Avenue and Limonite Avenue. If the City condi0ons the Developer to install oversized infrastructure that benefits other property owners, the City agrees to cooperate in the execu0on of a reimbursement agreement that obligates future beneficiaries of the oversized improvements to reimburse the original installer.
The commercial elements of the Project remain subject to the City’s then applicable Development Impact Fees. Based upon the current fee schedule and assump0ons regarding the character of commercial development, the commercial por0ons of the Project would contribute approximately $650,000 in Development Impact Fees for Transporta0on, Fire and Civic purposes. This amount will change if the City Council modifies the Development Impact Fees in the future, as the Development Agreement does not vest the rate for these fees for commercial development.
Because the Developer will be dedica0ng land to the City in exchange for Development Impact Fee credits, the City may need to supplement its development impact fee funds with other funding sources to finance the construc0on of improvements included within the City’s development impact fee program. The City may use the proceeds from future land sales/assignments of Lots 3/5/J to supplement its development impact fees.
Development Agreement Benefits/Costs
The Development Agreement is a voluntary contract between the municipality and the Developer, which should confer economic benefits to each party. The City mi0gates development risk for the Developer in the form of land use en0tlement protec0on, by limi0ng the applicability of subsequent rule changes and fee increases. For these valuable benefits, the City collects a Development Agreement fee, typically in the form of cash payments, higher impact fees, extraordinary public improvements, or land exchanges. In addi0on, the Development Agreement ensures development 12363 Limonite Avenue | Suite 910 | Eastvale, CA 91752
951.361.0900 | eastvaleca.gov
104
of the Project, which creates regional economic benefits, including new construc0on and commercial employment opportunities.
The land and other benefits provided to the City is valued at approximately $19 million dollars. The credited development impact fees and park fees are roughly $10.5 million. As a result, the surplus value to the City is $8.5 million. The value of land and other considera0ons received by the City exceeds the value of credits received by the Developer. The City will be paying zero dollars for the land. The value of land and other considera0on received by the City exceeds the value of credits realized by the Developer. This surplus value represents a premium paid by the Developer in exchange for the mi0ga0on of risk related to land use en0tlements, future development impact fee increases, the flexible requirements for parkland dedica0on and improvement, and the release of commercial phasing restrictions from the original Leal Master Plan.
The City has not updated its development impact fees in 10 years and the scope and cost of public facili0es financed by these fees have increased significantly. To increase the development impact fees, the City must engage a financial consultant, update its capital facility plans, prepare a nexus study, conduct public hearings, and adopt increased and/or new fees. Ci0es typically consider compe00ve market condi0ons before seXng fees and, especially aDer such a long adjustment lag, phase in the fees in to minimize the shock to the development community.
Kosmont Companies prepared a Summary Report for public review which summarizes the principal terms of the Development Agreement, the responsibili0es of the par0es, and the results of the Fiscal Impact Report. The Summary Report is included as Attachment Q to this report.
Prior City Council/Commission Action
The Leal Master Plan and Environmental Impact Report were approved by the City Council in 2017.
A Joint Workshop of the Planning Commission and the City Council was held on March 16, 2022 for the proposed Project.
Planning Commission Review and Recommendation
The Eastvale Municipal Code requires the Planning Commission to review an applica0on for a Development Agreement at public hearing. The Planning Commission shall determine whether the proposal is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan.
On April 25, 2022, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and considered the Development Agreement along with the various land use en0tlements for the Project. The Planning Commission adopted Resolu0on No. PLN21-20039 recommending that the City Council approve the Project.
Attachment(s)
Attachment A - Addendum
Attachment B - Leal Addendum Appendices Combined.pdf
Attachment C - Leal Comprehensive MMRP
Attachment D - LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
12363 Limonite Avenue | Suite 910 | Eastvale, CA 91752
951.361.0900 | eastvaleca.gov
105
Attachment E-1 - Land Use Plan
Attachment E-2 - Open Space/Parks
Attachment F - Phasing/Implementation
Attachment G - TTM 38290
Attachment H - Development Agreement CC Final.pdf
Attachment H-1 - Development Agreement Exhibit D.pdf
Attachment H-2 - Development Agreement Exhibit E .pdf
Attachment I - City Joint PC CC Presentation.pptx
Attachment J - Developer Joint PC & CC Presentation
Attachment J-1 - Leal Boards WKSHP .pdf
Attachment K - Resolution Approving Addendum
Attachment L - Draft CC Reso (MDR) - Leal.docx
Attachment L1 - CC COA MDR.pdf
Attachment M - Resolution Approving TTM
Attachment M-1 CC COA TTM.pdf
Attachment N - Ordinance Approving DA
Attachment O - LMP Amendment Ordinance
Attachment P - Leal Ranch Fiscal Report April 2022.pdf
Attachment Q - Leal Ranch Summary Report of DA May 4 2022.pdf 12363 Limonite Avenue | Suite 910 | Eastvale, CA 91752
951.361.0900 | eastvaleca.gov
106
DRAFT Addendum to the Environmental Impact Report
For the Leal Master Plan
(State Clearinghouse No. 2015031028)
Addendum No. 1
Prepared for:
City of Eastvale
12363 Limonite Avenue, Suite 910
Eastvale, CA 91752
Prepared by:
Carlson Strategic Land Solutions
27134A Paseo Espada, Suite 323
San Juan Capistrano, California 92675
April 2022
107
City of Eastvale Page i
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................1
1.1 Background ................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Location and Surrounding Land Uses...................................................................... 2
1.3 Modified Project Site Existing Conditions ................................................................ 2
1.4 Proposed Modifications.............................................................................................. 5
1.5 Prior Environmental Documentation....................................................................... 15
1.6 Basis for an Addendum.............................................................................................. 16
1.7 Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................... 19
1.8 Summary of Findings.................................................................................................. 28
1.9 Cumulative Impacts .................................................................................................... 29 Section 2.0 Environmental Checklist.............................................................30
2.1 Aesthetics ..................................................................................................................... 30
2.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources......................................................................... 34
2.3 Air Quality..................................................................................................................... 37
2.4 Biological Resources .................................................................................................. 47
2.5 Cultural Resources ...................................................................................................... 55
2.6 Energy ........................................................................................................................... 59
2.7 Geology and Soils....................................................................................................... 61
2.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions....................................................................................... 68
2.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials............................................................................ 70
2.10 Hydrology and Water Quality ................................................................................... 78
2.11 Land Use and Planning .............................................................................................. 84
2.12 Mineral Resources....................................................................................................... 88
2.13 Noise ............................................................................................................................. 90
2.14 Population and Housing.......................................................................................... 101
2.15 Public Services ........................................................................................................... 103
2.16 Recreation .................................................................................................................. 106
2.17 Transportation/Traffic............................................................................................... 108
2.18 Tribal Cultural Resources......................................................................................... 115
2.19 Utilities and Service Systems................................................................................... 119
2.20 Wildfire........................................................................................................................ 124
2.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance ...................................................................... 127 Section 3.0 Sources ........................................................................................129 108
City of Eastvale Page ii
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
TABLES
Table 1. Original Leal Master Plan Permitted Development Range................................... 5 Table 2. Buildout Assumptions for the Original Project ....................................................... 5 Table 3. Buildout Assumptions for the Modified Project...................................................... 6 Table 4. Development Comparison between Original Project and Modified Project.... 6 Table 5. Summary of Land Use Acreages................................................................................ 7 Table 6. Modified Project Earthwork Summary...................................................................... 8 Table 7. Impact Comparison Between Original Project and Modified Project ..............17 Table 8. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Checklist ...................................................19 Table 9. Regional Construction Emissions14.........................................................................41 Table 10. Regional Operational Emissions16.........................................................................42 Table 11. Localized Construction Emissions.........................................................................43 Table 12. Vegetation Communities Observed.....................................................................48 Table 13. Existing Storm Drain Design Flow Rate................................................................79 Table 14. Buildout Assumptions for the Original Project...................................................85 Table 15. Buildout Assumptions for the Modified Project ................................................86 Table 16. Land Use Comparison Table .................................................................................86 Table 17. Roadway Noise Impact Analysis (dBA CNEL)1 Existing Year Conditions .......93 Table 18. Project Construction Noise Levels ........................................................................97 Table 19. Construction Vibration Impact Analysis ...............................................................98 Table 20. Modified Project Net Trip Generation Compared to Leal Specific Plan TIA109 Table 21. Comparison of VMT from the Modified Project to the Original Project ......111 Table 22. Project Water Demand .........................................................................................121
FIGURES
Figure 1: Aerial View of Project Site and Surrounding Land Uses .......................................3 Figure 2: Assessor’s Parcel Map.................................................................................................4 Figure 3: TTM 38290....................................................................................................................9 Figure 4: Cut and Fill Map.........................................................................................................10 Figure 5: Airport Land Use Plan Map......................................................................................75
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Leal Master Plan Amendment
Appendix B: Leal Master Plan Amendment Project Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas and Energy Impact Study
Appendix C: Biological Assessment of the Leal Property
Appendix D: Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment Appendix E: Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Appendix F: Environmental Site Assessment
Appendix F.1 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Appendix F.2 Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report Appendix G: Preliminary Hydrology Analysis for Leal Ranch 109
City of Eastvale Page ii
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
Appendix H: Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (PWQMP) for Tentative Map No. 38290
Appendix I: Leal Master Plan Amendment Noise Impact Study Appendix J: Leal Master Plan Amendment Project Traffic Study Appendix K: Sewer System Development Analysis
Appendix L: Water Supply Assessment
110
City of Eastvale Page 1
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
SECTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
On December 13, 2017, the City of Eastvale certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse No. 2015031028) for the 158.6-acre1 Project site, adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for significant but unavoidable impacts, amended the Eastvale General Plan to incorporate the Leal Master Plan (including amending land use policies and the Land Use Map) and voted to adopt the Leal Master Plan and a corresponding change of zone from heavy agriculture (A-2) to Leal Master Plan. On January 10, 2018, the City held second reading and adopted the Leal Master Plan and change of zone to Leal Master Plan. The Leal Master Plan outlined a multistage planning and development process. The first stage included the adoption of the Leal Master Plan, which identified “the project objectives and specific parameters for the design and quality of overall future development of the project site.”2 Stage 2 of the development process was anticipated to focus on “preparing project-wide development criteria and guidelines that are not included in the Master Plan, creating detailed plans for the first phase(s) of development based on the criteria and guidelines included in the Master Plan.”3 The last development phase outlined in the Master Plan consists of the “submittal of specific development projects through the Development Plan Review process established in the Eastvale Zoning Code.”4 The proposed Project is defined in Section 1.4 and is being processed through and consists of an amendment to the Leal Master Plan, Tentative Tract Map (TTM), and Development Plan Review (referred to as the “Modified Project”). The Modified Project represents Stage 2 of the development process outlined in the Leal Master Plan.
The Prior EIR analyzed the Leal Master Plan, which is further described in Tables 1 and 2 below and constitutes the “Original Project.”
Plans for the Modified Project, as well as the Prior EIR, are available for review on the City’s website and in hard copy at:
City of Eastvale City Hall
Contact: Gina Gibson-Williams, Community Development Director 12363 Limonite Avenue, Suite 910
Eastvale, California 91752
Email: [email protected]
1 The Leal Master Plan EIR identifies the size of the project site as 161 acres. Based on detailed engineering, the actual size of the project site is 158.6 acres. 2 Leal Master Plan EIR, December 2017, Project Description Page 2.0-2 3 Leal Master Plan EIR, December 2017, Project Description Page 2.0-2 4 Leal Master Plan EIR, December 2017, Project Description Page 2.0-2 111
City of Eastvale Page 2
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
1.2 Location and Surrounding Land Uses
The Modified Project site encompasses approximately 158.6 acres of former dairy farm in the northern portion of the City of Eastvale. The Modified Project site is bordered by Limonite Avenue on the south, Scholar Way on the west, 58th Street on the north, and Hamner Avenue on the east. The property is addressed as 12741 and 12745 Limonite Avenue, and 12740 58th Street, Eastvale, California. The assessor’s parcel numbers are 164-030-010, 164-030-012, 164-030-013, 164-030-014, 164-030- 024; 164-030-025. Figure 1 shows the location of the Project site and surrounding land uses. Figure 2 shows the Assessor’s Parcel Map.
The Modified Project site is surrounded by the following uses:
South: Residential on the west and Commercial (Cloverdale Marketplace) on the east West: Residential
North: Residential
East: Residential on the north and Commercial (Eastvale Gateway) on the south
1.3 Modified Project Site Existing Conditions
The Modified Project site is a square shaped approximately 158.6-acre flat property.
The site elevation ranges between approximately 683 feet above mean sea level in the northern portion of the site and approximately 660 feet above mean sea level in the southern portion of the site. The Modified Project site has been used previously as a dairy farm, horse ranch, and orchard.
Currently the site is an inactive former dairy farm. Five residential structures exist on the site, as well as a dairy barn, horse barn, and maintenance/repair structure.
Figure 1 also graphically describes the Project location and existing conditions. 112
Legend
Approximate Project Boundary
Aerial View of Project Site and
N.T.S. Surrounding Land Uses
N
Source: Google (2021) Figure 1
Limonite Avenue
Hamner Avenue
58th Street
Scholar Way
113
AV
E
N
U
E
67'
37 481.50
838.50
N89-57-30E
990.68
124.51
59.89 171.70
208.70
1045.12
R.7.W.
R.6.W. N00-02-30W
AV
E
N
U
E
30'
H
A
M
N
E
R
1283.30
1320.30
1319.80
1270.89
1298.83
838.50
51.40 295.56
562
10.97 AC
(#152880 04-25-00)
(#152880 04-25-00)
430 (#152879 04-25-00)
47.01 L=220.11 59'
623.92 123.05
L= 34.69
41.19 LIMONITE 76'
S
U
M
N
E
R
49.25 L=249.63
VALENCIA ST
AVENUE
40.00 AC M/L 33.73 AC
28.20 AC M/L 39.55 AC
265.50
889.90
58TH STREET
163.54
34.59 112.17
52'
7' 50' 119.92
190.46
62.52 117.35 57.69
87.48 40.45 93.61
44.69 66' 129.70
N43-08-17E
L=160.44
64.80 44.27
273.38
N89-54-28E 627.38
33.87 254.94 129.73
160.36
180.69 157.98
63.08 150.27
138.37
35.70 33.43 44.36
83.59 30.10
L=84.05
188.30
PAR 1 PAR 2
PAR 3
PAR 4
PAR 5
PAR 6
PAR 7
1.15 AC
1.32 AC
2.34 AC
N00-05-15W PM 243/054
PM 243/054
( (38 39
(40
(41
(24
(12
(14
(25
(10
(35
(13
(36
(37
164-03
ASSESSOR'S MAP BK164 PG.03
Riverside County, Calif. BDiaz Nov 2017
SEC. 24 T.2S, R.7W
CITY OF EASTVALE
TRA 027-002
134-08
03 Pg 03
Bk 160
Pg 03
Bk 160
Pg 23
Bk 164
Pg 28
Bk 152
Pg 65
Pg
Pg 72
44 Pg 43
Pg
45 Bk 164
Pg 42
Pg 65
Pg
15 Pg
71 Pg 49 Pg Pg 70
22 Bk 160
P Pg 24 g
56 Pg 66
Pg
69 Pg
46 Pg
13 THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES ONLY. NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED FOR THE ACCURACY OF THE DATA SHOWN. ASSESSOR'S PARCEL MAY NOT COMPLY WITH LOCAL LOT-SPLIT OR BUILDING SITE ORDINANCES. 24 19
25 30
©
1 " = 400 '
Legend
Lot Lines
Right-Of-Way
Old Lot Lines
Reference R.O.W
Other Easements
Lease Area
Subdivision Tic Mark
24 Data
MB 9/33 SB, 11/42
RS 52/30, RS 57/61
Map Reference
MB 350/51 - 61 TRACT MAP NO. 30633
PM 243/54 - 55 PARCEL MAP NO. 37031
Date Old Number New Number
4/22/2004 8 13,ST
4/22/2004 9 14,ST
4/22/2004 11 15,ST
6/25/2004 1 16-17
6/25/2004 2,6,17,020-7 18
6/25/2004 18 19,PGS.42-45
6/25/2004 16 PG.2
11/2/2005 7 20,21
11/2/2005 15 22,23
11/2/2005 20,22 24
11/2/2005 21,23 25
12/28/2005 5 26,ST
4/8/2006 26 27,ST
3/5/2007 3 28,29
3/5/2007 4 30,31
3/5/2007 28,30,020-2 32
3/5/2007 29,31 33
11/1/2011 33 PGS.66,67
11/1/2011 32 PGS.67-69
9/23/2014 27 34,PG.72
9/23/2014 34 PGS. 71,72
10/11/2017 19 35-4 1
N.T.S.
N
Source: City of Eastvale (04/20/2022) Figure 2
Assessor’s Parcel Map
114
City of Eastvale Page 5
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
1.4 Proposed Modifications
The proposed changes associated with the Modified Project are summarized herein.
Leal Master Plan Amendment
The Modified Project includes an amendment to the Leal Master Plan, which is included in Appendix A to this Addendum. The Leal Master Plan Amendment includes the following primary changes:
• Development Intensities – The Original Leal Master Plan established the following development intensities.
Table 1. Original Leal Master Plan Permitted Development Range Land Use Type Minimum/Maximum Range
Lifestyle Center 325,000 to 1,300,000 square feet
General Commercial Maximum of 225,000 square feet
Commercial Office Maximum of 920,000 square feet
Hotel Maximum of 450 rooms
Civic Center No minimum/maximum
Medium Density Residential No minimum/maximum
High Density Residential 500 to 660 dwelling units
Other Community Features To be provided as part of the
development of the Project
Source: Leal Master Plan EIR (2017) Table 2.0-2, Page 2.0-4 The Leal Master Plan did not establish a maximum number of dwelling units and no minimum development standards were identified. Therefore, development of the Project site had a wide range of flexibility. Given the wide flexibility, the following land use assumptions were established in the Prior EIR and constitute the Original Project as shown in Table 2.
Table 2. Buildout Assumptions for the Original Project
Land Use
660 multi-family homes (apartments)
1,525,000 square feet of general retail (shopping center) 460,000 square feet of general office
460,000 square feet of medical office
450 hotel rooms
100,000-square-foot civic center
Source: Leal Master Plan EIR (2017) Table 2.0-3, Page 2.0-5 115
City of Eastvale Page 6
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
The Modified Project proposes a land use intensity of 2,500 residential dwellings, 595,000 square feet of commercial uses and a fire station. As planned in the Stage 2 sequencing, the Modified Project continues to provide development flexibility to allow for development to occur in accordance with market conditions as part of Stage 3 planning. While no Stage 3 development plans have been prepared, the 2,500 dwelling units and 595,000 square feet of commercial uses have been allocated as shown in the following table for purposes of this Addendum. It is important to note that the following mix of uses is conceptual and may change during the Stage 3 planning processes. Since development of the site could take many years and each planning area requires a separate Stage 3 planning process, development of the Project site could vary from the assumptions provided in the table below. If changes to these assumptions occur in the future, the City is responsible to evaluate those changes and determine if additional environmental review pursuant to CEQA is required. The Modified Project is defined as the buildout assumptions shown in Table
3. Table 3. Buildout Assumptions for the Modified Project Land Use
1,840 medium density residential (400 single family detached and 1,440 single family attached)
660 high density residential (apartment units)
390,000 square feet of general retail (shopping center) 65,000 square feet of general office
65,000 square feet of medical office
75,000 square feet civic center (City Hall, Library, Police) 12,200 square feet fire station
The following table compares the development assumptions between the Original Project and the Modified Project.
Table 4. Development Comparison between Original Project and Modified Project Land Use Original
Project
Modified
Project
Difference
Medium Density Residential 0 1,840 +1,840 units
High Density Residential 660 660 no change
Retail (Shopping Center) 1,525,000 390,000 -1,135,000 sf General Office 460,000 65,000 -395,000 sf
Medical Office 460,000 65,000 -395,000 sf
Hotel 450 0 - 450 rooms
Civic Center 100,000 75,000 - 25,000 sf
Fire Station 0 12,200 + 12,200 sf
116
City of Eastvale Page 7
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
• Site Plan – the Leal Master Plan Amendment includes a site plan for the entire site, specifying backbone streets, development areas, and backbone parks and open space.
• Development Standards – the Leal Master Plan Amendment includes development standards, such as setbacks, height limits, etc., to guide future development.
• Design Guidelines – the Leal Master Plan Amendment includes modifications to the design guidelines.
A hotel was included as part of the Original Project and is still being contemplated in the commercial area. A hotel is a permitted land use and consistent with the General Plan designation. Hotels generally have a conversion of approximately 400 square feet per hotel room. Therefore, if a hotel were included in future development plans, the square footage of the other commercial uses would need to be reduced. One scenario contemplated includes the removal of the medical and general office and a 50,000 square foot reduction of the retail space. In such scenario the overall daily traffic volumes would be reduced by 496 trips compared to the Modified Project analyzed in this Addendum. The peak hour trips for AM and PM would also be reduced by 83 trips and 158 trips, respectively.
Tentative Tract Map (TTM) 38290
TTM 38290, included as Figure 3, proposes 14 numbered lots and 19 lettered lots over the 158.6 acre Modified Project Site. The 14 numbered lots total approximately 121.54 acres of development area. The 19 lettered lots total approximately 37.04 acres of open space, parks, and streets. The following table provides a summary of approximate land use acreages.
Table 5. Summary of Land Use Acreages
Land Use Acreage (acres)
Development Area 121.54
Streets 22.92
Parks and Open Space 14.12
Total 158.59
TTM 38290 is considered an “A” level tract map. “A” or “B” level map(s) or condominium plan(s) may be prepared for the specific development of each numbered lot. The “B” level mapping would represent Phase 3 of the multistage planning/development process.
117
City of Eastvale Page 8
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
TTM 38290 includes a rough grading plan. An earthwork cut and fill exhibit is included as Figure 4. The following table summarizes the proposed earthwork for the Modified Project.
Table 6. Modified Project Earthwork Summary
Cut (cubic yards) Fill (cubic yards)
Raw Earthwork Volume 436,161 289,574
Pad Over-Ex (after organics removal) 651,540 651,540
Pad Over-Ex Shrinkage 97,730
Paved Area Over-Ex (after organics removal) 41,981 41,981 Paved Area Over-Ex Shrinkage 6,300
Fill Shrinkage 65,420
Total 1,129,682 1,152,545
118
City of Eastvale
SHEET
TENTATIVE TRACT NO.38290
CUT FILL
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 38290
COVER SHEET
NUMBERED LOTS
Lot # S.F. Acres
1 315,892.10 7.252
2 550,731.85 12.643
3 426,869.17 9.800
4 279,624.41 6.419
5 198,540.25 4.558
6 244,324.99 5.609
7 613,599.82 14.086
8 171,451.45 3.936
9 191,384.23 4.394
10 195,395.18 4.486
11 724,736.51 16.638
12 754,749.47 17.327
13 574,268.61 13.183
14 53,083.07 1.219
Total 5,294,651.11 121.548
LETTERED LOTS
Lot # S.F. Acres
A 139,937.69 3.213
B 147,811.51 3.393
C 84,478.50 1.939
D 38,267.77 0.879
E 246,244.32 5.653
F 44,673.74 1.026
G 113,590.68 2.608
H 115,905.65 2.661
I 67,321.01 1.545
J 89,220.27 2.048
K 68,998.58 1.584
L 153,611.43 3.526
M 44,835.28 1.029
N 31,408.46 0.721
O 32,546.77 0.747
P 84,078.57 1.930
Q 46,663.19 1.071
R 42,155.07 0.968
S 21,801.21 0.500
Total 1,613,549.70 37.042
N.T.S.
N
Source: Hunsaker & Associates (04/15/2022) Figure 3
Tentative Tract Map 38290
119
(659) (660)(661) (662) (663) (664)
(665) (666)(667) (668)(669) (670) (671) (672)
(673) (674) (675)
(677) (676) (676)
(676)
(677) (678)
(679) (677)
(661) (662) (663) (664) (665) (666) (667) (668)
(669)
(670)
(675) (673) (677)
(679) (680)
(680)
(679) (679)
(677)
(675)
(682)
(670)
(672)
679 678 677 676 675 674 673 672 671 670 669 668 667 666 665 664 663 662 661 660 659 658 658 667 668 669 670 671672 673 674 675 676
677678 679 680 680 681 682 683
679
678
678
677
678
678
678
678677
677
678
677
679680
681
682
683
683
684
684
684 HAMNER AVE
58TH ST
SCHOLAR WAY
Notes
Leal Ranch
Existing surface is from Inland Aerial flown topo, dated July 29, 2021.
Proposed surface is TTM grading at time of exhibit.
Adjustments for Soils Conditions
Soil adjustments have been calculated based on LGC soils report titled "Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation Including Near Surface Organic Content for the Proposed Approximately 160-Acre Leal Property, City of Eastvale, California", dated June 21, 2021.
Top Organics Remove and Dispose
149.68 ac CUT FILL
Net Volume 22,863 CYS
Volume
SHORT
TTM vs Flown Topo
Adjustments Made:
1) Top 1 ft of soil, plus deeper areas identified on Fig 2, to be removed and disposed off site.
2) Pad areas to be cut and re-compacted to 5 ft below EG, or 3 ft below FG, whichever is deeper.
3) Paved areas to be cut and re-compacted to 2 ft below EG, or 1 ft below FG, whichever is deeper.
4) Road undercut is 10 inches.
5) 10% to 15% shrinkage on cut. 15% used for numbers below.
Pad Over-Ex 651,540 CYS 651,540 CYS
(after Organics Removal)
Paved Area Over-Ex 41,981 CYS 41,981 CYS
(after Organics Removal)
Pad Over-Ex Shrinkage 97,730 CYS
Paved Area Over-Ex Shrinkage 6,300 CYS
Fill Shrinkage 65,420 CYS
Total 1,129,682 CYS 1,152,545 CYS
Raw Volume 436,161 CYS 289,574 CYS
354,400 CYS
Cut and Fill elevation values shown are after organics have been removed.
Lower site 0.09 ft to achieve theoretical balance.
Organics Removal Export
EXPORT
N.T.S. N
Source: Hunsaker & Associates (11/01/2021) Figure 4
Cut and Fill Map
120
City of Eastvale Page 11
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
The net volume results in 22,863 cubic yards (cy) short, requiring import of 22,863 cy.
The Project site also has 354,400 cy of organics from dairy operations that must be removed. In summary the Modified Project requires:
• 22,863 cy of import
• 354,400 cy of export
TTM 38290 specifies proposed street sections for internal and external streets. Street widening will occur on Limonite Avenue and Hamner Avenue. Both streets are designed with three travel lanes, a median, a bicycle lane, and landscaping with a meandering trail. The perimeter street improvements require dedication of right-ofway and easements. No new traffic signals are proposed on surrounding streets.
The Modified Project includes the provision of water quality and detention facilities.
The Project site drains from north to southwest, with a storm drain connection in Limonite near the western boundary of the Project site. The water quality and detention facilities are primarily proposed as underground storage and treatment facilities. The Project site does not have infiltration rates high enough to infiltrate storm water, therefore, the storm flows must be treated and released. During final engineering surface treatment areas, such as bioswales, may be incorporated into the final design.
In addition to the description of the Modified Project above, several standard conditions, regulatory requirements, and commitments made by the Modified Project have been included herein and are referred to as Project Design Features (PDFs). The PDFs for the Modified Project include:
AQ PDF-1 A Construction Management Plan will be prepared that includes the requirements for Air Quality mitigation measures as specified in the Addendum to be submitted to the City of Eastvale for all phases of construction.
AQ PDF-2 The Project commits to following the standard South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) rules and requirements with regards to fugitive dust control, which includes, but are not limited to the following:
1. All active construction areas shall be watered two (2) times daily.
2. Speed on unpaved roads shall be reduced to less than 15 mph.
3. Any visible dirt deposition on any public roadway shall be swept or washed at the site access points within 30 minutes.
4. Any on-site stockpiles of debris, dirt or other dusty material shall be covered or watered twice daily.
121
City of Eastvale Page 12
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
5. All operations on any unpaved surface shall be suspended if winds exceed 15 mph.
6. Access points shall be washed or swept daily.
7. Construction sites shall be sandbagged for erosion control.
8. Apply nontoxic chemical soil stabilizers according to manufacturers’ specifications to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for 10 days or more).
9. Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, and maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard space in accordance with the requirements of California Vehicle Code (CVC) section 23114.
10. Pave or gravel construction access roads at least 100 feet onto the site from the main road and use gravel aprons at truck exits.
11. Replace the ground cover of disturbed areas as quickly possible.
12. A fugitive dust control plan should be prepared and submitted to SCAQMD prior to the start of construction.
AQ PDF-3 All construction equipment, to the extent feasible, will have Tier 4 low emission “clean diesel” engines (Original Equipment Manufacturer(OEM) or retrofit) that include diesel oxidation catalysts and diesel particulate filters that meet the latest California Air Resource Board (CARB) best available control technology.
AQ PDF-4 Construction equipment will be maintained in proper tune.
AQ PDF-5 All construction vehicles will be prohibited from excessive idling.
Excessive idling is defined as five (5) minutes or longer.
AQ PDF-6 The Project will minimize the simultaneous operation of multiple construction equipment units, to the maximum extent feasible.
AQ PDF-7 The use of heavy construction equipment and earthmoving activity will be suspended during Air Alerts when the Air Quality Index reaches the “Unhealthy” level.
AQ PDF-8 The Project will establish an electricity supply to the construction site and use electric powered equipment instead of diesel-powered equipment or generators, where feasible.
122
City of Eastvale Page 13
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
AQ PDF-9 Staging areas for the construction equipment will be located as distant as possible from adjacent residential homes.
AQ PDF-10 To the extent possible, the Project will use haul trucks with on-road engines instead of off-road engines for on-site hauling.
GEO PDF-1 The Project will implement the recommendations included in the geotechnical report, “Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation Including Near Surface Organic Content for the Proposed Approximately 160‐Acre “Leal” Property, City of Eastvale, California,” prepared by LGC Geotechnical, Inc. and dated June 21, 2021.
NOI PDF-1 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Project will demonstrate that building construction will achieve the minimum interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL for all residential units located along arterial roadways and/or adjacent to commercial uses, per the California Building Standards Code. The following noise control measures may be required for dwelling units located near adjacent roadways:
• Install sound barriers (masonry walls or walls with earth berms) between residences and noise sources.
• Install double-paned or upgraded sound transmission class (STC) sound rated windows.
• Provide sound insulating exterior walls and roofing systems. • Locate and/or design attic vents to minimize sound propagation into each home.
• Provide forced-air ventilation systems.
• Provide the necessary setbacks for dwelling units fronting along major roadways.
NOI PDF-2 The Project will comply with California Title 24 building insulation requirements for exterior walls, roofs and common separating assemblies (e.g. floor/ceiling assemblies and demising walls).
NOI PDF-3 For proper acoustical performance, all exterior windows, doors, and sliding glass doors will have a positive seal and leaks/cracks must be kept to a minimum.
NOI PDF-4 The final building plans will ensure that heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) units are not located within an area of the Project site that would contribute to a noise level exceedance at any adjacent property line, per the City of Eastvale Municipal Code requirements. To meet the City’s noise standards the following measures should be followed:
123
City of Eastvale Page 14
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
• All HVAC equipment shall be shielded or enclosed from the line of sight of adjacent residential uses.
• The combined noise level of all units operating simultaneously shall not exceed the City of Eastvale daytime and nighttime exterior standards at the nearest surrounding property lines.
NOI PDF-5 Future residents, property management personnel, and commercial tenants will be required to comply with the City of Eastvale Municipal Code Noise Regulations, Chapter 8.52, which specify that no person shall create loud, unnecessary, or unusual noise that disturbs the peace or quiet of any neighborhood, or that causes discomfort or annoyance to any person of normal sensitiveness.
To help ensure compliance with the City’s Noise Regulations, the following recommendations are provided:
• Deliveries, loading and unloading activities, and trash pick-up hours should be limited to daytime hours only (8 a.m. – 10 p.m.). • Limit engine idling time for all delivery vehicles and moving trucks to 5 minutes or less.
NOI PDF-6 The Project will prepare a construction management plan and obtain a construction work permit from the City of Eastvale prior to starting construction. The construction management plan will ensure all contractors implement construction best management practices to reduce construction noise levels. Examples of best management practices may include the following:
• All construction equipment shall be equipped with muffles and other suitable noise attenuation devices (e.g., engine shields). • Grading and construction contractors shall use quieter equipment as opposed to noisier equipment (such as rubber-tired equipment rather than track equipment), to the maximum extent feasible. • If feasible, electric hook-ups shall be provided to avoid the use of generators. If electric service is determined to be infeasible for the site, only whisper-quiet generators shall be used (i.e., inverter generators capable of providing variable load.
• Use electric air compressors and similar power tools rather than diesel equipment, where feasible.
• Locate staging area, generators and stationary construction equipment as far from the adjacent residential homes as feasible. • Construction-related equipment, including heavy-duty equipment, motor vehicles, and portable equipment, shall be turned off when not in use for more than 5 minutes.
124
City of Eastvale Page 15
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
• Provide notifications and signage in readily visible locations along the perimeter of construction sites that indicate the dates and duration of construction activities, as well as provide a telephone number where neighbors can enquire about the construction process and register complaints to a designated construction noise disturbance coordinator.
• Construction activities shall not take place between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. during the months of June through September and 6:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. during the months of October through May.
NOI PDF-7 The Project will not include pile driving or blasting activities during construction. If impact pile driving or blasting is required, a follow-up noise and vibration impact assessment will be conducted prior to start of any activity.
1.5 Prior Environmental Documentation
On December 13, 2017, the City of Eastvale certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse No. 2015031028) for the 158.6-acre5 Project site, adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for significant but unavoidable impacts, amended the Eastvale General Plan to incorporate the Leal Master Plan (including amending land use policies and the Land Use Map) and voted to adopt the Leal Master Plan and a corresponding change of zone from heavy agriculture (A-2) to Leal Master Plan. On January 10, 2018, the City held a second reading and adopted the Leal Master Plan and change of zone to Leal Master Plan.
The Prior EIR included two Project alternatives, as follows:
• Alternative 1: No Project
Alternative 1 assumed development consistent with the existing General Plan6land use designations, which were Business Park, Medium Density Residential, and High Density Residential.
• Alternative 2: Market Probable Scenario
Alternative 2, Market Probable Scenario, assumes a lower intensity buildout scenario compared to the Original Project. The Market Probable Scenario assumes the same 5 The Leal Master Plan EIR identifies the size of the project site as 161 acres. Based on detailed engineering, the actual size of the project site is 158.6 acres. 6 This is a reference from the Prior EIR to the existing General Plan prior to the adoption of the General Plan Amendment which changed the land use designation on the Project site to Leal Property Policy Area.
125
City of Eastvale Page 16
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
types of land uses as the Original Project, but with the non-residential uses developed at a lower intensity.
The Leal Master Plan EIR determined the Original Project would cause six (6) significant and unavoidable impacts within the following three (3) topic areas:
• Transportation / Traffic
• Air Quality
• Noise
The City has determined, for reasons specified below, that the revisions proposed as part of the Modified Project would not result in any new or more significant environmental impacts, and thus qualify for an Addendum. The prior environmental documentation, Leal Master Plan Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2015031028) is referred to as “Prior EIR” or “EIR” and is available at the City of Eastvale City Hall; contact Gina Gibson-Williams, Community Development Director, at 12363 Limonite Avenue, Suite 910, Eastvale, California 91752.
1.6 Basis for an Addendum
Prior to approval of subsequent actions that constitute a “project” under CEQA, the City is required to determine whether the environmental effects of such actions are within the scope of prior environmental analysis, or whether additional environmental analysis is required. That decision is influenced by whether the subsequent actions require major revisions to the EIR due to new significant impacts or an increase the severity of previously identified significant impacts.
Under CEQA, the lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously-certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary to the prior EIR, but none of the conditions calling for preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR have occurred (Public Resources Code § 21166; CEQA Guidelines §§ 15162, 15163, 15164). Once an EIR has been certified, no supplement or subsequent EIR shall be prepared unless the lead agency or responsible agency determines that one of the following conditions has been met:
(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project, or substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken, which require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects [CEQA Guidelines § 15162(a)(1)&(2)]; (2) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete, shows any of the following:
126
City of Eastvale Page 17
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
a) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR;
b) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
c) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
d) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative [CEQA Guidelines § 15162(a)(3)].
The City has evaluated the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Modified Project against the criteria set forth in CEQA Guidelines §§ 15162, 15163, 15164, and 15168(c). The City, acting as the Lead Agency, has determined that substantial evidence throughout this Addendum supports the determination that the Modified Project would not have any reasonably foreseeable environmental consequences beyond that analyzed in the Prior EIR and its associated administrative record, that none of the conditions listed above trigging preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR apply and that an Addendum to the Leal Master Plan Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2015031028) is appropriate for the proposed Modified Project and related entitlements, and fully complies with CEQA, as described in Public Resources Code section 21166 and the CEQA Guidelines. The Original EIR was prepared as a Program EIR and as such was evaluated pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15168(c). The Lead Agency has determined that the effects of the later activity, in this case the Modified Project, were examined in the program EIR (Original EIR) and pursuant to Section 15162 no subsequent EIR is required.
Table 7 summarizes the City’s determination that none of the conditions listed above trigging preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR apply. The following table provides a summary comparison of impacts for the Original Project and the Modified Project. The summary of comparative impacts shows both construction and operations differences.
Table 7. Impact Comparison Between Original Project and Modified Project Environmental Issue Area Original Project
Modified Project1
Construction Operations
Aesthetics Less than Significant Impact with
Mitigation Similar Similar
127
City of Eastvale Page 18
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
Environmental Issue Area Original Project
Modified Project1
Construction Operations
Agriculture and Forestry
Resources
Less than Significant Impact Similar Similar
Air Quality Significant and Unavoidable Impact Similar Reduced Biological Resources Less than Significant Impact with
Mitigation Similar Similar
Cultural Resources Less than Significant Impact with
Mitigation Similar Similar
Energy Less than Significant Impact Similar Reduced
Geology and Soils Less than Significant Impact Similar Similar Greenhouse Gas Emissions Less than Significant Impact Similar Reduced Hazards and Hazardous
Waste
Less than Significant Impact with
Mitigation Similar Similar
Hydrology and Water Quality Less than Significant Impact Similar Similar Land Use and Planning Less than Significant Impact Similar Similar Mineral Resources Less than Significant Impact Similar Similar Noise Significant and Unavoidable Impact Similar Reduced Population and Housing Less than Significant Impact Similar Similar Public Services Less than Significant Impact
Similar Similar
Recreation Less than Significant Impact Similar Similar Transportation and Traffic Significant and Unavoidable Impact Similar Reduced Tribal Cultural Resources Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Similar Similar
Utilities and Service Systems Less than Significant Impact Similar Similar Wildfire Less than Significant Impact Similar Similar
1 This table provides a qualitative comparison of impacts between the Original and Modified Projects, including construction and operations for the Modified Project. The following Environmental Checklist in Section 2.0 of this Addendum goes into greater detail and justification of these general conclusions presented in this table.
An addendum does not need to be circulated for public review, but rather can be attached to the Prior EIR (CEQA Guidelines § 15164(c)). The City will consider this Addendum and will make a decision regarding the Modified Project [CEQA Guidelines §15164(d)].
128
City of Eastvale Page 19
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
1.7 Mitigation Measures
The City has determined that no new mitigation measures7 are required, as documented in detail in Section 2.0 below. The Prior EIR included mitigation measures for development of the Modified Project site to reduce impacts to a level of less than significant. Where noted in Section 2.0 and the table below, certain mitigation measures have been satisfied as part of this Addendum and are shown in light grey format. One mitigation measure has been revised to clarify the results of further analysis. The other measures remain in place and are listed below.
Table 8. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Checklist
Aesthetics, Light, and Glare
MM 3.5.1 Nonglare glass shall be used in all nonresidential buildings to minimize and reduce impacts from glare. Buildings that are allowed to use semi-reflective glass must be oriented so that the reflection of sunlight is minimized. Types of nonglare glass shall be specified on final development plans.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to approval of final development plans Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department Air Quality
MM 3.3.5a A site-specific air toxics pollutant analysis shall be conducted in accordance with the SCAQMD (2008) Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology for construction activities. If SCAQMD screening thresholds would be exceeded, air toxic reduction measures shall be identified in order to reduce potential impacts to a level that is less than significant. If it is the case that emissions remain in excess of SCAQMD localized significance thresholds despite the imposition of air toxic reduction measures, projectspecific construction-related dispersion modeling acceptable to the SCAQMD shall be used to identify potential toxic air contaminant impacts, including diesel particulate matter. If SCAQMD risk thresholds would be exceeded, additional measures shall be identified in the air toxics analysis to address potential impacts and shall be based on site-specific information such as the distance to the nearest sensitive receptors, project site plan details, and construction schedule. The City shall ensure that construction contracts include all identified measures and that the measures reduce the health risk below SCAQMD risk thresholds.
7 A statement of “No New Mitigation” as used in this Addendum means that there is no new mitigation required due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.
129
City of Eastvale Page 20
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
Construction-generated air toxics pollutant mitigation measures may include but not be limited to:
1. Limiting the amount of acreage to be graded in a single day.
2. Restricting intensive equipment usage and intensive ground disturbance to hours outside of hours typically spent at home.
3. Notifying affected sensitive receptors one week prior to commencing on-site construction so that any necessary precautions (such as rescheduling or relocating outdoor activities) can be implemented.
The written notification shall include the name and telephone number of the individual empowered to manage construction of the project. In the event complaints are received, the individual empowered to manage construction shall respond to the complaint within 24 hours.
The response shall include identification of measures being taken by the project construction contractor to reduce construction-related air pollutants. Such measures may include but are not limited to the relocation of equipment or the rescheduling of construction outside of hours typically spent at home.
Timing/Implementation: The site-specific air toxics pollutant analysis and any necessary modeling shall be completed prior to
grading permit issuance, and measures
implemented during construction activities
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning, Building and Safety, or Public Works Departments
MM 3.3.5b A site-specific air toxics pollutant analysis shall be conducted in accordance with the SCAQMD (2008) Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology for operational activities. If SCAQMD screening thresholds would be exceeded, air toxic reduction measures shall be identified in order to reduce potential impacts to a level that is less than significant. If it is the case that emissions remain in excess of SCAQMD localized significance thresholds despite the imposition of air toxic reduction measures, projectspecific operations-related dispersion modeling acceptable to the SCAQMD shall be used to identify potential toxic air contaminant impacts, including diesel particulate matter generated by heavy-duty haul trucks. If SCAQMD risk thresholds would be exceeded, additional mitigation measures shall be identified in the air toxics analysis to address potential impacts and shall be based on site-specific information such as the distance to the nearest sensitive receptors, project site plan details, and merchandise delivery schedule. The City shall ensure that operations include all identified measures and that the measures reduce the health risk below SCAQMD risk thresholds. Operations-generated air toxic pollutant mitigation measures may include but not be limited to:
1. Redesigning the project site plan to locate proposed loading dock facilities as far from sensitive receptors as possible.
2. Posting signage stating the State-mandated prohibition on all project trucks idling in excess of 5 minutes under the Heavy-Duty Vehicle 130
City of Eastvale Page 21
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
Idling Emission Reduction Program.
3. Restricting the number of daily heavy-duty haul truck deliveries.
Timing/Implementation: The site-specific air toxics pollutant analysis and any necessary modeling shall be completed prior to
grading permit issuance, and measures
implemented during construction activities
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning, Building and Safety, or Public
Biological Resources
MSHCP
Standard
Conditions
Note: The following discussion highlights the requirements of the MSHCP as they apply to the proposed project. Because the MSHCP has been adopted by the City, it is not necessary to adopt a mitigation measure to enforce its provisions.
The MSHCP requires that projects pay a mitigation fee, perform speciesspecific habitat assessments and surveys, and be reviewed for consistency with Section 6.1.2–Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool, Section 6.1.3–Protection of Narrow Endemic Plan Species, Section 6.3.2–Additional Survey Needs and Procedures, and Section
6.1.4–Guidelines Pertaining to the Urban/Wildlands Interface of the MSHCP.
The following requirements of the MSHCP apply to the proposed project and will be required of all subsequent development plans and/or projects within the Leal Master Plan area:
A. The project applicant shall submit fees to the City in accordance with the requirements of the MSHCP Mitigation Fee Ordinance (Chapter
4.62 of the City of Eastvale Municipal Code).
B. The project applicant shall assess the proposed project’s consistency with Section 6.1.2, Section 6.1.3, Section 6.3.2, and Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP.
C. A qualified biologist shall conduct a burrowing owl habitat assessment. If needed, focused surveys and preconstruction surveys shall be conducted, as well as appropriate avoidance and minimization (Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP).
D. A qualified biologist shall conduct habitat assessments for the required Narrow Endemic Plant Species. If needed, focused surveys and shall be conducted, as well as appropriate avoidance and minimization (Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP).
E. A qualified biologist shall conduct a habitat assessment for Delhi sands flower-loving fly in areas underlain by Delhi soil series (Speciesspecific Objective 1B).
As noted above, because the City has adopted the MSHCP and enforces its provisions, these requirements do not need to be included as mitigation measures.
131
City of Eastvale Page 22
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
MM 3.7.1 All construction and clearing activities shall be conducted outside of the avian nesting season (January 15–August 31), when feasible. If clearing and/or construction activities occur during the nesting season, preconstruction surveys for nesting raptors, special-status resident birds, and other migratory birds protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act shall be conducted by a qualified biologist, up to 3 days before initiation of construction activities. The qualified biologist shall survey the construction zone and a 250-foot radius surrounding the construction zone to determine whether the activities taking place have the potential to disturb or otherwise harm nesting birds.
If an active nest is located within 100 feet (250 feet for raptors) of construction activities, the project applicant shall establish an exclusion zone (no ingress of personnel or equipment at a minimum radius of 100 feet or 250 feet, as appropriate, around the nest). Alternative exclusion zones may be established through consultation with the CDFW and the USFWS, as necessary. The City shall be notified if altered exclusions zones widths are authorized by these agencies prior to the initiation of work. The exclusion zones shall remain in force until all young have fledged.
Timing/Implementation: Requirements shall be incorporated into all rough and/or precise grading plan documents.
The project applicant’s construction inspector
shall monitor to ensure that measures are
implemented during construction.
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department MM 3.7.2 Prior to breaking ground, a qualified biologist shall be retained to determine whether potentially jurisdictional waters are present. If potentially jurisdictional features are identified, the project applicant shall submit a preliminary jurisdictional determination to the US Army Corps of Engineers for verification. The verified delineation will be submitted to the City for its records.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to approval of grading permits Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department MM 3.7.3 Projects shall result in no net loss of sensitive habitats, riparian vegetation, and/or federally protected waters through impact avoidance, impact minimization, and/or compensatory mitigation, as determined in Clean Water Act Section 404 and 401 permits and/or a 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement. Evidence of compliance with this mitigation measure shall be provided to the City prior to approval of each individual grading permit.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to approval of grading permits Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department. 132
City of Eastvale Page 23
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
Cultural Resources
MM 3.8.1 A detailed cultural resources field survey of the subject property shall be conducted prior to approval of the project. The cultural resources field survey shall identify any cultural resource finds and will set out measures to mitigate any impacts to any significant resources as defined by CEQA, the California Register of Historical Resources, and/or the National Historic Preservation Act.
Mitigation methods to be employed include but are not limited to the following:
• Redesign of the development project to avoid the resource. The resource site shall be deeded to the City or a nonprofit agency to be approved by the City for maintenance of the site.
• If avoidance is determined to be infeasible by the City, the resource shall be mapped, stabilized, and capped pursuant to appropriate standards.
• If capping is determined to be infeasible by the City, the resource shall be excavated and recorded to appropriate standards.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to approval of development plan or project Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department MM 3.8.2 If cultural resources (i.e., prehistoric sites, historic sites, and isolated artifacts) are discovered during grading or construction activities in the project area, work shall be halted immediately within 50 feet of the discovery, the City Planning Department shall be notified, and a professional archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards in archaeology and/or history shall be retained to determine the significance of the discovery.
The City shall consider mitigation recommendations presented by a professional archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards in archaeology and/or history for any unanticipated discoveries. The City and the project applicant of the site where the discovery is made shall consult and agree on implementation of a measure or measures that the City deems feasible. Such measures may include avoidance, preservation in place, excavation, documentation, curation, data recovery, or other appropriate measures. The project applicant shall be required to implement any mitigation necessary for the protection of cultural resources.
Timing/Implementation: As a condition of project approval and implemented during grading and/or construction
activities
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department MM 3.8.3 If human remains are discovered during any ground-disturbing activities in the project area, all work shall be halted immediately within 50 feet of the discovery, the City Planning Department shall be notified, and the Riverside 133
City of Eastvale Page 24
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
County Coroner must be notified per California Public Resources Code Section 7050.5 and California Health and Safety Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission, and the procedures outlined in CEQA Section 15064.5(d) and (e) shall be followed.
Timing/Implementation: As a condition of project approval and implemented during grading and/or construction
activities
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department MM 3.8.4 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a certified professional paleontologist will be retained by the developer to provide professional paleontological services, which will include survey, education of construction workers, onsite construction monitoring, appropriate recovery, and reporting.
A paleontological monitor shall be present during ground disturbing activities in the eastern half of the Project. The monitor shall work under the direct supervision of a qualified paleontologist (B.S./B.A. in geology, or related discipline with an emphasis in paleontology and demonstrated competence in paleontological research, fieldwork, reporting, and curation).
1. The qualified paleontologist shall be on-site at the pre-construction meeting to discuss monitoring protocols.
2. The paleontological monitor shall be present full-time during ground disturbance in the eastern half of the Project, including but not limited to grading, trenching, utilities, and offsite easements. If, after excavation begins, the qualified paleontologist determines that the sediments are not likely to produce fossil resources, monitoring efforts shall be reduced.
3. The monitor shall be empowered to temporarily halt or redirect grading efforts if paleontological resources are discovered.
4. In the event of a paleontological discovery the monitor shall flag the area and notify the construction crew immediately. No further disturbance in the flagged area shall occur until the qualified paleontologist has cleared the area.
5. In consultation with the qualified paleontologist the monitor shall quickly assess the nature and significance of the find. If the specimen is not significant it shall be quickly mapped, documented, removed, and the area cleared.
6. If the discovery is significant the qualified paleontologist shall notify the CLIENT and CITY immediately.
7. In consultation with the CLIENT and CITY the qualified paleontologist 134
City of Eastvale Page 25
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
shall develop a plan of mitigation which will likely include full-time monitoring, salvage excavation, scientific removal of the find, removal of sediment from around the specimen (in the laboratory), research to identify and categorize the find, curation of the find in a local qualified repository, and preparation of a report summarizing the find.
For the remaining portions of the Project site, if If any paleontological resources (fossils) are discovered during grading or construction activities in the project area, work shall be halted immediately within 50 feet of the discovery, and the City Planning Department shall be immediately notified. At that time, the City will coordinate any necessary investigation of the discovery with a qualified paleontologist.
The City shall consider the mitigation recommendations of the qualified paleontologist for any unanticipated discoveries of paleontological resources.
The City and the project applicant shall consult and agree on implementation of a measure or measures that the City deems feasible and appropriate. Such measures may include avoidance, preservation in place, excavation, documentation, curation, data recovery, or other appropriate measures. The project applicant shall be required to implement any mitigation necessary for the protection of paleontological resources.8
Timing/Implementation: As a condition of project approval and implemented during grading and/or construction
activities
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department Hazards and Hazardous Materials
MM 3.10.2a Asbestos. Prior to the issuance of any permit for the demolition or alteration of existing structure(s), a letter shall be provided to the Planning Department from a qualified asbestos abatement consultant indicating that no asbestoscontaining materials (ACM) are present in the building. If ACMs are found to be present, they will need to be abated in compliance with the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s Rule 1403 and all other applicable state and federal rules and regulations.
Lead Paint. Prior to issuance of any permit for the demolition or alteration of 8 The eastern portion of the Project site has a higher potential for paleontological resources than the remainder of the site. Therefore, paleontological monitoring in the eastern portion of the site is required during ground disturbance. The Prior EIR included Mitigation Measure MM 3.8.4, which requires that a qualified paleontologist evaluate any paleontological discoveries during grading. The potential for paleontological discoveries has not changed since certification of the Prior EIR and the limits of disturbance have remained the same. This mitigation measure is being revised in this Addendum to require a qualified paleontologist monitor grading activities on the eastern portion of the site, which is more efficient for grading activities, instead of the requirement to call a monitor to the site to evaluate paleontological resources if found during grading. 135
City of Eastvale Page 26
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
the existing structure(s), a lead-based paint survey shall be performed to the written satisfaction of the Eastvale Building Safety and Inspection Department. Should lead-based paint materials be identified, standard handling and disposal practices shall be implemented pursuant to OSHA regulations.
Polychlorinated Biphenyls. Prior to issuance of a demolition permit, a polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) abatement contractor shall conduct a survey of the project site to identify and assist with compliance with applicable state and federal rules and regulations governing PCB removal and disposal.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to the issuance of demolition permit Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Building and Planning Departments
MM 3.10.2b Prior to the issuance of any individual grading permit, a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) shall be conducted to determine the potential for contaminated soil or groundwater on the site. If the Phase I ESA determines that the potential exists for contaminated soil or groundwater onsite, the project applicant shall conduct a Phase II ESA and shall follow its recommendations to remediate any potentially contaminated soil or groundwater. On-site contaminants must be addressed to the satisfaction of either Cal/EPA or the Riverside County Waste Management Department, with their approval of completion of activities/remedial action plans (RAP) submitted to the Eastvale Department of Building and Construction prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to issuance of individual grading permit Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Building and Planning Departments
MM 3.10.2c All trash and debris observed on-site shall be removed prior to construction activities and disposed of at a landfill or approved dumpsite.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to construction activities Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Building and Planning Departments
Noise
MM 3.6.1 An acoustical assessment shall be prepared that evaluates potential environmental noise impacts associated with the proposed project. Where the acoustical analysis determines that noise levels would exceed applicable City noise standards, noise reduction measures shall be identified and included in the project.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to approval of development plan or project Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department 136
City of Eastvale Page 27
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
MM 3.6.2 A vibration assessment shall be prepared for construction projects that would involve the use of major vibration-generating equipment (e.g., pile drivers, vibratory rollers) within 200 feet of existing structures. Measures to reduce ground vibration levels shall be identified for any potential vibration impacts exceeding a vibration threshold of 0.2 in/sec ppv.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to approval of development plan or project Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department MM 3.6.3 A construction-related noise mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit. The plan shall depict the location of construction equipment and specify how the noise from this equipment will be mitigated during construction of the project.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to issuance of grading permit Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department MM 3.6.4 The following mitigation measures shall be implemented and specified on all project construction plans:
a) Clearing and construction activities shall be conducted outside of 6:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. during the months of June through September, and outside of 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. during the months of October through May (Municipal Code Chapter 8.52, Noise Regulation).
b) All construction equipment shall be kept properly tuned and use noise reduction features (e.g., mufflers and engine shrouds) that are no less effective than those originally installed by the manufacturer. c) Construction equipment staging areas shall be centrally located on the project site or located at the farthest distance possible from nearby residential land uses.
d) All motorized construction equipment and vehicles shall be turned off when not in use.
Timing/Implementation: During construction activities, noted on all project construction plans
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department Transportation
MM 3.2.1a Fair Share of funding shall be paid for widening Limonite Avenue along the project frontage from two to three lanes in each direction. Funding shall be determined and paid via the Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). Project plans and/or phasing shall establish the timing of this improvement to ensure it is in place prior to LOS D operations and consistent with the Master Plan’s infrastructure phasing provisions.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to approval of development plan or project Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department 137
City of Eastvale Page 28
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
MM 3.2.1b A focused traffic study shall be prepared that demonstrates the project’s consistency with the transportation impact assessment (TIA) for the Leal Master Plan prepared by Fehr & Peers (2015). The traffic study shall assess the following:
• Parking;
• Site access and on-site circulation;
• Interaction of driveways with adjacent intersections (if appropriate); • Impacts on local intersections;
• Impacts to pedestrian, transit, and bicycle facilities; and • Trip generation monitoring study to ensure that, as land develops in the Leal Master Plan area, the total development generates traffic at or below the levels assumed in this Draft EIR.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to approval of development plan or project Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department MM 3.2.1c Hamner Avenue shall be widened between Limonite Avenue and Bellegrave Avenue to three lanes in each direction either directly or through fair-share funding as determined by infrastructure and/or facility financing plans approved for the Leal Master Plan. Project plans and/or phasing shall establish the timing of this improvement to ensure it is in place prior to LOS F operations and consistent with infrastructure phasing provisions established as part of Master Plan implementation.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to approval of development plan or project Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department Source: Final Environmental Impact Report Leal Master Plan EIR SCH No. 2015031028, July 2015.
1.8 Summary of Findings
The Prior EIR concluded impacts from the Original Project would result in the following significant unavoidable impacts:
• Transportation / Traffic
• Air Quality
• Noise
The City of Eastvale has determined that none of the conditions in Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code or Sections 15162, 15163 15164, and 15168 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for preparation of a subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report have occurred. In accordance with the analysis presented in Section 2.0, and pursuant to Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code and Section 15162, 15164, 15168, and 15183 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Eastvale has determined that:
138
City of Eastvale Page 29
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
1) The Modified Project does not propose substantial changes that would require major revisions to the previously certified EIR (Prior EIR) due to new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant environmental effects; and
2) No substantial changes in circumstances have occurred that require major revisions to the previously certified EIR (Prior EIR) due to new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and
3) No new information of substantial importance as described in Section 15162 (a)(3) has been identified that shows any of the following: a) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Prior EIR; b) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the Prior EIR; c) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or d) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Prior EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. 4) The Original EIR was prepared as a Program EIR and as such was evaluated pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15168(c). The Lead Agency has determined that the effects of the later activity, in this case the Modified Project, were examined in the program EIR (Original EIR) and pursuant to Section 15162 no subsequent EIR is required.
1.9 Cumulative Impacts
The Modified Project would not change the permitted land uses, limits of disturbance or location of the Project boundary, extent of construction activities, or increase the intensity of development. The most intense short-term construction impacts entail rough grading. Since the limits of grading and the remedial grading requirements based on existing geologic conditions would remain as analyzed for the Original Project, short-term construction impacts for the Modified Project would be the same or less than the Original Project. For this reason, no new or greater cumulative impacts associated with construction activities would occur from the Modified Project. Since the Modified Project reduces the intensity of development by reducing the amount of trip generation, the long-term operational impacts associated with the Modified Project would be the same or less than analyzed in the Prior EIR and no new or greater cumulative impacts associated with operational activities would occur from the Modified Project.
Therefore, the Modified Project would not cause new or increased cumulative impacts. 139
City of Eastvale Page 30
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
SECTION 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
The following is an analysis of the topical categories listed in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. It should be noted that the topical categories in Appendix G have changed since the certification of the Prior EIR. For example, there are new sections for Tribal Cultural Resources, Energy, and Wildfire; the question for paleontological impacts has moved to the geology and soils category; and many categories have revised wording of the significance questions. This Addendum is based on the updated version of Appendix G to provide current analysis. Additionally, the findings for each topical category have been revised to be consistent with subsequent review.
The findings are “New Potentially Significant Impact,” “New Mitigation is Required,” “No New Impact/No Impact,” and “Reduced Impact.” A finding of “New Mitigation is Required” means that the project has a new potentially significant impact on the environment or a substantially more severe impact than analyzed in the previously approved or certified CEQA document and that new mitigation is required to address the new or substantially more severe significant impact.
2.1 Aesthetics
Issues:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation
is Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
AESTHETICS. Except as provided in Public
Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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 affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
140
City of Eastvale Page 31
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
Discussion: The Prior EIR determined the Original Project would cause a permanent substantial change in the existing visual character of the Project site from dairy/agricultural to developed uses, but that altering the existing visual character of the site would not necessarily degrade it, as the surrounding area is similarly developed. The Modified Project would also change the visual character of the site from dairy farm to developed uses. While the Modified Project proposes to change the mix and intensity of uses compared to the Original Project, the overall result remains the same that the character of the site would change from dairy farm to a mix of residential and commercial development.
The proposed changes associated with the Modified Project would not change the conclusions in the Prior EIR as there is no new potentially significant impact and previously identified significant impacts are not substantially more severe. The Modified Project would not cause new or increased impacts and impacts are less than significant.
a, b) The Prior EIR determined the Project site does not constitute a scenic vista and is not located near a scenic highway. Furthermore, there are no designated scenic vistas identified in the Eastvale General Plan. The Santa Ana River is identified as a scenic resource; however, the Project site is approximately two miles north of the Santa Ana River. The area surrounding the Project site is currently developed with a mix of residential and commercial uses, similar to the Modified Project.
Therefore, the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR that the Project site does not constitute a scenic vista; does not contain scenic resources; is not located near a scenic highway; and would not block views of a scenic vista, would also apply to the Modified Project.
Therefore, the Modified Project would not cause new or increased impacts and impacts are less than significant.
c) The Prior EIR determined the Original Project would not degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site or surrounding areas. The Leal Master Plan includes design guidelines to ensure the character and quality of development meet the City’s goals for Project characteristics and level of quality and is visually compatible with surrounding development.
The Modified Project also includes design guidelines and adds new development standards to guide and regulate future development in greater detail than the Original Project. Furthermore, the Modified Project specifies proposed development intensity and identified the southeast corner of the Project site (Limonite and Hamner) as the Downtown area, which is adjacent to and compatible with surrounding existing commercial development (Eastvale Gateway Center and the Cloverdale Marketplace). 141
City of Eastvale Page 32
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
Since the Project site is located within an urbanized area, surrounded by residential and commercial uses, and the Modified Project is consistent with the Leal Master Plan zoning, and no other City regulations govern scenic quality, the Modified Project would have a less than significant impact.
Therefore, the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged as there is no new potentially significant impact and previously identified significant impacts are not substantially more severe. No new or more severe impacts would occur as a result of the Modified Project, and impacts are less than significant. d) The Prior EIR determined the Project site is located in a suburban setting, surrounded by a developed environment with fixed and mobile sources of exterior light and glare. Fixed sources of light and glare include exterior building-mounted and freestanding light fixtures, illuminated signage on existing land uses, and street lighting along local streets near the Project. Mobile sources of light and glare originate from vehicles along surrounding streets. These existing light sources contribute to moderate levels of nighttime lighting.
Development of the Project site would add nighttime lighting for roadway visibility and safety, and lighting associated with residential and commercial development. The Original Project concluded that consistency with Section 120.05.050, Outdoor Lighting, in Chapter 120.05, Development Standards, of the Eastvale Municipal Code, would reduce impacts from all outdoor lighting fixtures to less than significant.
The Original EIR also determined that development could introduce new sources of glare from windows associated with the proposed non-residential development.
Mitigation Measure MM 3.5.1 was included to require future development plans and/or Projects to utilize nonglare glass in all nonresidential buildings to minimize and reduce impacts from glare. With implementation of the mitigation measure, impacts were determined less than significant.
The Modified Project includes a similar mix of uses as the Original Project and both Section 120.05.050 of the Municipal Code and Mitigation Measure 3.5.1 would apply to the Modified Project. Therefore, the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged. No new or more severe impacts would occur as a result of the Modified Project, and impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measure included in the Prior EIR remains applicable to the Modified Project is shown below.
MM 3.5.1 Nonglare glass shall be used in all nonresidential buildings to minimize and reduce impacts from glare. Buildings that are allowed to use semireflective glass must be oriented so that the reflection of sunlight is minimized. Types of nonglare glass shall be specified on final development plans.
142
City of Eastvale Page 33
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
Timing/Implementation: Prior to approval of final development plans Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department Conclusion: The changes associated with the Modified Project would not substantially change or increase the visibility of development or substantially change the overall character of the development from the Original Project. The Modified Project would not add new sources of light and glare compared to the Original Project and the Modified Project would have the same level of visual compatibility as the Original Project. Therefore, no changes to the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR are warranted. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant with mitigation. 143
City of Eastvale Page 34
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
2.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Issues:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation
is Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES. In
determining whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant environmental effects, lead
agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land
Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997)
prepared by the California 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 effects, lead agencies may
refer to information compiled by the California
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding
the state’s inventory of forest land, including the
Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest
Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon
measurement methodology provided in Forest
Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources
Board. Would the 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 nonagricultural use? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,
or a Williamson Act contract? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code 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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Discussion: In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15128, the Prior EIR determined that as a result of the absence of environmental resources or Project characteristics to produce impacts, the potential effect on Agriculture and Forestry Resources was found to be less than significant. The Original Project included a zone 144
City of Eastvale Page 35
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
change from Heavy Agriculture (A-2) to Leal Master Plan. In the course of that zone change, the City made findings documenting the rationale for the zone change and the justification for the conclusion that no significant impacts to agricultural resources would occur. The Prior EIR concluded,
“However, the City’s General Plan and General Plan EIR determined that conversion of agricultural land was a significant and unavoidable impact of land development within the Eastvale city limits. General Plan Policy AQ-39 states that the loss of agricultural productivity on lands designated for urban uses within the city limits is anticipated as a consequence of the city’s development.
Because this property was designated for development, the conversion of agricultural uses is consistent with the adopted General Plan and General Plan EIR. Therefore, this impact is less than significant.”9 The Modified Project would not change the limits of disturbance, which encumbers the entire site, therefore the analysis and conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged. Furthermore, no substantial changes in site conditions or substantial changes to the circumstances have occurred that would change the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR.
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
a) The Original Project changed the zoning on the Project site from Heavy Agriculture (A-2) to Leal Master Plan. In the course of that zone change, the City made findings documenting the rationale for the zone change and the justification for the conclusion that no significant impacts to agricultural resources would occur. Furthermore, the Prior EIR under Impact 3.9.8 determined that conversion of mapped Farmland was a less than significant impact. The Modified Project would not change the limits of disturbance, which encumbers the entire site, therefore the analysis and conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
b) The Original Project changed the zoning on the Project site from Heavy Agriculture (A-2) to Leal Master Plan and no Williamson Act contract applies to the Project site.
The Modified Project is consistent with the allowed uses under the Leal Master Plan zoning. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant 9 Leal Master Plan Draft EIR, July 2015, Section 3.9.8, Page 3.9-6 145
City of Eastvale Page 36
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary.
Impacts would remain less than significant.
c) The Project site is currently zoned Leal Master Plan, which designates the site for a mix of residential and commercial uses. The Project site does not contain land zoned as forest land or timberland. The Modified Project is consistent with the allowed uses under the Leal Master Plan zoning conforms to the existing Leal Master Plan zoning.
No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
d) As discussed above, no land zoned as forest land or timberland exists within the Project site boundaries. Approval of the Modified Project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to other uses. Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
e) The Modified Project would not involve other changes in the existing environment that, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland to nonagricultural use or forest land to non-forest use. The Modified Project would not change the limits of disturbance, which encumbers the entire site. No existing farmland occurs adjacent to the Project site. The Project site itself is no longer productive farmland. The entire Project site is surrounded by existing residential and commercial development. Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.
Conclusion: The Original Project included a zone change from Heavy Agriculture (A-2) to Leal Master Plan. In the course of that zone change, the City made findings documenting the rationale for the zone change and the justification for the conclusion that no significant impacts to agricultural resources would occur. The Modified Project would not change the limits of disturbance, which encumbers the entire site, therefore the analysis and conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged.
Furthermore, no substantial changes in site conditions or substantial changes to the circumstances have occurred that would change the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR. Therefore, the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged as there is no new potentially significant impact and previously identified significant impacts are not substantially more severe. No new or more severe impacts would occur as a result of the Modified Project, and impacts are less than significant. 146
City of Eastvale Page 37
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
2.3 Air Quality
Issues:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation is
Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance
criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may be
relied upon to make the following determinations.
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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 to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading
to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number
of people?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Discussion: Air Quality impacts are analyzed for both operations and construction.
Operational emissions are based on the type and intensity of land use. The Prior EIR analyzed operational emissions from the Original Project land use mix and concluded operational emissions would be significant and unavoidable.
Construction emissions result from construction activities, most notably grading activities since grading tends to produce the greatest amount of daily emissions. The Prior EIR determined construction activities would result in a significant unavoidable impact.
The Prior EIR included two mitigation measures, MM 3.3.5a and 3.3.5b, requiring site specific air toxics pollutant analysis in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology for both construction and operational activities.
a) The Prior EIR determined that the Original Project “would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 2012 AQMP, as it has been anticipated in the City General Plan... The proposed Master Plan is consistent with the City’s General Plan and 147
City of Eastvale Page 38
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
thus does not exceed the population or job growth projections used by the SCAQMD to develop the 2012 Air Quality Management Plan. ”
10 Since certification of the Prior EIR, a newer 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) has been adopted. The 2016 AQMP is based on development intensities assumed in the City’s adopted General Plan, which for this Project site is the Leal Master Plan.
Since the Modified Project reduces the overall intensity of development compared to the Original Project, resulting in a reduction in the number of vehicle trips generated by the future development11 and the Modified Project continues to propose a mix of residential and commercial uses, including developing a ”downtown,” the Modified Project is consistent with the 2016 AQMP.
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
b) The Prior EIR analyzed both short-term construction emissions and long-term operational emissions. The Prior EIR determined short-term construction emissions and long-term operational impacts would be significant and unavoidable.
Construction
The Prior EIR determined short-term construction emissions would cause a significant unavoidable impact. The Prior EIR states:
“Quantifying the air quality pollutant emissions from future, short-term, temporary construction activities allowed under the proposed Master Plan is not possible due to project-level variability and uncertainties related to future individual projects in terms of detailed site plans, construction schedules, equipment requirements, etc., which are not currently determined. However, depending on how development proceeds, construction-generated emissions associated with development of the Master Plan area could potentially exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance. Therefore, future project-level analyses of air quality impacts, in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements, would be conducted on a case-by-case basis as individual, future development projects allowed under the Master Plan proceed.”12
The Master Plan, as part of the Stage 2 development planning process, is further defined and detailed than the Original Project. The proposed Tentative Tract Map includes a rough grading concept, and a cut/fill analysis has been performed to 10 Leal Master Plan Draft EIR, July 2015, Section 3.3, Page 3.3-10 11 Leal Master Plan Amendment Project Traffic Study, RK Engineering Group, Inc., December 22, 2021 12 Leal Master Plan Draft EIR, July 2015, Section 3.3, Page 3.3-5 148
City of Eastvale Page 39
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
determine earthwork quantities. This information was used to prepare the “Leal Master Plan Amendment Project Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas and Energy Impact Study” by RK Engineering Group, Inc., December 22, 2021, which is included in Appendix B.
The Modified Project includes several Project Design Features (PDFs) that have emission reduction benefits.
AQ PDF-1 A Construction Management Plan will be prepared that includes the requirements for Air Quality mitigation measures to be submitted to the City of Eastvale for all phases of construction.
AQ PDF-2 The Project commits to following the standard South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) rules and requirements with regards to fugitive dust control, which includes, but are not limited to the following:
1. All active construction areas shall be watered two (2) times daily.
2. Speed on unpaved roads shall be reduced to less than 15 mph.
3. Any visible dirt deposition on any public roadway shall be swept or washed at the site access points within 30 minutes.
4. Any on-site stockpiles of debris, dirt or other dusty material shall be covered or watered twice daily.
5. All operations on any unpaved surface shall be suspended if winds exceed 15 mph.
6. Access points shall be washed or swept daily.
7. Construction sites shall be sandbagged for erosion control.
8. Apply nontoxic chemical soil stabilizers according to manufacturers’ specifications to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for 10 days or more).
9. Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, and maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard space in accordance with the requirements of California Vehicle Code (CVC) section 23114.
10. Pave or gravel construction access roads at least 100 feet onto the site from the main road and use gravel aprons at truck exits.
11. Replace the ground cover of disturbed areas as quickly possible.
12. A fugitive dust control plan should be prepared and submitted to SCAQMD prior to the start of construction.
149
City of Eastvale Page 40
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
AQ PDF-3 All construction equipment to the extent feasible will have Tier 4 low emission “clean diesel” engines (Original Equipment Manufacturer or retrofit) that include diesel oxidation catalysts and diesel particulate filters that meet the latest California Air Resources Board (CARB) best available control technology.
AQ PDF-4 Construction equipment will be maintained in proper tune.
AQ PDF-5 All construction vehicles will be prohibited from excessive idling.
Excessive idling is defined as five (5) minutes or longer.
AQ PDF-6 The Project will minimize the simultaneous operation of multiple construction equipment units, to the maximum extent feasible.
AQ PDF-7 The use of heavy construction equipment and earthmoving activity will be suspended during Air Alerts when the Air Quality Index reaches the “Unhealthy” level.
AQ PDF-8 The Project will establish an electricity supply to the construction site and use electric powered equipment instead of diesel-powered equipment or generators, where feasible.
AQ PDF-9 Staging areas for the construction equipment will be located as distant as possible from adjacent residential homes.
AQ PDF-10 To the extent possible, the Project will use haul trucks with on-road engines instead of off-road engines for on-site hauling.
The most notable PDF applied to the Modified Project that was not applied to the Original Project is the use of Tier 4 low emission “clean diesel” engines (AQ PDF-3).
The Original Project did not mandate the use of all Tier 4 engines allowing grading activity to rely on Tier 3 engines, which emit more emissions than Tier 4 engines. 13 The Air Quality study calculated construction emissions as summarized in the following table.14
13 Leal Master Plan Draft EIR, July 2015, Section 3.3, Page 3.3-5 14 Table 16 from “Leal Master Plan Amendment Project Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas and Energy Impact Study,” prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc., dated December 22, 2021 150
City of Eastvale Page 41
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
Table 9. Regional Construction Emissions14
As shown in the prior table, construction activities are anticipated to be less than SCAQMD thresholds. Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project.
Operations
The Prior EIR determined long-term operational emissions would cause a significant unavoidable impact. The Prior EIR states:
“…buildout of the Master Plan, assuming the most conservative land use potential, would result in emissions in excess of SCAQMD thresholds for criteria air pollutants and precursors for which the SoCAB is in nonattainment.”15 The Modified Project, prepared as part of the Stage 2 development planning process, provides greater detail and definition than the Original Project, as shown in Table 3 and the Leal Master Plan Amendment (Appendix A). Similar to the Original Project, the Modified Project allows for flexibility of land uses and establishes specific land use intensities provided development is consistent with the plans and specifications included in the Leal Master Plan Amendment. The air quality analysis provided below is based on the land use intensities established for the Modified Project in Table 3.
The following table summarizes regional operational emissions from the Modified Project.16 As shown, operational emissions from the Modified Project remain under 15 Leal Master Plan Draft EIR, July 2015, Section 3.3, Page 3.3-8 151
City of Eastvale Page 42
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
SCAQMD thresholds of significance and less than the Original Project. The reason for this change is the reduced level of development intensity presented in the Modified Project compared to the Original Project.
Table 10. Regional Operational Emissions16
Therefore, the Modified Project would not cause new or increased operational impacts to occur.
Cumulative
Air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. Therefore, by SCAQMD policy, if a Project’s individual emissions exceed significance thresholds, the project’s impacts would be cumulatively considerable. If a project’s individual emissions do not exceed significance thresholds, the project’s impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.
The Prior EIR concluded the Original Project would cause a significant and unavoidable cumulative impact because individual construction and operational emissions would exceed significance thresholds. The individual construction and operational emissions for the Modified Project are less than the Original Project. Since the Modified Project would not increase the amount of daily nonattainment pollutant emissions as discussed in above, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in 16 Table 18, from “Leal Master Plan Amendment Project Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas and Energy Impact Study,” prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc., dated December 22, 2021 152
City of Eastvale Page 43
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary.
c) The Prior EIR determined Project construction would emit localized pollutants through the on-site use of heavy-duty construction equipment as well as fugitive dust from demolition and ground-disturbing activities on site. These localized emissions could expose nearby sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
Similarly, long-term Project operations would emit pollutants that could result in local Carbon Monoxide (CO) hotspots.
The Air Quality Study for the Modified Project calculated Localized Construction Emissions for the Modified Project. The Prior EIR included a requirement for Localized Construction Emissions as Mitigation Measure 3.3.5a, which this analysis satisfies. As shown in the following table, Localized Construction Emissions would be below the SCAQMD thresholds of significance.
Table 11. Localized Construction Emissions17
A CO hot spot is a localized concentration of carbon monoxide (CO) that is above the state one-hour standard of 20 ppm or the eight-hour standard of 9 ppm. The Prior EIR conducted a CO hot spot analysis and determined emission levels would be below the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) levels.18 Since the Modified Project would generate approximately 27,764 fewer daily vehicle trips, it can also be concluded that no new CO hotspots would occur as a result of the Modified Project.
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Mitigation Measure 3.3.5.b. would remain applicable. d) The Prior EIR determined short-term odors can occur during construction, both during grading and painting of structures. Long-term operational odors commonly 17Table 17, from “Leal Master Plan Amendment Project Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas and Energy Impact Study,” prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc., dated December 22, 2021. 18 Leal Master Plan Draft EIR, July 2015, Table 3.3-5, Page 3.3-12 153
City of Eastvale Page 44
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
occur from land uses such as, agricultural uses (farming and livestock), chemical plants, composting operations, dairies, fiberglass molding facilities, food processing plants, landfills, refineries, rail yards, and wastewater treatment plants. Since the construction operations would remain similar to the Original Project, and the Modified Project does not contain any new odor producing land uses, the Modified Project would not cause new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures MM 3.3.5b remains applicable to the Modified Project.
MM 3.3.5a A site-specific air toxics pollutant analysis shall be conducted in accordance with the SCAQMD (2008) Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology for construction activities. If SCAQMD screening thresholds would be exceeded, air toxic reduction measures shall be identified in order to reduce potential impacts to a level that is less than significant. If it is the case that emissions remain in excess of SCAQMD localized significance thresholds despite the imposition of air toxic reduction measures, project-specific construction-related dispersion modeling acceptable to the SCAQMD shall be used to identify potential toxic air contaminant impacts, including diesel particulate matter. If SCAQMD risk thresholds would be exceeded, additional measures shall be identified in the air toxics analysis to address potential impacts and shall be based on site-specific information such as the distance to the nearest sensitive receptors, project site plan details, and construction schedule. The City shall ensure that construction contracts include all identified measures and that the measures reduce the health risk below SCAQMD risk thresholds. Construction-generated air toxics pollutant mitigation measures may include but not be limited to:
1. Limiting the amount of acreage to be graded in a single day.
2. Restricting intensive equipment usage and intensive ground disturbance to hours outside of hours typically spent at home.
3. Notifying affected sensitive receptors one week prior to commencing on-site construction so that any necessary precautions (such as rescheduling or relocating outdoor activities) can be implemented. The written notification shall include the name and telephone number of the individual empowered to manage construction of the project. In the event complaints are received, the individual empowered to manage construction shall respond to the complaint within 24 hours. The response shall include identification of measures being taken by the project construction contractor to reduce construction-related air 154
City of Eastvale Page 45
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
pollutants. Such measures may include but are not limited to the relocation of equipment or the rescheduling of construction outside of hours typically spent at home.
Timing/Implementation: The site-specific air toxics pollutant analysis and any necessary modeling shall be
completed prior to grading permit issuance,
and measures implemented during
construction activities
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning, Building and Safety, or Public Works Departments
MM 3.3.5b A site-specific air toxics pollutant analysis shall be conducted in accordance with the SCAQMD (2008) Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology for operational activities. If SCAQMD screening thresholds would be exceeded, air toxic reduction measures shall be identified in order to reduce potential impacts to a level that is less than significant. If it is the case that emissions remain in excess of SCAQMD localized significance thresholds despite the imposition of air toxic reduction measures, project-specific operations-related dispersion modeling acceptable to the SCAQMD shall be used to identify potential toxic air contaminant impacts, including diesel particulate matter generated by heavy-duty haul trucks. If SCAQMD risk thresholds would be exceeded, additional mitigation measures shall be identified in the air toxics analysis to address potential impacts and shall be based on sitespecific information such as the distance to the nearest sensitive receptors, project site plan details, and merchandise delivery schedule.
The City shall ensure that operations include all identified measures and that the measures reduce the health risk below SCAQMD risk thresholds.
Operations-generated air toxic pollutant mitigation measures may include but not be limited to:
1. Redesigning the project site plan to locate proposed loading dock facilities as far from sensitive receptors as possible.
2. Posting signage stating the State-mandated prohibition on all project trucks idling in excess of 5 minutes under the Heavy-Duty Vehicle Idling Emission Reduction Program.
3. Restricting the number of daily heavy-duty haul truck deliveries.
Timing/Implementation: The site-specific air toxics pollutant analysis and any necessary modeling shall be
completed prior to grading permit issuance,
and measures implemented during
construction activities
155
City of Eastvale Page 46
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning, Building and Safety, or Public Works Departments
Conclusion: The Modified Project would cause similar daily emissions from construction activities and less operational emissions as a result of approximately 27,764 fewer daily vehicle trips, compared to the Original Project. Therefore, no changes to the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR are necessary. Mitigation Measure MM 3.3.5b required by the Prior EIR remains applicable to the Modified Project. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. 156
City of Eastvale Page 47
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
2.4 Biological Resources
Issues:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation is
Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly
or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special
status species in local or regional plans, policies,
or regulations, or by the California Department
of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California Department of
Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d) Interfere 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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Discussion: The Prior EIR performed a records search and determined no previously recorded sensitive biological resources have occurred on the Project site. The Project site is disturbed and was previously used as a dairy farm. No surveys for sensitive species were conducted as part of the Prior EIR and mitigation measures were added requiring future surveys. The Prior EIR concluded that with mitigation, all potential biological impacts would be reduced to less than significant.
The potential for biological impacts depends on the area of impact and the condition of the Project site. The Modified Project would not change the limits of disturbance, which encumbers the entire site, and the condition of the Project site remains 157
City of Eastvale Page 48
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
essentially unchanged from the time of the Prior EIR. Therefore, the analysis and conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged.
In support of this Addendum, a Biological Assessment was conducted for the Modified Project. That assessment, “Biological Assessment of the Leal Property,” prepared by Carlson Strategic Land Solutions, March 2021, is included as Appendix C.
The Biological Assessment included a field survey on June 9, 2021, to map vegetation communities and conduct a jurisdictional delineation. Focused burrowing owl surveys and narrow endemic plant surveys were conducted on June 16, June 23, July 1, and July 13, 2021. Furthermore, a Delhi Sands Flower Loving Fly Assessment was performed on June 18, 2021.
No special status species were observed on-site and none are expected to occur given current site conditions and habitat type. The vegetation communities mapped on the Project site are as follows:
Table 12. Vegetation Communities Observed19
Vegetation Community
Acreage within in the
Project Site
Ruderal 96.82
Historical Dairy Farm 25.82
Disturbed/Developed 37.87
TOTAL 160.0
The Project site is located within the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Program (MSHCP) boundaries. However, the Project site is not located within any MCHCP Criteria Areas, Cell Groups, or Subunits, and the Project site is not located in survey areas for Amphibians, Mammals, or Special Linkage areas. The Project site is subject to Riparian and Riverine Areas pursuant to MSHCP Section 6.1.2, Narrow Endemic Plants (Survey Area 7) pursuant to MSHCP Section 6.1.3, Urban/Wildlands Interface guidelines pursuant to MSHCP Section 6.1.4, and Western Burrowing Owl overlay pursuant to MSHCP Section 6.3.2.
The field surveys conducted as part of the Biological Assessment satisfy several of the prior mitigation measures, as described below. Project site conditions have remained very similar to that analyzed in the Prior EIR. There is no evidence of changes that could result in occupation by special status species or riparian/wetland habitats that would be subject to state and federal permits, and the analysis and conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain valid.
19 Table 2, from “Biological Assessment of the Leal Property located in the City of Eastvale,” prepared by Carlson Strategic Land Solutions, dated November 2, 2021. 158
City of Eastvale Page 49
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
a) The Biological Assessment determined no previously recorded sensitive biological resources (i.e., special-status species populations, sensitive habitats, or jurisdictional features) occur on the Project site or within the Study Area. Furthermore, no sensitive biological resources, including, special-status species populations, sensitive habitats, or jurisdictional features occur on the Project site.
The Project site does not contain any suitable habitat for special status species or sensitive species, nor were any observed on-site during recent surveys. The Modified Project would include the removal of non-native and ruderal species; therefore, impacts would not be considered a significant impact and no mitigation is required.
The Modified Project would cause the disruption and removal of ruderal and developed habitat and the loss and displacement of non-sensitive common wildlife species. Due to the level of existing disturbance from the historical use as a dairy farm, human activity on-site and within the vicinity (e.g., nearby development), these impacts would not be expected to reduce the general wildlife populations below selfsustaining levels within the region and impacts to non-sensitive wildlife species do not meet the significance thresholds. Therefore, impacts to common wildlife species would not be considered a significant impact and no mitigation is required.
The Prior EIR identified a potential for impacts to nesting birds. The Project site consists of suitable habitat for nesting, foraging, and/or wintering avian species. While none of the common species carry a Federal or State listing as threatened or endangered, they are all protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) during breeding season. Therefore, a pre-construction survey is required in compliance with the MBTA. Implementation of Mitigation Measure MM 3.7.1 from the Prior EIR would reduce potential impacts to the avian species to a less than significant level if nesting individuals are present.
The biological evaluation of the Project site provides greater site-specific detail and analysis than the information presented in the Prior EIR, but this is not a substantial change with respect to the circumstances under which the Modified Project is undertaken or new information that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time of the Prior EIR. The Modified Project would not change the limits of disturbance, which encumbers the entire site, and the existing site conditions of a dairy farm remain consistent with that analyzed in the Prior EIR. Therefore, the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged.
No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.7.1 as presented in the Prior EIR.
b, c) Based on the field surveys and focused surveys conducted as part of the Biological Assessment of the Modified Project, no sensitive plant communities or habitats occur on the Project site. Sensitive habitats include those that are of special 159
City of Eastvale Page 50
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
concern to resource agencies and those that are protected under the MSHCP, CEQA, Section 1600 of the California Fish and Game Code, and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.
Furthermore, the Biological Assessment included a formal jurisdictional delineation on the Project site. Based on those results, no jurisdictional features were identified on the Project site subject to Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code and the Porter Cologne Act, as regulated by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and no jurisdictional non-wetland or wetland waters regulated under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act were identified on the Project site.
The Biological Assessment has determined that no sensitive biological resources or jurisdictional features occur on the Project site; therefore, no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures 3.7.2 and 3.7.3 included in the Prior EIR have been fulfilled by the Biological Assessment.
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant and Mitigation Measures 3.7.2 and 3.7.3 presented in the Prior EIR have been fulfilled. d) The Project site has been disturbed by development and intense historical dairy and agricultural uses and is unlikely to facilitate local wildlife movement. In addition, the Project site is completely surrounded by dense urban development, further impairing wildlife movement.
The Project site supports potential live-in and movement habitat for species on a local scale (i.e., some limited live-in and marginal movement habitat for reptile, bird, and mammal species), however, the Project site provides little to no function to facilitate wildlife movement on a regional scale. Furthermore, the site is not identified as a Special Linkage area within the MSHCP. Movement on a local scale likely occurs with species adapted to urban environments due to the surrounding development and disturbances in the vicinity of the site. Implementation of the Modified Project would not change the lack of wildlife movement across the Project site nor the classification of the Project site in the MSHCP that the Project site is not a Special Linkage area or integral to wildlife movement.
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
160
City of Eastvale Page 51
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
e) As indicated in the Prior EIR, “The City of Eastvale has no policies or ordinances relating to biological resources.”20 Therefore, the Project site is not subject to any local policies, such as a tree preservation ordinance, and no impacts would occur and no mitigation is required. No change in conclusion from what was analyzed in the Prior EIR would occur.
f) As analyzed in the Prior EIR, and applicable to the Modified Project, the Project site is located within the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) and is not located within any MSHCP Criteria Areas, Cell Groups, or Subunits. Furthermore, the Project site is not located in survey areas for Amphibians, Mammals, or Special Linkage areas. The Project site is subject to Riparian and Riverine Areas pursuant to MSHCP Section 6.1.2, Narrow Endemic Plants Overlay, pursuant to MSHCP Section 6.1.3, Urban/Wildland Interface pursuant to Section 6.1.4, and Western Burrowing Owl overlay pursuant to MSHCP Section 6.3.2.
The Biological Assessment determined no previously recorded sensitive biological resources (i.e., special-status species populations, sensitive habitats, or jurisdictional features) occur on the Project site or within the Study Area. Furthermore, no sensitive biological resources, including i.e., special-status species populations, sensitive habitats, or jurisdictional features occur on the Project site. The MSHCP includes standard measures, some of which apply to the Modified Project as documented in the Biological Assessment. The Biological Assessment provides greater site-specific detail and analysis than the information presented in the Prior EIR, but the assessment and compliance with the MSHCP are not new information that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time of the Prior EIR.
Suitable habitat for burrowing owl, white-tailed kite, grasshopper sparrow, and mountain plover exists within the Study Area. These animal species are all covered under the MSHCP. With the City’s participation and implementation of the MSHCP, any direct and indirect impacts to sensitive species would be less than significant with the payment of the mitigation fee and compliance with all applicable requirements of the MSHCP. This provides full mitigation under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Endangered Species Act (ESA), and the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) for impacts to MSHCP covered species and habitats. Compliance with the MSHCP and payment of MSHCP fees are not new information that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time of the Prior EIR.
Therefore, the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would 20 Leal Master Plan Draft EIR, July 2015, Page 3.7-7
161
City of Eastvale Page 52
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: Several measures have already been satisfied and are shown in light grey format. The mitigation measures applicable to the Modified Project are listed below.
MSHCP Standard Condition: Note: The following discussion highlights the requirements of the MSHCP, which are standard requirements applicable to project sites within the MSHCP boundaries. Because the MSHCP has been adopted by the City, it is not necessary to adopt a mitigation measure to enforce its provisions.
The MSHCP requires that projects pay a mitigation fee, perform speciesspecific habitat assessments and surveys, and be reviewed for consistency with Section 6.1.2–Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool, Section 6.1.3–Protection of Narrow Endemic Plan Species, Section 6.3.2–Additional Survey Needs and Procedures, and Section 6.1.4–Guidelines Pertaining to the Urban/Wildlands Interface of the MSHCP.
The following requirements of the MSHCP apply to the proposed Project and will be required of all subsequent development plans and/or projects within the Leal Master Plan area:
A. The Project applicant shall submit fees to the City in accordance with the requirements of the MSHCP Mitigation Fee Ordinance (Chapter
4.62 of the City of Eastvale Municipal Code).
B. The project applicant shall assess the proposed project’s consistency with Section 6.1.2, Section 6.1.3, Section 6.3.2, and Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP.
C. A qualified biologist shall conduct a burrowing owl habitat assessment. If needed, focused surveys and preconstruction surveys shall be conducted, as well as appropriate avoidance and minimization (Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP).
D. A qualified biologist shall conduct habitat assessments for the required Narrow Endemic Plant Species. If needed, focused surveys and shall be conducted, as well as appropriate avoidance and minimization (Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP).
E. A qualified biologist shall conduct a habitat assessment for Delhi sands flower-loving fly in areas underlain by Delhi soil series (Speciesspecific Objective 1B). 162
City of Eastvale Page 53
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
As noted above, because the City has adopted the MSHCP and enforces its provisions, these requirements are fully enforceable under the City’s Code as standard conditions.
MM 3.7.1 All construction and clearing activities shall be conducted outside of the avian nesting season (January 15–August 31), when feasible. If clearing and/or construction activities occur during the nesting season, preconstruction surveys for nesting raptors, special-status resident birds, and other migratory birds protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act shall be conducted by a qualified biologist, up to 3 days before initiation of construction activities. The qualified biologist shall survey the construction zone and a 250-foot radius surrounding the construction zone to determine whether the activities taking place have the potential to disturb or otherwise harm nesting birds.
If an active nest is located within 100 feet (250 feet for raptors) of construction activities, the Project applicant shall establish an exclusion zone (no ingress of personnel or equipment at a minimum radius of 100 feet or 250 feet, as appropriate, around the nest). Alternative exclusion zones may be established through consultation with the CDFW and the USFWS, as necessary. The City shall be notified if altered exclusions zones widths are authorized by these agencies prior to the initiation of work. The exclusion zones shall remain in force until all young have fledged.
Timing/Implementation: Requirements shall be incorporated into all rough and/or precise grading plan
documents. The Project applicant’s
construction inspector shall monitor to ensure
that measures are implemented during
construction.
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department MM 3.7.2 Prior to breaking ground, a qualified biologist shall be retained to determine whether potentially jurisdictional waters are present. If potentially jurisdictional features are identified, the project applicant shall submit a preliminary jurisdictional determination to the US Army Corps of Engineers for verification. The verified delineation will be submitted to the City for its records.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to approval of grading permits Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department 163
City of Eastvale Page 54
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
MM 3.7.3 Projects shall result in no net loss of sensitive habitats, riparian vegetation, and/or federally protected waters through impact avoidance, impact minimization, and/or compensatory mitigation, as determined in Clean Water Act Section 404 and 401 permits and/or a 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement. Evidence of compliance with this mitigation measure shall be provided to the City prior to approval of each individual grading permit.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to approval of grading permits Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department Conclusion: A Biological Assessment of the Modified Project determined impacts to biological resources would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Mitigation Measures 3.7.2 and 3.7.3 presented in the Prior EIR have been fulfilled.
Mitigation Measure 3.7.1 remains applicable as presented in the Prior EIR to reduce impacts to nesting birds to less than significant. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Mitigation Measure 3.7.1 remains applicable to the Modified Project.
164
City of Eastvale Page 55
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
2.5 Cultural Resources
Issues:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation is
Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
CULTURAL RESOURCES. 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? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Discussion: The Prior EIR conducted a records search and determined that no designated or previously identified cultural resources, such as prehistoric sites, historic sites, historic buildings/structures, and isolated artifacts, occur on the Project site.
However, the Prior EIR indicated that a formal analysis had not been conducted and whether cultural resources or human remains are present could not be determined.21 Mitigation Measure 3.8.1 required that future development plans and Projects prepare site-specific cultural resource field surveys and studies.
A site-specific cultural resources study has been prepared for the Modified Project.
The report, “Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment, October 2021,” prepared by Duke CRM is included in Appendix D. The study included a records search and intensive pedestrian field survey of the site on June 17 and 18, 2021. a) The Prior EIR concluded that while there are no designated or previously identified cultural resources, the Project area had not been formally evaluated for the cultural resources and as a result it was unknown at the time whether cultural resources or human remains were present onsite. As a result, Mitigation Measure 3.8.1 was required within the Prior EIR, which included a detailed, site-specific cultural resource field survey to identify any cultural resources onsite. As part of the Modified Project a Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment was prepared (Appendix D) and included both a records search and field survey, which satisfies this mitigation measure. The records search identified two previously recorded cultural resources with ½ mile of the Project site. The resource located off the Project site consists of historic debris, which would not be impacted by the proposed Project. The second result of the records search is the Leal Property itself. A thorough assessment of the Leal Property, including the structures on the property, determined that Property is not 21 Leal Master Plan Draft EIR, July 2015, Section 3.8.5, Page 3.8-3 165
City of Eastvale Page 56
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), or local designation. Additionally, the field survey did not identify any cultural resources on the Project site. Based on the low sensitivity for cultural resources occurring on the Project site, no archaeological monitoring is required during ground disturbing activities.
Therefore, the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project. Mitigation Measure MM 3.8.1 has been satisfied and no new mitigation is necessary. While determined to be highly unlikely, Mitigation Measures MM 3.8.2 and MM 3.8.3 would remain applicable to the Modified Project.
Impacts would remain less than significant with mitigation. b) Archaeological record surveys were conducted as part of the Prior EIR and as part of the Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment prepared for the Modified Project. Furthermore, an extensive pedestrian field survey of the Project site took place over two days for the Modified Project. No archaeological resources were identified on the Project site from the records search or the field surveys. The Cultural Resources Assessment for the Modified Project concluded that a low sensitivity exists for archaeological resources to occur on site and therefore, no archaeological monitoring is required during site disturbance activities, such as grading.
The Modified Project would not change the limits of disturbance, which encumbers the entire site, therefore the analysis and conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged. Mitigation Measure MM 3.8.1 has been satisfied and no new mitigation is necessary. While determined to be highly unlikely, Mitigation Measures MM 3.8.2 and MM 3.8.3 would remain applicable to the Modified Project. Impacts would remain less than significant with mitigation.
c) The Prior EIR did not identify any evidence suggesting the Project site was used in the past for human burials. The Modified Project would not change the limits of disturbance, which encumbers the entire site, therefore the analysis and conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged. Because existing laws and regulations would ensure that impacts on any buried human remains would be reduced to a level below significance, the Modified Project’s impact related to the potential of encountering human remains would be less than significant.
Therefore, the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure MM 3.8.1 has already been satisfied and is shown in light grey format. The mitigation measures applicable to the Modified Project that remain in place are listed below.
166
City of Eastvale Page 57
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
MM 3.8.1 A detailed cultural resources field survey of the subject property shall be conducted prior to approval of the project. The cultural resources field survey shall identify any cultural resource finds and will set out measures to mitigate any impacts to any significant resources as defined by CEQA, the California Register of Historical Resources, and/or the National Historic Preservation Act. Mitigation methods to be employed include but are not limited to the following:
• Redesign of the development project to avoid the resource. The resource site shall be deeded to the City or a nonprofit agency to be approved by the City for maintenance of the site.
• If avoidance is determined to be infeasible by the City, the resource shall be mapped, stabilized, and capped pursuant to appropriate standards.
• If capping is determined to be infeasible by the City, the resource shall be excavated and recorded to appropriate standards.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to approval of development plan or project
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department MM 3.8.2 If cultural resources (i.e., prehistoric sites, historic sites, and isolated artifacts) are discovered during grading or construction activities in the Project area, work shall be halted immediately within 50 feet of the discovery, the City Planning Department shall be notified, and a professional archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards in archaeology and/or history shall be retained to determine the significance of the discovery.
The City shall consider mitigation recommendations presented by a professional archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards in archaeology and/or history for any unanticipated discoveries. The City and the Project applicant of the site where the discovery is made shall consult and agree on implementation of a measure or measures that the City deems feasible.
Such measures may include avoidance, preservation in place, excavation, documentation, curation, data recovery, or other appropriate measures.
The Project applicant shall be required to implement any mitigation necessary for the protection of cultural resources.
167
City of Eastvale Page 58
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
Timing/Implementation: As a condition of project approval and implemented during grading and/or
construction activities
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department MM 3.8.3 If human remains are discovered during any ground-disturbing activities in the Project area, all work shall be halted immediately within 50 feet of the discovery, the City Planning Department shall be notified, and the Riverside County Coroner must be notified per California Public Resources Code Section 7050.5 and California Health and Safety Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission, and the procedures outlined in CEQA Section 15064.5(d) and (e) shall be followed.
Timing/Implementation: As a condition of project approval and implemented during grading and/or
construction activities
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department Conclusion: The Modified Project would not change the limits of disturbance compared to the Original Project and no conditions or circumstances have changed relative to historical, archaeological, or tribal cultural resources on the Project site.
Therefore, the analysis and conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged for the Modified Project. The Prior EIR identified Mitigation Measures MM 3.8.1 through 3.8.4 to reduce impacts associated with archaeological and paleontological resources to less than significant. Mitigation Measure MM 3.8.1 has been satisfied and is no longer applicable, and Mitigation Measures MM 3.8.2 and 3.8.3 remain applicable to the Modified Project. Mitigation Measure 3.8.4 has been revised and is presented in Section 2.7 Geology and Soils, consistent with the revisions to CEQA Guidelines Appendix G.
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and impacts remain less than significant with mitigation as presented in the Prior EIR. 168
City of Eastvale Page 59
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
2.6 Energy
Issues:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation is
Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
ENERGY. Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, 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 efficiency?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Discussion: Since preparation of the Prior EIR, CEQA Guidelines Appendix G has been revised to include a specific section on Energy. The Prior EIR analyzed potential impacts associated with energy consumption in the Utilities section. A Project-specific energy analysis was prepared for the Modified Project. The analysis is included in "Air Quality, GHG, and Energy Impact Study”, prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc., dated December 22, 2021, is included in Appendix B. The Prior EIR concluded the increase in energy consumption from the Original Project would be less than significant. No changes to the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR would occur for the Modified Project as confirmed by the Energy Study.
a, b) The Energy Study for the Modified Project quantified projected energy use of electricity, natural gas, and petroleum. The Energy Study determined the Modified Project would not cause a wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources with implementation of the mandatory requirements of California’s Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24, Part 6) and Green Building Standards (CALGreen, Title 24, Part 11). California’s building energy efficiency standards are some of the strictest in the nation and the Project’s compliance with California’s building code will ensure that wasteful, inefficient or unnecessary consumption of energy is minimized. The building standards code is designed to reduce the amount of energy needed to heat or cool a building, reduce energy usage for lighting and appliances and promote usage of energy from renewable sources.
Additionally, the Modified Project would not obstruct or conflict with renewable energy plans. Future occupants of the Modified Project will purchase electricity through Southern California Edison which is subject to the requirements of California Senate Bill 100 (SB 100). SB 100 is the most stringent and current energy legislation in California; requiring that renewable energy resources and zero-carbon resources supply 100% of retail sales of electricity to California end-use customers and 100% of electricity procured to serve all state agencies by December 31, 2045. 169
City of Eastvale Page 60
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.
Conclusion: The Energy Study prepared for the Modified Project provides greater sitespecific detail and analysis than the information presented in the Prior EIR, but the assessment and compliance with energy standards and regulations are not new information that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time of the Prior EIR. The changes associated with the Modified Project would not cause wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources or obstruct renewable energy plans. Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
170
City of Eastvale Page 61
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
2.7 Geology and Soils
Issues:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation
is Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or
death involving:
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iv) Landslides? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in onor off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table
18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial risks to life or property?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative waste water
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of waste water?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Discussion: The analysis presented in the Prior EIR was based on a review of published information, surveys, and reports regarding regional geology and soils. Information was obtained from private and governmental agencies and Internet websites, 171
City of Eastvale Page 62
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
including the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), the California Geological Survey (CGS), and the US Geological Survey (USGS). 22 A site-specific geotechnical evaluation was prepared for the Modified Project. The report, “Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation Including Near Surface Organic Content for the Proposed Approximately 160‐Acre “Leal” Property, City of Eastvale, California,” prepared by LGC Geotechnical, Inc. and dated June 21, 2021, and “Geotechnical Responses to City Reviewer Geotechnical Review Comments dated February 16, 2022 for the Proposed Approximately 160-Acre “Leal” Property, City of Eastvale, California,” prepared by LGC Geotechnical, Inc. and dated April 5, 2021, is included in Appendix E.
a- i) As indicated in the Prior EIR, the Project site is not located within a State of California Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The Geotechnical Evaluation prepared for the Modified Project confirmed this conclusion and determined that no faults were identified on the Project site as part of the site evaluation. The Modified Project does not change the Project boundary or the conclusion that the potential for rupture of an earthquake fault is less than significant. Therefore, the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
a – ii) The Project site would be subject to strong ground shaking, as is most of Southern California. The Prior EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant. The Modified Project does not change the limits of disturbance or the underlying geology. The Modified Project is subject to California Building Code (CBC), which establishes seismic standards for new construction. Furthermore, the Geotechnical Evaluation report evaluated seismic characteristics of the Project site and found no unique conditions, new information, or changes in circumstances pertaining to seismic impacts that were not known or could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time of the Prior EIR.
The Modified Project includes a Project Design Feature (PDF), which is a component of the Modified Project’s Project Description, that incorporates the recommendations presented in the Geotechnical Evaluation report. Many of these recommendations require compliance with adopted standards and codes. Some of the recommendations provide greater site-specific details and analysis than the information presented in the Prior EIR, but these recommendations are not a substantial change with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken or new information that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time of the Prior EIR. With 22 Leal Master Plan Draft EIR, July 2015, Section 3.9.4, Page 3.9-2 172
City of Eastvale Page 63
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
incorporation of the geotechnical recommendations, impacts from ground shaking would be less than significant.
Therefore, the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
a-iii) The Prior EIR concluded based on Map My County23, the Project site is located in an area mapped as having “moderate” and “high” liquefaction potential and concluded the potential impact is less than significant. The Geotechnical Evaluation prepared for the Modified Project determined that site soils are not generally susceptible to liquefaction due to a lack of groundwater in the upper 50 feet. Records indicate groundwater levels recorded in the area are at depths greater than 100 feet below the ground surface. However, isolated layers are susceptible to dry sand seismic settlement. Total dynamic settlement is estimated to be on the order 0.5-inch or less.
Differential settlement is estimated as half of the total settlement over a horizontal span of 40 feet, which would be minimal.
The Geotechnical Evaluation provides greater site-specific detail and analysis than the information presented in the Prior EIR, but this is not a substantial change with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken or new information that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time of the Prior EIR. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant. a-iv) The Prior EIR determined that given the flatness of the Project site, there is no potential for landslides to occur on or near the Project site. The Geotechnical Evaluation for the Modified Project confirms that conclusion. Therefore, the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
b) As analyzed in the Prior EIR, the loss of topsoil or soil erosion can occur with any development of the Project site regardless of design. The design revisions associated with the Modified Project would not substantially increase the risk of topsoil loss or erosion. As indicated in the Geotechnical Response dated April 5, 2022 (Appendix E), “The proposed grading activities that will be part of the development of the subject site will include removal of the topsoil across the site and replacement with engineered fill material. The proposed grading plan does not have any natural or 23 Leal Master Plan Draft EIR, July 2015, Section 3.9.3, Page 3.9-3 173
City of Eastvale Page 64
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
steep slopes that would be subject to excessive erosion. The ground surface at the completion of grading will be engineered fill with typical site drainage and typical slope inclinations.” During construction, the Modified Project site is subject to the requirements of a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Permit, which requires Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent erosion or soil loss during construction.
Therefore, the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
c) The stability of the geologic unit underlying the Project site was analyzed in the Prior EIR and impacts were determined to be less than significant. The Geotechnical Evaluation provides a site-specific evaluation and determined the near-surface loose and compressible soils are not suitable for development in the present condition given the quantity of organic rich soils. The Geotechnical Evaluation provides greater site-specific detail and analysis than the information presented in the Prior EIR, but this is not a substantial change with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken or new information that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time of the Prior EIR.
Total organic carbon content generally greater than 2 percent is not suitable for compacted fill soils. From a geotechnical perspective, onsite soils are anticipated to be suitable for use as general compacted fill provided the high organic content soils (soils with organic content greater than 5 percent) are removed from the site and the remaining soils with organic content between 2 and 5 percent are blended and mixed with “clean” soils and screened of construction debris and any oversized material (8 inches in greatest dimension). Therefore, as described in the Project Description and included in Project Design Feature PDF GEO-1, the top layer of organic materials must be removed from the Project site, resulting in approximately 354,400 cubic yards of export. With implementation of the PDFs, the Project site would be suitable for development.
Therefore, the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
d) The Prior EIR concluded that based on literature and mapping, the on-site soils would not have a high expansion potential. The Geotechnical Evaluation prepared for the Modified Project includes a more detailed site-specific analysis and concludes based on laboratory testing that site soils are anticipated to have “Very Low” expansion potential.
174
City of Eastvale Page 65
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
Therefore, the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
e) No septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems were proposed with the Original Project. The Modified Project also does not propose the use of septic systems. Therefore, the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
f) The Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment prepared for the Modified Project determined the Project site includes areas of high sensitivity for paleontological deposits (Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment, October 2021, prepared by Duke CRM; Appendix D). While no paleontological resources were identified on the Project site during the field surveys, multiple fossil localities have been documented with three miles of the Project site. The eastern portion of the Project site has a higher potential for paleontological resources than the remainder of the site. Therefore, paleontological monitoring in the eastern portion of the site is required during ground disturbance. The Prior EIR included Mitigation Measure MM 3.8.4, which requires that a qualified paleontologist evaluate any paleontological discoveries during grading. The potential for paleontological discoveries has not changed since certification of the Prior EIR and the limits of disturbance have remained the same. This mitigation measure is being revised in this Addendum to require a qualified paleontologist monitor grading activities on the eastern portion of the site, which is more efficient for grading activities instead of the requirement to call a monitor to the site to evaluate paleontological resources if found during grading. Therefore, no change in analysis from the Prior EIR would occur and Mitigation Measure MM 3.8.4 remains applicable to the Modified Project as modified.
Therefore, the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant with implementation of the following mitigation measure as presented in the Prior EIR.
Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measure applicable to the Modified Project, which was previously included within the Cultural Resource Section, remains in place, however this mitigation measure has been modified to require paleontological monitoring during ground disturbing activities. The revised language is in underline and strike-through format as shown below.
MM 3.8.4 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a certified professional 175
City of Eastvale Page 66
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
paleontologist will be retained by the developer to provide professional paleontological services, which will include survey, education of construction workers, onsite construction monitoring, appropriate recovery, and reporting.
A paleontological monitor shall be present during ground disturbing activities in the eastern half of the Project. The monitor shall work under the direct supervision of a qualified paleontologist (B.S./B.A. in geology, or related discipline with an emphasis in paleontology and demonstrated competence in paleontological research, fieldwork, reporting, and curation).
1. The qualified paleontologist shall be on-site at the pre-construction meeting to discuss monitoring protocols.
2. The paleontological monitor shall be present full-time during ground disturbance in the eastern half of the Project, including but not limited to grading, trenching, utilities, and offsite easements. If, after excavation begins, the qualified paleontologist determines that the sediments are not likely to produce fossil resources, monitoring efforts shall be reduced.
3. The monitor shall be empowered to temporarily halt or redirect grading efforts if paleontological resources are discovered.
4. In the event of a paleontological discovery the monitor shall flag the area and notify the construction crew immediately. No further disturbance in the flagged area shall occur until the qualified paleontologist has cleared the area.
5. In consultation with the qualified paleontologist the monitor shall quickly assess the nature and significance of the find. If the specimen is not significant it shall be quickly mapped, documented, removed, and the area cleared.
6. If the discovery is significant the qualified paleontologist shall notify the CLIENT and CITY immediately.
7. In consultation with the CLIENT and CITY the qualified paleontologist shall develop a plan of mitigation which will likely include full-time monitoring, salvage excavation, scientific removal of the find, removal of sediment from around the specimen (in the laboratory), research to identify and categorize the find, curation of the find in a local qualified repository, and preparation of a report summarizing the find. 176
City of Eastvale Page 67
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
For the remaining portions of the Project site, if If any paleontological resources (fossils) are discovered during grading or construction activities in the Project area, work shall be halted immediately within 50 feet of the discovery, and the City Planning Department shall be immediately notified. At that time, the City will coordinate any necessary investigation of the discovery with a qualified paleontologist.
The City shall consider the mitigation recommendations of the qualified paleontologist for any unanticipated discoveries of paleontological resources. The City and the Project applicant shall consult and agree on implementation of a measure or measures that the City deems feasible and appropriate. Such measures may include avoidance, preservation in place, excavation, documentation, curation, data recovery, or other appropriate measures. The Project applicant shall be required to implement any mitigation necessary for the protection of paleontological resources.
Timing/Implementation: As a condition of project approval and implemented during grading and/or
construction activities
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department Conclusion: A site-specific Geotechnical Evaluation report was prepared for the Modified Project. The Geotechnical Evaluation provides greater site-specific detail and analysis than the information presented in the Prior EIR but not new information that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time of the Prior EIR. The additional analysis performed for the Modified Project introduces additional evidence in the record that impacts remain as described in the Prior EIR and less than significant. Therefore, no changes to the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR are warranted No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
177
City of Eastvale Page 68
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
2.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Issues:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation
is Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. 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 emission of greenhouse gases?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Discussion: The Prior EIR analyzed Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions from the Original Project by quantifying emissions of metric tons (MT) of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) equivalents (CO2e) from construction and operations. The Prior EIR relied on the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2013.2.2 computer program developed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD). The Prior EIR determined the Original Project would generate 105,649 CO2e metric tons (MT) per year. The analysis took credit for State-led GHG reduction measures, such as low carbon fuel standards and green building code standards. The reduction dropped CO2e emissions to 77,375 MT per year24. The Prior EIR concluded that emissions from the Original Project represented a 26.7 percent reduction from Business as Usual, greater than the threshold of significance of 21.7 percent, resulting in a less than significant impact.
An analysis of the GHG emissions for the Modified Project is included in the report, “Leal Master Plan Amendment Project Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study,” prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc. and dated December 22, 2021, included in Appendix B. The GHG Study determined the Modified Project would generate approximately 32,220 MT CO2e per year. Compared to the Original Project with CO2e emissions of 77,375 MT per year, the Modified Project (32,220 MT CO2e per year) would reduce GHG emissions by 45,155 MT CO2e per year, which represents an approximately 58% reduction in GHG emissions.
a) The Prior EIR determined the Original Project would generate 77,375 MT CO2e, which represented a 26.7% reduction from Business as Usual, which is a greater reduction than the 21.7% threshold of significance. By comparison, the Modified Project would generate approximately 32,220 MT CO2e per year, which is 45,155 MT 24 The 77,375 MT CO2e emissions per year are 2035 levels. The GHG Study prepared by RK Engineering Group (Appendix B) used 2020 emission levels of 74,317 MT CO2e per year in Table 20 for comparison with the Modified Project emissions. Since 2020 emission levels have passed, this Addendum relies on the 2035 emission levels for comparison.
178
City of Eastvale Page 69
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
CO2e per year less than the Original Project, which represents an approximately 58% reduction in GHG emissions. Therefore, the Modified Project would generate less GHG emissions than the Original Project.
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
b) The project will be required to comply with the mandatory requirements of the latest 2019 California Building Standards Code, including Title 24, Part 11, CALGreen and Title 24, Part 6, Energy Code. The purpose of the building standards is to reduce negative impacts on the environment through improved planning and design, energy efficiency, water efficiency and conservation and material and resource conservation.
The California Building Standards were developed to help meet the requirements of the Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32). As part of the latest Energy Code requirements, the project will be required to include rooftop solar panels, community solar panels, and/or other sources of on-site renewable energy capable of meeting the required California Energy Code Energy Design Rating. Therefore, by complying with the City’s GHG reduction policy the project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.
Conclusion: The Modified Project would reduce the amount of GHG emissions by approximately 58% compared to the Original Project and remain consistent with State policies for the reduction in GHG emissions. Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
179
City of Eastvale Page 70
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
2.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Issues:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation
is Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would
the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use,
or disposal of hazardous materials?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e) For a project within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project result in a safety hazard or
excess noise for people residing or working in the
project area?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Discussion: The Prior EIR evaluated the Project site as a former dairy farm and agricultural use and concluded that the Project site was suitable for development with a mix of residential and commercial uses. The Prior EIR also concluded that the existing buildings on the Project site may contain asbestos, lead paint, or polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) and that demolition of the existing structures could expose the environment or humans to hazardous materials. Mitigation Measures MM
3.10.2a, 3.10.2b, and 3.10.2c were included to reduce all impacts related to potential hazardous building materials on-site to less than significant. 180
City of Eastvale Page 71
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
The Modified Project includes two site-specific analysis of the Project site. The first study is a “Phase I Environmental Site Assessment” prepared by Hillmann Consulting, March 23, 2022, and included in Appendix F.1. The second study, also prepared by Hillmann Consulting is a “Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report” dated March 23, 2022, and included in Appendix F.2.
The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment identified five Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) on the Project site as follows:
REC #1 There is a possibility for elevated methane gas in soil vapor at areas where livestock wastes accumulated.
REC #2 A historical 550-gallon gasoline underground storage tank (UST) is considered to be a REC due to the possibility for undocumented spills to have occurred.
REC #3 Maintenance and repair of farm equipment and vehicles appears to have been conducted for an extended period of time in an area of the northern portion of the Property, which could have resulted in undocumented spills.
REC #4 The Property was utilized as orchards since approximately 1931 to 1950s, resulting in the potential for residual pesticide concentrations in shallow soils due to historic application of pesticides.
REC #5 The presence of discarded/abandoned drums due to the unknown content and possibility of undocumented chemical spills/releases.
In response to the RECs identified as part of the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, a Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation of the Project site was conducted. The Phase II investigation included 96 near surface soil samples and methane testing. The results of the analysis conclude:
- Soil samples detected low levels of 4,4’-dichlorodiphenyldichleorethylene (DDE) and 4,4’-dichlorodiphenyltrichoroethane (DDT), which did not exceed the applicable screening levels for residential applications. DDT was a common pesticide once widely used in the past for insect control for agriculture purposes. DDE is a breakdown product of DDT.
- Soil sample analysis for heavy metals identified low background levels of metals, which did not exceed the applicable screening levels for residential applications.
- Soil gas sampling determined no detectable concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons or volatile organic compounds (VOC), and no heavy metal concentrations exceeding residential screening levels.
181
City of Eastvale Page 72
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
- One sample had benzene concentrations that slightly exceed proposed residential screening levels (if they were to be adopted) but given the depth of the sample (14 feet) and consideration for attenuation provided by new construction, these very low concentrations do not pose a significant environmental or human health concern for the proposed residential use. - Methane testing identified three samples out of fifteen with detectable concentrations of methane. The methane distribution was determined to not be widespread and the areas that were investigated were still covered with animal waste. The treatment for the areas with detectable methane includes removal of animal waste (organics), which is planned as part of the Project Description and PDFs.
The Phase I and Phase II assessments provide greater site-specific detail and analysis than the information presented in the Prior EIR, but this is not a substantial change with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken or new information that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time of the Prior EIR. The Prior EIR evaluated the site as a former agricultural use being converted to allow a mix of uses including residential and commercial. The Modified Project would not change the limits of disturbance, which encumbers the entire site, or the existing site conditions. a) The Original Project included the same project boundaries and a mix of commercial and residential land uses. The Modified Project would change the intensity of certain land uses but retain the same mix of land uses. The Prior EIR concluded that neither commercial nor residential development is expected to involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials in significant quantities.25 The same conclusion would apply to the Modified Project because of the same mix of residential and commercial land uses.
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
b) The Prior EIR determined construction activities could release hazardous materials into the environment, such as petroleum-based fuels or hydraulic fluid used for construction equipment. These materials are routine in construction projects and the risk would apply similarly to the Modified Project. Given the age of the structures on site, a possibility exists for asbestos and/or lead paint to occur within the construction materials used in the structures. The Prior EIR included three mitigation measures to reduce impacts to less than significant. Mitigation Measure MM 3.10.2a requires 25 Leal Master Plan Draft EIR, July 2015, Section 3.10.5, Page 3.10-3 182
City of Eastvale Page 73
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
testing for asbestos, lead paint, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) prior to demolition of the existing structures on site. This mitigation measure would apply to the Modified Project and reduce impacts to less than significant.
Mitigation Measure MM 3.10.2b requires preparation of a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment prior to grading. A Phase I has been prepared for the Modified Project and is included in Appendix F.1. A portion of this mitigation measure has been satisfied, however compliance with the recommendations from a Phase II assessment remains a requirement.
Mitigation Measure MM 3.10.2c requires all trash and debris be removed from the Project site and disposed of properly. This mitigation measure would apply to the Modified Project and reduce impacts to less than significant.
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures.
c) The Project site is located within 0.20 miles of Harada Elementary School. The Prior EIR concluded:
“However, as described in response to Threshold 1, hazards to the public or to the environment through the routine use, handling, transport, and storage of hazardous materials would be subject to federal, state, and local health and safety requirements. The storage, handling, and disposal of hazardous materials are regulated by the EPA, OSHA, and the Fire Department. Therefore, the proposed Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.”
26 The Modified Project proposes the same mix of residential and commercial uses as the Original Project. Therefore, there is no change in the potential for release of hazardous materials during construction or operation of the Modified Project. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
d) The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment prepared for the Modified Project determined the Project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites and does not pose a risk to the public. Recent site inspections confirm no change in conditions would alter that conclusion presented in the Prior EIR. Therefore, no new 26 Leal Master Plan Draft EIR, July 2015, Section 3.10.3, Page 3.10-6 183
City of Eastvale Page 74
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
e) The Project site is not located in an airport land use plan (see Figure 5) or near a private or public airstrip. The Modified Project would not change these findings.
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
f) The Prior EIR concluded the Original Project would not impair the City’s ability to implement its emergency response plan or use its emergency evacuation routes. The Modified Project includes less intensive development than the Original Project. As shown in Section 2.17, the Modified Project would reduce trip generation by 27,764 average daily vehicle trips, thereby reducing the number of potential vehicles on local roadways that may be used by emergency vehicles or for evacuation in the event of an emergency. The Modified Project would improve the surrounding circulation system with additional travel lanes on Limonite and Hamner and the Modified Project would contribute to fewer local roadway trips than the Original Project. The Modified Project would complete street improvements on all four surrounding streets. Therefore, as a result of the Modified Project proposing less intensive development than the Original Project and proposing to complete the surrounding street system, no new impacts would occur, and the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged.
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
g) The Prior EIR concluded the Project site is not designated as a fire hazard severity zone. Since there are no changes to the boundaries of the Modified Project, the conclusions in the Prior EIR remain applicable. Furthermore, the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire) website was reviewed; and no change of fire hazard severity designation has occurred on the Project site since the Prior EIR was prepared and adopted27. Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
27 CalFire (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection). 2022. Cal Fire website. http://www.fire.ca.gov/.
184
N.T.S. N
Source: Meet&Hunt (June 2008)
Airport Land Use Plan Map
Figure 5
Leal Project Site
185
City of Eastvale Page 76
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
Mitigation Measures: The measure that has already been satisfied is shown in light grey format. The mitigation measures applicable to the Modified Project that remain in place are listed below.
MM 3.10.2a Asbestos. Prior to the issuance of any permit for the demolition or alteration of existing structure(s), a letter shall be provided to the Planning Department from a qualified asbestos abatement consultant indicating that no asbestos-containing materials (ACM) are present in the building. If ACMs are found to be present, they will need to be abated in compliance with the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s Rule 1403 and all other applicable state and federal rules and regulations.
Lead Paint. Prior to issuance of any permit for the demolition or alteration of the existing structure(s), a lead-based paint survey shall be performed to the written satisfaction of the Eastvale Building Safety and Inspection Department. Should lead-based paint materials be identified, standard handling and disposal practices shall be implemented pursuant to OSHA regulations.
Polychlorinated Biphenyls. Prior to issuance of a demolition permit, a polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) abatement contractor shall conduct a survey of the Project site to identify and assist with compliance with applicable state and federal rules and regulations governing PCB removal and disposal.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to the issuance of demolition permit Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Building and Planning Departments
MM 3.10.2b Prior to the issuance of any individual grading permit, a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) shall be conducted to determine the potential for contaminated soil or groundwater on the site. If the Phase I ESA determines that the potential exists for contaminated soil or groundwater on-site, the project applicant shall conduct a Phase II ESA and shall follow its recommendations to remediate any potentially contaminated soil or groundwater. On-site contaminants must be addressed to the satisfaction of either Cal/EPA or the Riverside County Waste Management Department, with their approval of completion of activities/remedial action plans (RAP) submitted to the Eastvale Department of Building and Construction prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
186
City of Eastvale Page 77
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
Timing/Implementation: Prior to issuance of individual grading permit Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Building and Planning Departments
MM 3.10.2c All trash and debris observed on-site shall be removed prior to construction activities and disposed of at a landfill or approved dumpsite.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to construction activities Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Building and Planning Departments
Conclusion: A site-specific Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and a Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation were prepared for the Modified Project. Those studies provide greater site-specific detail and analysis than the information presented in the Prior EIR. The additional analysis performed for the Modified Project introduces additional evidence in the record that impacts remain as described in the Prior EIR and less than significant with mitigation incorporated. The information provided is not a substantial change with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken or new information that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time of the Prior EIR. Therefore, no changes to the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR are warranted. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant with mitigation.
187
City of Eastvale Page 78
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
2.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
Issues:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation is
Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the
project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or groundwater quality?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration
of the course of a stream or river or through the
addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner
which would:
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation
on- or off-site; ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
ii) substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or
offsite;
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iii) create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing
or planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff;
or
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iv) impede or redirect flood flows? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to project inundation? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a
water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Discussion: The analysis in the Prior EIR determined the Original Project would have less than significant hydrology and water quality impacts. The Project site is located in Flood Hazard Zone X according to the Federal Emergency Management Agency 188
City of Eastvale Page 79
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
(FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM)28. Flood Zone X indicates the site is subject to minimal risk of flooding.
Two site-specific technical studies were prepared for the Modified Project. One report is titled, “Preliminary Hydrology Analysis for Leal Ranch (Tentative Map No. 38290)” prepared by Hunsaker & Associates Irvine, Inc., and dated November 29, 2021 (Appendix G). The second report is the “Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (PWQMP) for Tentative Map No. 38290,” prepared by Hunsaker & Associates Irvine, Inc., and dated November 29, 2021 (Appendix H).
The Modified Project proposes a series of storm drains to convey runoff from the Project site to an existing storm drain system within Limonite Avenue. This drainage pattern is consistent with the Eastvale Master Plan of drainage. The Modified Project also includes improvements, including catch basins within 58th Street, Hamner Avenue, Limonite Avenue, and Scholar Way. Catch basin laterals are proposed to join the existing storm drains within those perimeter streets. The Modified Project also includes two (2) water quality basins and one combined water quality/detention basin.
These basins may be located either on the surface or buried beneath the surface.
Current plans show these facilities buried beneath the surface, allowing for parks, parking lots, or other improvements on the surface above these facilities.
The proposed underground detention basin is currently sized approximately 360 feet long, 120 feet wide, and 6 feet deep. These dimensions may vary as long as equivalent storage is provided. Since the Original Project and Modified Project would convert the Project site from primarily pervious surface to largely impervious (80%), the detention basin is necessary to reduce peak storm flow rates to existing storm drain design flows.
The 100-year storm event is the major storm event used to size storm drain facilities.
During a 100-year storm event, storm flow of 252 cubic feet per second (cfs) would flow into the detention basin and flows of 82 cfs would flow out of the basin. The detention provided by the basin allows the runoff from the Modified Project to be less than the existing storm drain design flow rate, as shown in the following table.
Table 13. Existing Storm Drain Design Flow Rate29
Node
Flow without
Detention
(cfs)
Flow Reduction
from Detention
(cfs)
Flow after
Detention
(cfs)
Existing Storm Drain
Design Flow Rate
(cfs)
75 322.0 170.1 151.9 160.0
28 FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). 2021. Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Panel 06065Co681G and 06065CO677G. Visited December 2021. http://msc.fema.gove/portal. 29 Table 2, from “Preliminary Hydrology Analysis for Leal Ranch (Tentative Map No. 38290),” prepared by Hunsaker & Associates Irvine, dated November 29, 2021. 189
City of Eastvale Page 80
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
The PWQMP identified potential treatment options for runoff prior to discharge from the Project site in accordance with the Regional Water Quality Control Board Order No. R8-2010-0033 (MS4 Permit). The Original Project and Modified Project would change the existing Project site from largely pervious to a mix of 80% impervious and 20% pervious. As such, the Modified Project is required to treat runoff from the Project site. The MS4 Permit requires projects implement Low Impact Development (LID) principles to the extent feasible. The primary LID principle each Project must analyze is infiltration. Infiltration testing was conducted, and the infiltration rates do not meet minimum standards, therefore, infiltration cannot be relied upon as the primary treatment option. The Modified Project proposes biotreatment/bioretention basins that will allow for incidental infiltration. The biotreatment/bioretention basins rely on proprietary treatment of flows prior to discharge into the storm drain system off the Project site.
a) Short-term water quality requirements apply during construction and long-term water quality requirements apply for the built condition. The Prior EIR analyzed both conditions and determined impacts would be less than significant. During construction water quality impacts could occur from surface water pollutants such as sediment, oil, grease, and trash. Since the development area is greater than 1 acre, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) must be prepared to identify the best management practices (BMPs) to be implemented during construction.
Implementation of the SWPPP would reduce impacts to less than significant. The Modified Project includes the same amount of grading area as the Original Project and would also be subject to a SWPPP. Therefore, the analysis and conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged for the Modified Project.
A Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (PWQMP) was prepared for the Modified Project. The Modified Project relies on two underground biotreatment/bioretention basins that rely on proprietary treatment systems. An example of proprietary treatment system is a modular wetland, which has been accepted by most agencies. The Project site does not qualify to rely on infiltration as the primary source of treatment, however, the treatment basins will allow for incidental infiltration.
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
b) The Prior EIR determined the Original Project would have a less than significant impact on groundwater recharge. Percolation tests were performed as part of the PWQMP for the Modified Project, which determined that existing percolation rates do not meet the minimum standards to rely on infiltration. Furthermore, the Geotechnical Study for the Modified Project determined that existing groundwater levels are greater than 100-feet below the ground surface (Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation Including Near Surface Organic Content for the Proposed Approximately 160‐Acre “Leal” 190
City of Eastvale Page 81
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
Property, City of Eastvale, California, prepared by LGC Geotechnical, Inc; Appendix E).
The low infiltration rates and low groundwater depth both indicate that the Project site is not substantially contributing to groundwater recharge.
Therefore, the analysis presented in the Prior EIR would apply to the Modified Project because the conditions remain the same. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant. c.i, c.iv) The Modified Project would not change the drainage patterns as analyzed in the Prior EIR for the Original Project. Runoff from the Project site continues to flow from north to south, collecting in the southwestern portion of the Project site near Limonite Avenue. No stream or river is located on the Project site. Storm flows are primarily captured in streets or sheet flow over vegetated land. The Modified Project includes details of a storm drain system that would collect surface flows in catch basin inlets in the streets and convey flows via a storm drain system under on-site roadways to an underground detention vault located southwest portion of the Project site.
The Modified Project would increase the amount of impervious surface compared to existing conditions. This increase in impervious surface would increase the amount of runoff, however, through the Project design, peak discharge from the Modified Project would be less than the existing condition and less than the design flows of the existing storm drain in Limonite Avenue. By containing the runoff within proposed and existing storm drains, the Modified Project would not cause erosion or siltation on or off the Project site. The Hydrology Study for the Modified Project provides greater sitespecific detail and analysis than the information presented in the Prior EIR, but this is not a substantial change with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken or new information that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time of the Prior EIR.
Therefore, the analysis and conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged and no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary.
Impacts would remain less than significant.
c.ii - c.iii) As described above, the Modified Project includes a large subsurface detention basin to restrict peak flows during a 100-year storm event. The detention basin would outlet flows less than the design flows of the existing storm drain in Limonite Avenue. Therefore, the Modified Project would not create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of the existing stormwater drainage systems. Also as previously described, the Modified Project includes two biotreatment/bioretention facilities designed to treat initial storm flows to meet applicable local and state water quality requirements. Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with 191
City of Eastvale Page 82
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
d) The Original Project boundary is not located within a FEMA designated 100-year flood zone. The Modified Project does not change the Project boundary and is therefore also located outside of a FEMA designated 100-year flood zone. Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
The Original Project site is located over 30 miles from the Pacific Ocean and not located near a large body of water, therefore, the Project site is outside of a tsunami inundation area and not at risk of impacts from a seiche. The Modified Project does not change the Project boundaries and is therefore located outside of a flood zone, and tsunami and seiche inundation area, and therefore not at risk of discharging pollutants during a flood, tsunami or seiche. Furthermore, areas disturbed by grading and construction for the Modified Project would be either paved or landscaped with vegetation to control surface erosion. Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
e) The Original Project boundaries are not located within a sustainable ground water management plan. The Modified Project does not change the Project boundaries and is therefore also located outside of a sustainable ground water management plan. The Project site is subject to the Regional Permit issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (MS4) and a PWQMP has been prepared to show how the Modified Project will comply with the MS4 requirements. Percolation tests were performed as part of the PWQMP for the Modified Project, which determined that existing percolation rates do not meet the minimum standards to rely on infiltration.
Furthermore, the Geotechnical Study for the Modified Project determined that existing groundwater levels are greater than 100-feet below the ground surface. The low infiltration rates and low groundwater depth both indicate that the Project site is not substantially contributing to groundwater recharge.
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.
Conclusion: The Modified Project includes a site-specific hydrology study and preliminary water quality management plan that confirm the analysis and conclusions presented in the Prior EIR. The information provided in the hydrology study and PWQMP is not a substantial change with respect to the circumstances under which the 192
City of Eastvale Page 83
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
project is undertaken or new information that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time of the Prior EIR. The Modified Project would reduce peak stormflow discharge below the design flow of the existing storm drain in Limonite Avenue and include water treatment measures consistent with the MS4 requirements. Therefore, the analysis and conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged for the Modified Project. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
193
City of Eastvale Page 84
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
2.11 Land Use and Planning
Issues:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation is
Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding
or mitigating an environmental effect?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Discussion: On December 13, 2017, the City of Eastvale certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse No. 2015031028) for the 158.6-acre30 Project site, adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for significant but unavoidable impacts, amended the Eastvale General Plan to incorporate the Leal Master Plan (including amending land use policies and the Land Use Map) and voted to adopt the Leal Master Plan and a corresponding change of zone from heavy agriculture (A-2) to Leal Master Plan. On January 10, 2018, the City held the second reading and adopted the Leal Master Plan and change of zone to Leal Master Plan.
The Leal Master Plan outlined a multistage planning and development process. The first stage included the adoption of the Leal Master Plan, which identified “the project objectives and specific parameters for the design and quality of overall future development of the project site.”31 Stage 2 of the development process was anticipated to focus on “preparing project-wide development criteria and guidelines that are not included in the Master Plan, creating detailed plans for the first phase(s) of development based on the criteria and guidelines included in the Master Plan.”32 The last development phase outlined in the Master Plan consists of the “submittal of specific development projects through the Development Plan Review process established in the Eastvale Zoning Code.”
33 The Modified Project consists of an amendment to the Leal Master Plan, Development Agreement, Tentative Tract Map (TTM), and Major Development Review. This represents Stage 2 of the development process outlined in the Leal Master Plan. The Leal Master Plan Amendment provides a Project-wide site plan and identifies 30 The Leal Master Plan EIR identifies the size of the Project site as 161 acres. Based on detailed engineering, the actual size of the Project site is 158.6 acres. 31 Leal Master Plan EIR, December 2017, Project Description Page 2.0-2 32 Leal Master Plan EIR, December 2017, Project Description Page 2.0-2 33 Leal Master Plan EIR, December 2017, Project Description Page 2.0-2 194
City of Eastvale Page 85
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
permitted development intensities and development standards. The TTM creates both numbered lots for development areas and lettered lots for streets, parks, and open space.
a) The Prior EIR determined the Original Project would not physically divide an existing community. The Modified Project provides additional planning detail on future development of the Project site, consistent with the original Leal Master Plan. The boundaries of the Project site remain unchanged and the type of future development continues to provide a mix of residential and commercial uses.
Therefore, the Modified Project would not physically divide an existing community and no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
b) The Original Leal Master Plan did not establish a maximum number of dwelling units and no minimum development standards were identified. Therefore, development of the Project site had a wide range of flexibility. Given the wide flexibility, the Original Project established the following land use assumptions that were used in the Original Leal Master Plan EIR.
Table 14. Buildout Assumptions for the Original Project Land Use
660 multi-family homes (apartments)
1,525,000 square feet of general retail (shopping center) 460,000 square feet of general office
460,000 square feet of medical office
450 hotel rooms
100,000-square-foot civic center
The Modified Project proposes a land use intensity of 2,500 residential dwellings, 595,000 square feet of commercial uses and a fire station. As planned in the Stage 2 sequencing, the Modified Project continues to provide development flexibility to allow for development to occur in accordance with market conditions as part of Stage 3 planning. While no Stage 3 development plans have been prepared, the 2,500 dwelling units and 595,000 square feet of commercial uses have been allocated as shown in the following table for purposes of this Addendum. It is important to note that the following mix of uses is conceptual and may change during the Stage 3 planning processes. Since development of the site could take many years and each planning area requires a separate Stage 3 planning process, development of the Project site could vary from the assumptions provided in the table below. If changes to these assumptions occur in the future, the City is responsible to evaluate those changes and determine if additional environmental review pursuant to CEQA is required.
195
City of Eastvale Page 86
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
Table 15. Buildout Assumptions for the Modified Project Land Use
1,840 medium density residential (400 single family
detached and 1440 single family attached)
660 high density residential (apartment units)
390,000 square feet of general retail (shopping center) 65,000 square feet of general office
65,000 square feet of medical office
75,000 square feet civic center (City Hall, Library, Police) 12,200 square feet fire station
The following table compares the development assumptions between the Original Project and the Modified Project.
Table 16. Land Use Comparison Table
Land Use Original
Project
Modified
Project
Difference
Medium Density
Residential
0 1,840 +1,840 units
High Density Residential 660 660 no change
Retail (Shopping Center) 1,525,000 390,000 -1,135,000 sf General Office 460,000 65,000 -395,000 sf
Medical Office 460,000 65,000 -395,000 sf
Hotel 450 0 - 450 rooms
Civic Center 100,000 75,000 - 25,000 sf
Fire Station 0 12,200 + 12,200 sf
Therefore, the Modified Project is consistent with adopted plans and policies governing the Project site. Furthermore, as analyzed in the Prior EIR and applicable to the Modified Project, the Project site is located within the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP); however, is not located within any MSHCP Criteria Areas, Cell Groups, or Subunits and is not located in survey areas for Amphibians, Mammals, or Special Linkage areas. As analyzed in Section 2.4, Biological Resources, the Project is consistent with the MSHCP and does not provide suitable habitat for sensitive species. Furthermore, as analyzed in the Prior EIR and applicable to the Modified Project, the Project site is not subject to any local policies, such as a tree preservation ordinance.
The conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged and no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
196
City of Eastvale Page 87
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.
Conclusion: The Modified Project is consistent with the City’s General Plan land use designation, density limit, and policies. The Modified Project is also consistent with the existing Zoning for the Project site as it continues to contain a mix of residential and non-residential uses. Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. No impacts would occur.
197
City of Eastvale Page 88
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
2.12 Mineral Resources
Issues:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation is
Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and
the residents of the state?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locallyimportant mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan
or other land use plan?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Discussion: In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15128, the Prior EIR determined that as a result of the absence of environmental resources or Project characteristics to produce impacts, the potential effect on Mineral Resources was found to be less than significant. The Modified Project would not change the limits of disturbance, which encumbers the entire site, therefore the analysis and conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged. Furthermore, the site-specific geotechnical analysis evaluated the Project site’s soil conditions and found no mineral resources that would be a value to the region (Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation Including Near Surface Organic Content for the Proposed Approximately 160‐Acre “Leal” Property, City of Eastvale, California, prepared by LGC Geotechnical, Inc; Appendix E).
Therefore, the Modified Project would not create any new or greater significant impacts.
a) Consistent with the findings in the Prior EIR, no known mineral resources are located on the Modified Project site, which is further evidenced by the fact that during extensive geologic subsurface exploration across the entire Project site, no mineral resources were observed. The Project site is mapped Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ) - 3 by the California Department of Conservation
34. MRZ-3 identifies areas containing
mineral deposits, the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data, however, the extensive geologic subsurface exploration across the entire Project site confirmed no mineral resources are located onsite. Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
34 California Department of Conservation. 2022. California Department of Conservation Mineral Lands Classification website. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/mineralresources/. 198
City of Eastvale Page 89
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
b) The Eastvale General Plan designates the Project site for Leal Master Plan, permitting future development of residential and commercial uses. Therefore, no loss of mineral resources identified on any City land use maps would occur as a result of the Modified Project. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project. No new mitigation is necessary and impacts would remain less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.
Conclusion: The Modified Project would not change the analysis or conclusions found in the Prior EIR and no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
199
City of Eastvale Page 90
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
2.13 Noise
Issues:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation
is Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
NOISE. 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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Discussion: The Prior EIR analyzed potential construction, operation, and vibration noise associated with development of the Original Project and determined impacts associated with a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels would be significant and unavoidable, even after implementation of mitigation measures.
A Project-specific noise study was prepared for the Modified Project. The study, “Leal Master Plan Amendment Noise Impact Study” prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc. on December 21, 2021, is included in Appendix I. The Noise study analyzed impacts associated with construction and operation of the Modified Project as presented in the Project Description.
The Modified Project includes the following Project Design Features (PDFs) that are recognized for reducing noise levels. The PDFs include:
NOI PDF-1 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Project will demonstrate that building construction will achieve the minimum interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL for all residential units located along arterial roadways and/or adjacent to commercial uses, per the California Building Standards Code. The following noise control measures may be required for dwelling units located near adjacent roadways:
• Install sound barriers (masonry walls or walls with earth berms) between residences and noise sources.
200
City of Eastvale Page 91
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
• Install double-paned or upgraded STC sound rated windows. • Provide sound insulating exterior walls and roofing systems. • Locate and/or design attic vents to minimize sound propagation into each home.
• Provide forced-air ventilation systems.
• Provide the necessary setbacks for dwelling units fronting along major roadways.
NOI PDF-2 The Project will comply with California Title 24 building insulation requirements for exterior walls, roofs and common separating assemblies (e.g. floor/ceiling assemblies and demising walls).
NOI PDF-3 For proper acoustical performance, all exterior windows, doors, and sliding glass doors will have a positive seal and leaks/cracks must be kept to a minimum.
NOI PDF-4 The final building plans will ensure that HVAC units are not located within an area of the Project site that would contribute to a noise level exceedance at any adjacent property line, per the City of Eastvale Municipal Code requirements. To meet the City’s noise standards the following measures should be followed:
• All HVAC equipment shall be shielded or enclosed from the line of sight of adjacent residential uses.
• The combined noise level of all units operating simultaneously shall not exceed the City of Eastvale daytime and nighttime exterior standards at the nearest surrounding property lines.
NOI PDF-5 Future residents, property management personnel, and commercial tenants will be required to comply with the City of Eastvale Municipal Code Noise Regulations, Chapter 8.52, which specify that no person shall create loud, unnecessary, or unusual noise that disturbs the peace or quiet of any neighborhood, or that causes discomfort or annoyance to any person of normal sensitiveness.
To help ensure compliance with the City’s Noise Regulations, the following recommendations are provided:
• Deliveries, loading and unloading activities, and trash pick-up hours should be limited to daytime hours only (8 a.m. – 10 p.m.). • Limit engine idling time for all delivery vehicles and moving trucks to 5 minutes or less.
NOI PDF-6 The Project will prepare a construction management plan and obtain a construction work permit from the City of Eastvale prior to starting 201
City of Eastvale Page 92
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
construction. The construction management plan will ensure all contractors implement construction best management practices to reduce construction noise levels. Examples of best management practices may include the following:
• All construction equipment shall be equipped with muffles and other suitable noise attenuation devices (e.g., engine shields). • Grading and construction contractors shall use quieter equipment as opposed to noisier equipment (such as rubber-tired equipment rather than track equipment), to the maximum extent feasible. • If feasible, electric hook-ups shall be provided to avoid the use of generators. If electric service is determined to be infeasible for the site, only whisper-quiet generators shall be used (i.e., inverter generators capable of providing variable load.
• Use electric air compressors and similar power tools rather than diesel equipment, where feasible.
• Locate staging area, generators and stationary construction equipment as far from the adjacent residential homes as feasible. • Construction-related equipment, including heavy-duty equipment, motor vehicles, and portable equipment, shall be turned off when not in use for more than 5 minutes.
• Provide notifications and signage in readily visible locations along the perimeter of construction sites that indicate the dates and duration of construction activities, as well as provide a telephone number where neighbors can enquire about the construction process and register complaints to a designated construction noise disturbance coordinator.
• Construction activities shall not take place between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. during the months of June through September and 6:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. during the months of October through May.
NOI PDF-7 The Project will not include pile driving or blasting activities during construction. If impact pile driving or blasting is required, a follow-up noise and vibration impact assessment will be conducted prior to start of any activity.
With implementation of the PDFs, the Modified Project would not generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in excess of City standards. The Modified Project would generate approximately 27,764 fewer average daily trips than the Original Project, resulting in less traffic noise contribution to the surrounding roadways than previously analyzed in the Prior EIR. Lastly, the Modified Project has reduced the amount of commercial land use in favor of a greater amount 202
City of Eastvale Page 93
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
of residential use, which is generally considered a more compatible land use with the surrounding community from a noise standpoint.
a) The Noise Study prepared for the Modified Project analyzed noise impacts from long-term operations of the proposed development and short-term construction noise impacts. The Modified Project would generate approximately 27,764 fewer average daily trips than the Original Project, resulting in less operational traffic noise contribution to the surrounding roadways than previously analyzed in the Prior EIR.
Furthermore, the Modified Project would not cause a significant impact associated with a change in roadway noise levels as shown in the following table.
Table 17. Roadway Noise Impact Analysis (dBA CNEL)1 Existing Year Conditions35 The land uses proposed as part of the Modified Project are compatible with surrounding land uses and none of the land uses are considered substantial noise generators. Furthermore, future tenants within the commercial areas would be subject to the City’s noise ordinance, which places limits on noise generated from stationary 35 CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level, dBA = decibels A ;Table 8, from “Leal Master Plan Amendment Noise Impact Study,” prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc., dated December 21, 2021. 203
City of Eastvale Page 94
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
uses. The proposed Project includes several Project Design Features that would further reduce operational noise levels, as follows:
NOI PDF-1 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Project will demonstrate that building construction will achieve the minimum interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL for all residential units located along arterial roadways and/or adjacent to commercial uses, per the California Building Standards Code. The following noise control measures may be required for dwelling units located near adjacent roadways:
• Install sound barriers (masonry walls or walls with earth berms) between residences and noise sources.
• Install double-paned or upgraded sound transmission class (STC) sound rated windows.
• Provide sound insulating exterior walls and roofing systems. • Locate and/or design attic vents to minimize sound propagation into each home.
• Provide forced-air ventilation systems.
• Provide the necessary setbacks for dwelling units fronting along major roadways.
NOI PDF-2 The Project will comply with California Title 24 building insulation requirements for exterior walls, roofs and common separating assemblies (e.g. floor/ceiling assemblies and demising walls).
NOI PDF-3 For proper acoustical performance, all exterior windows, doors, and sliding glass doors will have a positive seal and leaks/cracks must be kept to a minimum.
NOI PDF-4 The final building plans will ensure that heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) units are not located within an area of the Project site that would contribute to a noise level exceedance at any adjacent property line, per the City of Eastvale Municipal Code requirements. To meet the City’s noise standards the following measures should be followed:
• All HVAC equipment shall be shielded or enclosed from the line of sight of adjacent residential uses.
• The combined noise level of all units operating simultaneously shall not exceed the City of Eastvale daytime and nighttime exterior standards at the nearest surrounding property lines.
204
City of Eastvale Page 95
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
NOI PDF-5 Future residents, property management personnel, and commercial tenants will be required to comply with the City of Eastvale Municipal Code Noise Regulations, Chapter 8.52, which specify that no person shall create loud, unnecessary, or unusual noise that disturbs the peace or quiet of any neighborhood, or that causes discomfort or annoyance to any person of normal sensitiveness.
To help ensure compliance with the City’s Noise Regulations, the following recommendations are provided:
• Deliveries, loading and unloading activities, and trash pick-up hours should be limited to daytime hours only (8 a.m. – 10 p.m.).
• Limit engine idling time for all delivery vehicles and moving trucks to 5 minutes or less.
Therefore, no new significant impacts or increase in severity of impacts would occur from long-term operation of the Modified Project.
The Noise Study prepared for the Modified Project analyzed potential construction noise impacts. The Noise Study analyzes potential noise impacts during all expected phases of construction, including, demolition, site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating. Noise levels are calculated based on an average distance of equipment over a 1-hour period to the nearest adjacent property. Demolition activities are expected to occur at approximately 50 feet from the nearest existing residential uses to the north. Therefore, noise levels from demolition activities are analyzed at 50 feet. Noise levels from all other construction activities are conservatively estimated from 200 feet, whereas, in reality, the degree of construction noise will vary depending on the type of construction activity taking place and the location of the activity relative to the surrounding properties.
The proposed Project includes several Project Design Features that would further reduce construction noise levels, as follows:
NOI PDF-6 The Project will prepare a construction management plan and obtain a construction work permit from the City of Eastvale prior to starting construction. The construction management plan will ensure all contractors implement construction best management practices to reduce construction noise levels. Examples of best management practices may include the following:
• All construction equipment shall be equipped with muffles and other suitable noise attenuation devices (e.g., engine shields).
• Grading and construction contractors shall use quieter equipment as opposed to noisier equipment (such as rubber-tired equipment rather than track equipment), to the maximum extent feasible.
205
City of Eastvale Page 96
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
• If feasible, electric hook-ups shall be provided to avoid the use of generators. If electric service is determined to be infeasible for the site, only whisper-quiet generators shall be used (i.e., inverter generators capable of providing variable load.
• Use electric air compressors and similar power tools rather than diesel equipment, where feasible.
• Locate staging area, generators and stationary construction equipment as far from the adjacent residential homes as feasible.
• Construction-related equipment, including heavy-duty equipment, motor vehicles, and portable equipment, shall be turned off when not in use for more than 5 minutes.
• Provide notifications and signage in readily visible locations along the perimeter of construction sites that indicate the dates and duration of construction activities, as well as provide a telephone number where neighbors can enquire about the construction process and register complaints to a designated construction noise disturbance coordinator.
• Construction activities shall not take place between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. during the months of June through September and 6:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. during the months of October through May.
NOI PDF-7 The Project will not include pile driving or blasting activities during construction. If impact pile driving or blasting is required, a follow-up noise and vibration impact assessment will be conducted prior to start of any activity.
The following table summarizes construction noise levels and documents that construction noise would not cause a significant impact. 206
City of Eastvale Page 97
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
Table 18. Project Construction Noise Levels36
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts were originally determined to be significant and unavoidable, however subsequent analysis prepared for the Modified Project with implementation of Project Design Features determined impacts are less than the Original Project and less than significant.
The Prior EIR included Mitigation Measures MM 3.6.1 and 3.6.3, which requires a Project-specific acoustical assessment and a construction-related noise mitigation plan, respectively. Mitigation Measure MM 3.6.1 and Mitigation Measure MM 3.6.3 36 dBA Leq = Equivalent Continuous Level ;Table 11, from “Leal Master Plan Amendment Noise Impact Study,” prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc., dated December 21, 2021. 207
City of Eastvale Page 98
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
have been satisfied with the Project specific Noise Analysis prepared for this Addendum (Appendix I). The Prior EIR included Mitigation Measure MM 3.6.4, which includes several requirements very similar to the PDFs included in the Project Description. Mitigation Measure 3.6.4 would continue to apply to the Modified Project.
b) The Prior EIR concluded the Original Project would have a less than significant impact from groundborne vibration with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM
3.6.2, which requires preparation of a vibration assessment for construction activities.
The Noise Study prepared for the Modified Project (Appendix I) includes a groundborne vibration assessment of the Modified Project, which satisfies Mitigation Measure MM 3.6.2. The construction of the proposed Project is not expected to require the use of substantial vibration inducing equipment or activities, such as pile drivers or blasting. The main sources of vibration impacts during construction of the Project would be the operation of equipment such as bulldozer activity during demolition, scrapers and loading trucks during grading and excavation, and vibratory rollers during paving. Based on standard construction equipment, vibration impacts would be less than significant as shown in the following table.
Table 19. Construction Vibration Impact Analysis37
The Noise Study prepared for the Modified Project provides greater site-specific detail and analysis than the information presented in the Prior EIR, but this is not a substantial change with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken or new information that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time of the Prior EIR. Therefore, the analysis and conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged for the Modified Project and no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant. Mitigation Measure MM 3.6.2 requiring preparation 37 PPV = peak particle velocity; Table 13, from “Leal Master Plan Amendment Noise Impact Study,” prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc., dated December 21, 2021. 208
City of Eastvale Page 99
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
of a vibration assessment has been satisfied and is no longer applicable to the Modified Project.
c) The Modified Project site is not located near a public or private airport or airstrip; therefore, the Modified Project would not alter the analysis or conclusions presented in the Prior EIR. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: Several mitigation measures have already been satisfied and are shown in light grey format. The mitigation measures applicable to the Modified Project that remain in place are listed below.
MM 3.6.1 An acoustical assessment shall be prepared that evaluates potential environmental noise impacts associated with the proposed project.
Where the acoustical analysis determines that noise levels would exceed applicable City noise standards, noise reduction measures shall be identified and included in the project.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to approval of development plan or project
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department MM 3.6.2 A vibration assessment shall be prepared for construction projects that would involve the use of major vibration-generating equipment (e.g., pile drivers, vibratory rollers) within 200 feet of existing structures. Measures to reduce ground vibration levels shall be identified for any potential vibration impacts exceeding a vibration threshold of 0.2 in/sec ppv.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to approval of development plan or project
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department MM 3.6.3 A construction-related noise mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit. The plan shall depict the location of construction equipment and specify how the noise from this equipment will be mitigated during construction of the project.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to issuance of grading permit Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department 209
City of Eastvale Page 100
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
MM 3.6.4 The following mitigation measures shall be implemented and specified on all project construction plans:
a) Clearing and construction activities shall be conducted outside of 6:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. during the months of June through September, and outside of 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. during the months of October through May. (Municipal Code Chapter 8.52, Noise Regulation).
b) All construction equipment shall be kept properly tuned and use noise reduction features (e.g., mufflers and engine shrouds) that are no less effective than those originally installed by the manufacturer. c) Construction equipment staging areas shall be centrally located on the Project site or located at the farthest distance possible from nearby residential land uses.
d) All motorized construction equipment and vehicles shall be turned off when not in use.
Timing/Implementation: During construction activities, noted on all project construction plans
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department Conclusion: A Project-specific Noise and Vibration Study was prepared for the Modified Project, including Project Design Features. This Study provides greater sitespecific detail and analysis than the information presented in the Prior EIR but this is not a substantial change with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken or new information that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time of the Prior EIR. The additional analysis performed for the Modified Project introduces additional evidence in the record that impacts from the Modified Project would be less than the Original Project and less than significant. Therefore, where the Prior EIR had concluded a significant unavoidable impact, the analysis of the Modified Project documents that impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measure MM 3.6.4 from the Prior EIR remains applicable and Mitigation Measures 3.6.1, 3.6.2, and 3.6.3 have been satisfied by the Noise Study prepared for the Modified Project. Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts from the Modified Project would be less than significant with mitigation. 210
City of Eastvale Page 101
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
2.14 Population and Housing
Issues:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation is
Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
d) 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 road
or other infrastructure)?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e) Displace substantial numbers of existing people
or housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Discussion: The Prior EIR concluded:
“…that while the proposed Leal Master Plan would facilitate growth on the project site, the growth would be an implementation of the long-range planning process for the project site as envisioned in the City’s General Plan.
The project would be consistent with the City’s General Plan policies and goals intended to promote smart growth. The project requires no mitigation measures to conclude that no impact would occur or impacts would be less than significant and less than cumulatively considerable.”38 The Original Leal Master Plan allows for residential medium density (14–21 units per acre) with no minimum or maximum and residential high density (22–40 units per acre) with a minimum of 500 dwelling units and a maximum of 660 dwelling units. The Modified Project proposes residential development up to 2,500 dwellings units, which is consistent with the flexibility and mix of uses specified in the Original Leal Master Plan and General Plan.
The State Legislature has declared that California has a housing crisis, and the Legislature has taken steps to encourage the production of additional housing.
Through California Government Code Section 65584, the State and Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) determines a Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA), which is a number of dwelling units local jurisdictions must accommodate through zoning and policies. The City of Eastvale has a RHNA of 3,028 dwelling units from 2021 to 2029. The Modified Project is one component of the City’s ability to reach its RHNA target.
38 Leal Draft Master Plan EIR, July 2015, Section 3.12.1, Page 3.12-1 211
City of Eastvale Page 102
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
The Project site has several houses owned by one landowner who is voluntarily selling the property. Therefore, no residents would be unwillingly displaced. Therefore, the Modified Project would not displace people or housing, or induce substantial unplanned population growth or create a need for replacement housing. The analysis and conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged for the Modified Project.
a) The Modified Project would provide population growth consistent with the Original Leal Master Plan analyzed in the Prior EIR. Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
b) The Project site has several houses owned by one landowner who is voluntarily selling the property. Therefore, no residents would be unwillingly displaced. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.
Conclusion: The analysis and conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged. The Modified Project provides residential housing consistent with the Original Leal Master Plan and consistent with the City’s General Plan and its policies.
Population growth is not unplanned and growth anticipated as a result of the Master Plan is an implementation of the long-range planning process for the site as envisioned in the City’s General Plan. Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
212
City of Eastvale Page 103
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
2.15 Public Services
Issues:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation is
Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
PUBLIC SERVICES.
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered governmental facilities,
need for new or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response
times or other performance objectives for any of
the public services:
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
i) Fire protection? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
ii) Police protection? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iii) Schools? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iv) Parks? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
v) Other public facilities? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Discussion: The Prior EIR analyzed impacts on public services including, fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, and other public facilities, and concluded impacts would be less than significant. In general, the potential for impacts to public services is based on population growth. The larger the population increase, the more demand is generally placed on public services. The number of residential dwelling units identified in the Modified Project is consistent with the Original Leal Master Plan, but greater than analyzed in the Prior EIR.
a) The analysis and conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged as follows:
i) Fire Protection: The Prior EIR stated that the Project site would be served within standard response times by existing stations. At the request of the City and not in order to reduce response times to the Project site, the Modified Project includes dedication of 1.22 acres at the corner of Scholar Way and 58th Street for a new fire station. The City has funding to construct the fire station, resulting in greater fire protection services and lower response times to the Project site than analyzed in the Prior EIR. The Original Project planned for 100,000 square feet of civic center uses and the Modified Project proposes approximately 75,000 square feet of civic center uses, consistent with the Original Leal Master Plan. The proposed fire station is approximately 12,200 square feet and combined with the other proposed civic center uses remains less than the 100,000 square feet analyzed in the Prior EIR. 213
City of Eastvale Page 104
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
The Project site is not located in a high fire hazards area and the Modified Project is not gated, thereby allowing for unrestricted emergency access. Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
ii) Police Protection: The Riverside County Sheriff’s Department (RCSD) provides police protection services to the City of Eastvale. Police response times do not come from a fixed location, like a fire station, because RCSD is continuously on patrol throughout the City. The Prior EIR indicated that the City of Eastvale is served by approximately 18 patrol officers operating from the Jurupa Valley Station39. At the request of the City, the Modified Project includes a proposal to dedicate several acres of land to the City for the construction of a new Civic Center campus, which would include City Hall, a Library, and a Police Station. While police services would continue to be provided by RCSD, a new Police Station in the City would serve as the law enforcement headquarters for the City instead of deputies stationed at the Jurupa Valley Station. The Modified Project would dedicate the land for the Police Station and the City has funds to construct and operate the facility. The Original Project planned for 100,000 square feet of civic center uses and the Modified Project proposes 75,000 square feet of civic center uses, consistent with the Original Leal Master Plan.
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
iii) Schools: The Prior EIR determined student generation from the Original Project would constitute a less than significant impact. Furthermore, Pursuant to Government Code Section 65996, mitigation of impacts on school facilities is limited to the imposition of statutory school fees. The Modified Project would cause an increase in student enrollment in the Corona-Norco Unified School District (CNUSD). The Prior EIR indicates that enrollment at Harada Elementary School exceeds capacity and enrollment at Eleanor Roosevelt High School is projected to exceed capacity in 2024.
According to CNUSD facilities staff, enrollment within CNUSD is declining within the center of the District in the Corona and Norco areas, and increasing in the perimeter of the District, in Eastvale and the Temescal Valley. The CNUSD is analyzing the additional students from the Modified Project and considering whether potential changes to school attendance boundaries would be necessary. 40 Given the payment of school fees pursuant to Government Code Section 65996 and the ability of CNUSD to adjust attendance boundaries as necessary, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with 39 Leal Draft Master Plan EIR, July 2015, Section 3.13.2, Page 3.13-3 40 Personal Communication with CNUSD facilities staff on December 2, 2021 214
City of Eastvale Page 105
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
iv) Parks: The Prior EIR concluded that future development on the Project site would be required to comply with City standards including General Plan Policy OS-6, which states that new residential developments would be required to, at a minimum, provide parks consistent with the Quimby Act (California Government Code Section 66477), through land dedication, fees in lieu, or on-site improvements . The Modified Project is subject to the City’s policies and regulations, similar to the Original Project and therefore, would not change the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR. Furthermore, the Modified Project has identified approximately 14 acres of parkland, for which the construction and operation of has been analyzed in this Addendum. At the time of the Stage 3 planning process, that amount of park acreage will be assessed against the City’s Quimby Act requirement and if a shortfall exists, additional parkland may be added on-site to the Modified Project and/or park fees will be paid.
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
v) Other Public Facilities: Other public facilities include libraries and government offices. The Prior EIR determined that impacts to Other Public Facilities from the Original Project would be less than significant. The Modified Project proposes to dedicate land to the City for civic center uses including a new Library and City Hall.
This dedication of land would allow the City to expand City Hall and provide a state of the art library within the City. The Original Project planned for 100,000 square feet of civic center uses and the Modified Project proposes 75,000 square feet of civic center uses, consistent with the Original Leal Master Plan.
Therefore, no new impacts or intensification of impacts to other government facilities would occur as a result of the Modified Project and impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.
Conclusion: No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
215
City of Eastvale Page 106
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
2.16 Recreation
Issues:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation is
Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
RECREATION. Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities such
that substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities
that might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Discussion: The City of Eastvale General Plan Policy OS-6 states that new residential developments would be required to, at a minimum, provide parks consistent with the Quimby Act (California Government Code Section 66477), through land dedication, fees in lieu, or on-site improvements. The Modified Project provides approximately 14 acres of parkland for which the construction and operation of has been analyzed in this Addendum. At the time of the Stage 3 planning process, that amount of park acreage will be assessed against the City’s Quimby Act requirement and if a shortfall exists park fees will be paid. Therefore, the Modified Project would not cause any new or more intense impacts on recreation facilities as compared to the Prior EIR. a) The Prior EIR concluded that future development on the Project site would be required to comply with City standards including General Plan Policy OS-6, which states that new residential developments would be required to, at a minimum, provide parks consistent with the Quimby Act (California Government Code Section 66477), through land dedication, fees in lieu, or on-site improvements. Since the Modified Project would continue to satisfy local park code requirements through the provision of park acreage and/or payment of park fees, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant. b) The Prior EIR concluded that future development on the Project site would be required to comply with City standards including General Plan Policy OS-6, which states that new residential developments would be required to, at a minimum, provide parks consistent with the Quimby Act (California Government Code Section 66477), through land dedication, fees in lieu, or on-site improvements. The Modified Project does not trigger the need to construct new or expand existing park or recreation facilities beyond the Project boundaries because the local park code requirement would be satisfied by the creation of on-site parks and/or payment of park fees. The Modified Project currently proposes approximately 14 acres of new on-site parkland. 216
City of Eastvale Page 107
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
Since the Modified Project would continue to satisfy local park code requirements, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.
Conclusion: The analysis or conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged for the Modified Project. The Modified Project will comply with the City’s local park code requirement through provision of approximately 14 acres of on-site parkland and/or payment of in-lieu fees, which offsets any increase in demand for park or recreation facilities associated with the Modified Project. Therefore, no additional demands on recreation would be created as part of the Modified Project, and no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
217
City of Eastvale Page 108
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
2.17 Transportation/Traffic
Issues:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation is
Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including
transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with
CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision
(b)?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Discussion: The Prior EIR included a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by Fehr and Peers for the Original Project. The TIA determined that with implementation of mitigation measures, traffic volumes from the Original Project would result in direct significant and unavoidable impacts to three roadway segments and cumulatively significant and unavoidable impacts to four roadway segments.
It should be noted that at the time the Prior EIR was prepared, traffic analysis and impacts were based on how roadway intersections and segments function. Traffic studies used a volume to capacity (V/C) methodology to calculate the level of service (LOS) of intersections and roadway segments. Following certification of the Prior EIR, the State Legislature adopted Senate Bill 743 (SB 743), which revised the CEQA Guidelines to add Section 15064.3, removing roadway function as the basis for analysis and replacing it with an analysis of vehicle miles traveled (VMT). 41 The premise
is the fewer vehicle miles traveled the less impact would occur to the roadway network. Automobile delay, as described by LOS or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion, is no longer considered a significant impact on the environment under CEQA under Public Resources Code section 21099 and case law. (Citizens for Positive Growth & Preservation v. City of Sacramento (2019) 43 Cal.App.5th 609).
41 The adoption of guidelines for analyzing and evaluating the significance of data does not constitute new information if the underlying information was otherwise known or should have been known at the time the EIR was certified. Concerned Dublin Citizens v. City of Dublin (2013) 214 Cal.App.4th 1301 218
City of Eastvale Page 109
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
A traffic study was prepared for the Modified Project titled, “Leal Master Plan Amendment Project Traffic Study,” by RK Engineering Group, Inc., and dated November 17, 2021 (Appendix J). Since the Prior EIR was based on a LOS analysis, the Traffic Study for the Modified Project includes a LOS analysis for informational purposes and for the City’s discretionary review and approval process, as well as a VMT analysis to be consistent with the current CEQA Guidelines. The Traffic Study for the Modified Project relied on the development mix presented in the Project Description.
Trip generation is the number of vehicle trips generated on a daily (24 hour) basis. The trip generation for each land use is obtained from the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE), which is the industry standard. The following table shows a comparison of the trip generation for the Modified Project compared to the Original Project. As shown in this table, the Modified Project reduces the number of daily vehicle trips by 27,764.
Table 20. Modified Project Net Trip Generation Compared to Leal Specific Plan TIA42 The Modified Project would also generate 1,200 fewer AM peak hour trips and approximately 2,978 fewer PM peak hours trips compared to the Original Project.
The Original Project analyzed the buildout of Limonite Avenue and Hamner Avenue both to six lanes. That requires the addition of a travel lane on westbound Limonite Avenue between Hamner Avenue and Scholar Way, and the addition of a southbound travel lane on Hamner Avenue between 58th Street and Limonite Avenue.
The analysis included in the Modified Project Traffic Study does not assume additional travel lanes on Limonite and Hamner. Instead, the Traffic Study assumes two travel lanes and a third drive isle associated with on-street parking for both of the Limonite and Hamner roadway segments.43 This would reduce each segment by one travel lane compared to what was analyzed in the Prior EIR.
42 Table 4-3, from “Leal Master Plan Amendment Project Traffic Study,” prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc., dated November 17, 2021.
43 An early design of the Modified Project proposed two westbound lanes on Limonite with on-street parking and two southbound lanes on Hamner with on-street parking. Shortly before publication of this Addendum the Modified Project was revised to eliminate on-street parking from both Limonite and Hamner and provide three travel lanes on westbound Limonite and three travel lanes on southbound Hamner. Since this late project revision adds more roadway capacity, similar to the Original Project, the 219
City of Eastvale Page 110
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
The Modified Project Traffic Study documents within Tables 6-1 and 6-2 that in the existing plus Project conditions and in the cumulative conditions, the Modified Project with two travel lanes on Limonite and Hamner would have a reduced volume to capacity ratio than the Original Project. The result of this study is that the reduction in the trip generation associated with the Modified Project is sufficient to improve the function of Limonite and Hamner with only two travel lanes on each roadway segment, compared to the Original Project. Therefore, the traffic impacts would remain significant and unavoidable, however the Modified Project would reduce the intensity of the impact.
It should be noted that the Modified Project does not propose only two travel lanes on Limonite and Hamner as analyzed in the Traffic Study. As shown on Tentative Tract Map No. 38290, both segments of Limonite and Hamner include three travel lanes, a median, and an access road serving on-street diagonal parking. The Traffic Study analyzed the “worst-case scenario” of only two travel lanes. The Modified Project as proposed with three travel lanes will only improve traffic conditions compared to the Original Project and represented in the TIA for the Modified Project.
Following certification of the Prior EIR, SB 743 was adopted, which changed how traffic is analyzed. Instead of V/C and LOS, traffic analysis in CEQA is now based on VMT.
The City’s VMT Guidelines state:
“Residential and office projects located within a low VMT-generating area, as identified in the WRCOG screening tool, may be presumed to have a less than significant impact. In addition, other employment-related and mixed-use land use projects may be screened if the project can reasonably be expected to generate VMT per resident, per worker, or per service population that is similar to the existing land uses in the low VMT area”
Based on the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) VMT screening tool, the Project is located in a low-VMT area because both the residential homebased VMT and home-based work VMT for this area are less than the City of Eastvale city-wide average. Furthermore, the Project consists of residential, employment and retail uses similar in nature to the existing land uses surrounding the site (which also consist of residential and commercial uses). Therefore, the Project would be expected to exhibit similar VMT patterns as the existing uses and utilization of the WRCOG screening maps is appropriate for screening purposes. Lastly, the Modified Project also includes an extensive network of sidewalks and trails to promote and encourage non-motorized mobility, which further reduces VMT.
Leal Master Plan Amendment Project Traffic Study was not updated with the additional travel lanes because the Traffic Study analysis a more conservative and constrained roadway network. The revisions to the Modified Project provide greater roadway capacity, which would further reduce traffic impacts. 220
City of Eastvale Page 111
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
A comparison of VMT generated from the Modified Project to the Original Project was performed using CalEEMod. The analysis determined the Modified Project would generate less VMT than the Original Project as shown in the following table.
Table 21. Comparison of VMT from the Modified Project to the Original Project44 Scenario Total Annual VMT (CalEEMod)
Current Project 68,221,050
2015 Project 150,029,705
Delta -81,808,655
a) The Prior EIR analyzed consistency with adopted plans and policies through a LOS analysis of roadway segments and intersections. The Prior EIR concluded the Original Project would result in significant unavoidable impacts after mitigation because several intersections with operate at deficient LOS standards in conflict with the City’s plans and policies.
The Modified Project would reduce trip generation by approximately 27,764 daily trips compared to the Original Project. The Traffic Study for the Modified Project determined that the Modified Project would continue to cause intersections to operate at deficient LOS compared to City policies, however the Modified Project would cause a less intensive significant impact than the Original Project.
The Prior EIR included three mitigation measures, which were part of the original LOS analysis and remain applicable to the Modified Project even though the CEQA Guidelines have changed to a VMT metric. Mitigation Measure MM 3.2.1a and 3.2.1c require the widening of Limonite and Hamner to three lanes, respectively. These two mitigation measures remain applicable to the Modified Project and have been incorporated into the Modified Project design as shown on TTM 38290. Mitigation Measure MM 3.2.1b requires a focused traffic study for the proposed Project. This mitigation measure has been satisfied by the Traffic Study prepared for the Modified Project.
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain significant and unavoidable with mitigation incorporated.
44 “Leal Master Plan Amendment Project Traffic Study,” prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc., dated November 17, 2021
221
City of Eastvale Page 112
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
b) The Western Riverside County Council of Governments (WRCOG) has developed a screening tool for VMT analysis. Based on the WRCOG screening tool, the Project site is located within a low VMT generating zone. Land use projects located within a low VMT-generating area may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. Utilizing the WRCOG Screening Tool, the Modified Project is located within a low-VMT generating zone based on residential home-based VMT and home-based work VMT. As a result, the Modified Project is exempt from further VMT analysis and the Project consists of residential, employment and retail uses similar in nature to the existing land uses surrounding the site (which also consist of residential and commercial uses). Therefore, the Project would be expected to exhibit similar VMT patterns as the existing uses and utilization of the WRCOG screening maps is appropriate for screening purposes. Lastly, the Modified Project also includes an extensive network of sidewalks and trails to promote and encourage non-motorized mobility, which further reduces VMT. Refer to Attachment A of Appendix J. Therefore, the Modified Project is consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3.
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would be less than significant.
c) The Prior EIR determined the Original Project would not increase hazards because of design or incompatible uses. The Modified Project relies on roadway networks consistent with City standards and similarly proposes a mix of land uses. Furthermore, the Traffic Study prepared for the Modified Project did not identify any hazardous design features. Additional engineering details will be added during the Stage 3 planning process and those engineering details will be reviewed and checked against adopted standard plans and design criteria for roadway design.
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
d) The Modified Project is surrounded by four City streets all of which provide emergency access. The Modified Project proposes to improve all four perimeter roadways to City standards. The Modified Project also proposes to dedicate 1.22 acres for a future fire station.
The Modified Project includes less intensive development than the Original Project by reducing trip generation by 27,764 average daily vehicle trips. The Modified Project would improve the surrounding circulation system with additional travel lanes as contemplated in the Original Project and the Modified Project would contribute to fewer local roadway trips than the Original Project helping to improve emergency access and circulation in the area. The Modified Project would complete street improvements on all four surrounding streets as proposed under the Original Project. 222
City of Eastvale Page 113
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
Therefore, as a result of the Modified Project proposing less intensive development than the Original Project and proposing to complete the surrounding street system, no new impacts would occur, and the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged.
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: Several measures have already been satisfied and are shown in light grey format. The mitigation measures applicable to the Modified Project that remain in place are listed below.
MM 3.2.1a Fair share of funding shall be paid for widening Limonite Avenue along the Project frontage from two to three lanes in each direction. Funding shall be determined and paid via the Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). Project plans and/or phasing shall establish the timing of this improvement to ensure it is in place prior to LOS D operations and consistent with the Master Plan’s infrastructure phasing provisions.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to approval of development plan or project
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department MM 3.2.1b A focused traffic study shall be prepared that demonstrates the project’s consistency with the transportation impact assessment (TIA) for the Leal Master Plan prepared by Fehr & Peers (2015). The traffic study shall assess the following:
• Parking;
• Site access and on-site circulation;
• Interaction of driveways with adjacent intersections (if appropriate); • Impacts on local intersections;
• Impacts to pedestrian, transit, and bicycle facilities; and • Trip generation monitoring study to ensure that, as land develops in the Leal Master Plan area, the total development generates traffic at or below the levels assumed in this Draft EIR.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to approval of development plan or project
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department 223
City of Eastvale Page 114
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
MM 3.2.1c Hamner Avenue shall be widened between Limonite Avenue and Bellegrave Avenue to three lanes in each direction either directly or through fair-share funding as determined by infrastructure and/or facility financing plans approved for the Leal Master Plan. Project plans and/or phasing shall establish the timing of this improvement to ensure it is in place prior to LOS F operations and consistent with infrastructure phasing provisions established as part of Master Plan implementation.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to approval of development plan or project
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department Conclusion: The changes associated with the Modified Project would reduce trip generation by approximately 27,764 average daily trips. Level of service impacts would remain significant and unavoidable; however, the Modified Project would reduce the severity of the significant impact. As evaluated again the new SB 743 standards, the Modified Project is consistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3 and impacts would be less than significant. The Prior EIR included three mitigation measures. Mitigation Measure MM 3.2.1a and 3.2.1c require the widening of Limonite and Hamner to three lanes, respectively. These two mitigation measures remain applicable to the Modified Project. Mitigation Measure MM 3.2.1b requires a focused traffic study for the proposed Project. This mitigation measure has been satisfied by the Traffic Study prepared for Modified Project and is therefore no longer applicable.
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. 224
City of Eastvale Page 115
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
2.18 Tribal Cultural Resources
Issues:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation is
Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project
cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in
Public Resources Code § 21074 as either a site,
feature, place, cultural landscape that is
geographically defined in terms of the size and
scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with
cultural value to a California Native American tribe,
and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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
§ 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code § 5024.1,
the lead agency shall consider the significance of
the resource to a California Native American
tribe?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Discussion: Since preparation of the Prior EIR, CEQA Guidelines Appendix G has been revised to include a specific section on Tribal Cultural Resources.45 The Prior EIR analyzed potential impacts associated with tribal cultural resources in the Cultural Resources section. The Prior EIR concluded that potential impacts to cultural resources would be less than significant with mitigation. No changes to the analysis or conclusions presented in the Prior EIR would occur for the Modified Project.
Notification pursuant to State Bill (SB) 18 and Assembly Bill (AB) 52 was distributed to the Native American Heritage Commission and local tribes as part of the Prior EIR. SB 18 requires local jurisdictions to provide opportunities for involvement of California Native Americans tribes in the land planning process for the purpose of preserving 45 The adoption of guidelines for analyzing and evaluating the significance of data does not constitute new information if the underlying information was otherwise known or should have been known at the time the EIR was certified. Concerned Dublin Citizens v. City of Dublin (2013) 214 Cal.App.4th 1301 225
City of Eastvale Page 116
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
traditional tribal cultural places. The Final Tribal Guidelines recommend that the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) provide written information as soon as possible but no later than 30 days after receiving notice of the Project to inform the lead agency if the proposed Project is determined to be in proximity to a traditional tribal cultural places (TTCP) and another 90 days for tribes to respond to a local government if they want to consult with the local government to determine whether the project would have an adverse impact on the TTCP. Per SB 18, the law requires a city or county to consult with the NAHC and any appropriate Native American tribe for the purpose of preserving relevant TTCP prior to the adoption, revision, amendment, or update of a City’s or County’s general plan.
AB 52 took effect July 1, 2015 and incorporates tribal consultation and analysis of impacts to tribal cultural resources (TCR) into the CEQA process. It requires TCRs to be analyzed like any other CEQA topic and establishes a consultation process for lead agencies and California tribes. A significant impact on a TCR is considered a significant environmental impact, requiring feasible mitigation measures.
Consultation with the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians occurred on May 21, 2015. The Prior EIR concluded that a potential for archaeological and paleontological resources exists and included mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less than significant level.
The potential for tribal cultural resource impacts depends on the area of impact and the condition of the Project site. The Modified Project would not change the area of impact or grading limits compared to the Original Project. Furthermore, Project site conditions for tribal cultural resources have not changed since preparation of the Prior EIR. Therefore, the analysis and conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain valid and unchanged.
a, b) During preparation of the Prior EIR, the City consulted with the Native American Heritage Commission in accordance with AB 52 and SB 18. No additional consultation has occurred. The Prior EIR conducted archaeological record surveys, which did not identify known tribal, cultural, or paleontological resources on the Project site.
However, since site-specific surveys were not conducted as part of the Prior EIR, the Prior EIR included several mitigation measures and determined impacts would be less than significant with implementation of the mitigation measures.
This Addendum includes preparation of the Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment prepared for the Modified Project (Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment, October 2021, prepared by Duke CRM; Appendix D), which included additional record searches and an extensive pedestrian field survey of the Project site over two days on June 17 and June 18, 2021. No archaeological resources were identified on the Project site from the records search or the field surveys. The Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment concluded that a low sensitivity exists for 226
City of Eastvale Page 117
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
archaeological resources to occur on-site and therefore, no archaeological monitoring is required during site disturbance activities, such as grading.
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Several of the mitigation measures included in the Prior EIR have been satisfied with the detailed Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment prepared for the Modified Project. Impacts would remain less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures: Several measures have already been satisfied and are shown in light grey format. The mitigation measures applicable to the Modified Project that remain in place are listed below.
MM 3.8.1 A detailed cultural resources field survey of the subject property shall be conducted prior to approval of the project. The cultural resources field survey shall identify any cultural resource finds and will set out measures to mitigate any impacts to any significant resources as defined by CEQA, the California Register of Historical Resources, and/or the National Historic Preservation Act. Mitigation methods to be employed include but are not limited to the following:
• Redesign of the development project to avoid the resource. The resource site shall be deeded to the City or a nonprofit agency to be approved by the City for maintenance of the site.
• If avoidance is determined to be infeasible by the City, the resource shall be mapped, stabilized, and capped pursuant to appropriate standards.
• If capping is determined to be infeasible by the City, the resource shall be excavated and recorded to appropriate standards.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to approval of development plan or project
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department MM 3.8.2 If cultural resources (i.e., prehistoric sites, historic sites, and isolated artifacts) are discovered during grading or construction activities in the Project area, work shall be halted immediately within 50 feet of the discovery, the City Planning Department shall be notified, and a professional archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards in archaeology and/or history shall be retained to determine the significance of the discovery. 227
City of Eastvale Page 118
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
The City shall consider mitigation recommendations presented by a professional archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards in archaeology and/or history for any unanticipated discoveries. The City and the Project applicant of the site where the discovery is made shall consult and agree on implementation of a measure or measures that the City deems feasible.
Such measures may include avoidance, preservation in place, excavation, documentation, curation, data recovery, or other appropriate measures.
The Project applicant shall be required to implement any mitigation necessary for the protection of cultural resources.
Timing/Implementation: As a condition of project approval and implemented during grading and/or
construction activities
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department MM 3.8.3 If human remains are discovered during any ground-disturbing activities in the Project area, all work shall be halted immediately within 50 feet of the discovery, the City Planning Department shall be notified, and the Riverside County Coroner must be notified per California Public Resources Code Section 7050.5 and California Health and Safety Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission, and the procedures outlined in CEQA Section 15064.5(d) and (e) shall be followed.
Timing/Implementation: As a condition of project approval and implemented during grading and/or
construction activities
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Eastvale Planning Department Conclusion: The Modified Project would not change the limits of disturbance or grading, which encumbers the entire site, therefore the analysis and conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged. Mitigation Measure MM 3.8.1 has been satisfied and no new mitigation is necessary. While determined to be highly unlikely, Mitigation Measures MM 3.8.2 and MM 3.8.3 would remain applicable to the Modified Project. Impacts would remain less than significant with mitigation. 228
City of Eastvale Page 119
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
2.19 Utilities and Service Systems
Issues:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation is
Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. 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 effects?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project's projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment
of solid waste reduction goals?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Discussion: The Prior EIR determined impacts from the Original Project on utility and service systems would be less than significant. The following site-specific utility studies were prepared for the Modified Project.
• “Sewer System Development Analysis” prepared by Hunsaker & Associates Irvine, Inc. dated December 6, 2021, is included in Appendix K. • “Water Supply Assessment” dated December 2021, prepared by Kimley Horn is included in Appendix L.
• “Preliminary Hydrology Analysis for Leal Ranch (Tentative Map No. 38290)” prepared by Hunsaker & Associates Irvine, Inc., and dated November 29, 2021 (Appendix G).
• “Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (PWQMP) for Tentative Map No. 38290,” prepared by Hunsaker & Associates Irvine, Inc., and dated November 29, 2021 (Appendix H).
229
City of Eastvale Page 120
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
These studies provide greater site-specific detail and analysis than the information presented in the Prior EIR, but this is not a substantial change with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken or new information that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time of the Prior EIR.
a, c) The Prior EIR concluded sufficient capacity exists for wastewater treatment from the Original Project and impacts would be less than significant. The Project site lies within the jurisdiction of Jurupa Community Services District (JCSD) for wastewater treatment. In August 2021, JCSD provided a preliminary hydraulic analysis of the existing sewer system to that would be impacted by the Modified Project. The analysis determined the maximum average daily sewer generation from the Modified Project without causing downstream sewer capacity issues or requiring upsizing of sewer lines. The analysis determined a maximum of 555,000 gallons per day (gpd) from the Modified Project could be accommodated within the existing sewer infrastructure without impacts. The Modified Project is estimated to generate 544,710 gpd, or 1.85% less than the maximum allowed average sewer flows from the Project site.
The Prior EIR also determined that expanded water facilities would not be required.
JCSD provides domestic water and service connection points are located within the existing surrounding streets. Sufficient pressure and storage capacity exist such that no additional facilities would be required to serve the Modified Project.
As detailed in Section 2.10, storm water flows to the southwest portion of the Project site. Existing storm drain facilities exist within Limonite Ave. The Modified Project includes a subterranean detention and water quality treatment basin that will reduce peak period discharge rates to existing levels and meet the water quality standards.
No new off-site storm drain or water quality infrastructure is required.
According to the Prior EIR, “Southern California Edison (SCE) currently provides electrical service to the Master Plan area and Southern California Gas Company provides natural gas service; properties surrounding the project site have already been developed and are served by existing SCE and Gas Company infrastructure. Per discussions with SCE staff, implementation of the proposed project would not be expected to require the construction of any off-site transmission or distribution infrastructure (Ditta 2015).”
46 The Modified Project would rely on electrical and natural gas service from existing facilities in surrounding streets. The existing above-ground electrical lines along Limonite would be placed underground. No additional off-site improvements are anticipated.
46 Leal Draft Master Plan EIR, July 2015, Section 3.13.2, Page 3.13-10 230
City of Eastvale Page 121
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
b) The Original EIR concluded, “Furthermore, the JCSD has demonstrated capacity in its water supply and wastewater treatment systems to accommodate growth in the city, including the proposed project and future development would obtain a water/sewer availability letter from the JCSD and pay any district fees and facilities charges in order to fund any off-site improvements.”
47A Project level water supply analysis was
prepared for the Modified Project. The Modified Project is of sufficient size that in accordance with Senate Bill (SB) 610 a Water Supply Assessment (WSA) is required.
Appendix L includes the WSA prepared for the Modified Project.
JCSD is the water supplier for the Project site and prepared a 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) for its service area. The UWMP analyzes growth assumptions and determines if sufficient domestic water is available to serve the growth assumptions in wet years and dry years.
The WSA relied upon duty factors supplied by JCSD in the UWMP to calculate Project Water Demand as shown in the following table.48
Table 22. Project Water Demand49
The 2020 UWMP assumed future growth on the Project site and projected a water demand of 505 acre feet per year (AFY) for the Project site. Based on Table 2-2 and 2- 3 from the WSA, the Modified Project will generate a water demand of approximately 461 AFY, less than the 505 AFY assumed in the 2020 UWMP.
The Prior EIR calculated a potable water demand for the Original Project. These estimates are found in Tables 3.13-1 and 3.13-2 of the Prior EIR. The projected water 47 Leal Draft Master Plan EIR, July 2015, Section 3.13.5, Page 3.13-9 48 Water Supply Assessment, Kimley Horn, December 2021, Table 2-2, Page 6 49 gpd/ac = gallons per day per acre; ac=acres; gpd = gallons per day; AFY = acres feet per year. Table 2-2, from “Eastvale Leal Property Water Supply Assessment,” prepared by Kimberly Horn, dated December 2021.
231
City of Eastvale Page 122
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
demand for the Original Project was 734 AFY or 470,320 gpd. In both cases the potable water demand is less for the Modified Project compared to the Original Project. Furthermore, the WSA determined that sufficient water supplies are available to service this project during normal, dry, and very dry years.
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
c) The Prior EIR determined, “The JCSD has a 3.25 million gallons per day (mgd) capacity right, although the ultimate estimated flow rate from the JCSD to the plant is projected to be 5.7 mgd, based on the projections in the 2007 Master Sewer Plan Addendum. This represents an increase of 2.45 mgd and would still be below the operating capacity of 8.0 mg. The JCSD has a proposed project in its 20-year Capital Improvement Program to obtain additional treatment capacity at the WWTP (JCSD 2011, p.57). As of 2007, the plant was not operating at capacity (treating approximately 5.5 mgd), and the JCSD obtaining additional treatment capacity to accommodate growth in its service area would not necessarily result in expansion of the WWTP. Potential impacts resulting from additional treatment capacity would be subject to CEQA review if necessary.”
50 As demonstrated in the “Sewer System Development Analysis” prepared by Hunsaker & Associates Irvine, Inc. dated December 6, 2021, and included in Appendix K, JCSD determined the maximum allowed average daily flows from the Project site would be 555,000 gpd, which accounts for transmission pipe capacity and treatment capacity.
The Modified Project is planned to generate 544,710 gpd or 1.85% less than the maximum allowed sewer flows from the site.51
Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
d – e) The Prior EIR determined impacts from solid waste would be less than significant since each of the landfills serving the Project site have remaining capacity over 179 million cubic yards.52 The Modified Project proposes less development intensity, likely resulting in equal or less solid waste generation. Furthermore, the Modified Project would be required to comply with applicable waste reduction regulations found in AB 939, the Green Building Code, and the Eastvale Municipal Code, which apply restrictions to solid waste disposal. Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial 50 Leal Draft Master Plan EIR, July 2015, Section 3.13.5, Page 3.13-8 and 9 51 “Sewer System Development Analysis” prepared by Hunsaker & Associates Irvine, Inc. dated December 6, 2021, Page 2
52 Leal Draft Master Plan EIR, July 2015, Section 3.13.6, Page 3.13-9 232
City of Eastvale Page 123
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.
Conclusion: Additional Project-specific analysis of utility systems was performed for the Modified Project. This analysis provides evidence supporting the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR. The Prior EIR determined impacts for the Original Project would be less than significant. Based on the more detailed analysis and less intensive development associated with the Modified Project, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
233
City of Eastvale Page 124
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
2.20 Wildfire
Issues:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation is
Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
WILDFIRE. Would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose
project occupants to pollutant concentrations
from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a
wildfire?
☐ ☒ ☒ ☐
c) Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or
other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that
may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to
the environment?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Discussion: Since preparation of the Prior EIR, CEQA Guidelines Appendix G has been revised to include a specific section on Wildfire.53 The Prior EIR analyzed potential impacts associated with wildfires in the Hazards and Hazardous Materials and Public Services sections. The Prior EIR concluded that potential impacts from wildfires would be less than significant. No changes to the analysis or conclusions presented in the Prior EIR would occur for the Modified Project.
The Project site is designated a Local Responsibility Area (LRA), which means the City of Eastvale is responsible for fire protection services54. The City of Eastvale contracts with Riverside County for fire protection. The Project site is not located in a fire hazard severity zone54. The Project site is completely surrounded by development and no wildland areas are within close proximity to the Project site54. 53 The adoption of guidelines for analyzing and evaluating the significance of data does not constitute new information if the underlying information was otherwise known or should have been known at the time the EIR was certified. Concerned Dublin Citizens v. City of Dublin (2013) 214 Cal.App.4th 1301 54 CalFire (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection). 2022. CalFire website. http://www.fire.ca.gov/.
234
City of Eastvale Page 125
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
a) The Prior EIR concluded the Original Project would not impair the City’s ability to implement its emergency response plan or use its emergency evacuation routes. The Modified Project includes less intensive development than the Original Project. As shown in Section 2.17, the Modified Project would reduce trip generation by 27,764 average daily vehicle trips. The Modified Project would improve the surrounding circulation system with additional travel lanes as contemplated in the Prior EIR and the Modified Project would contribute to fewer local roadway trips than the Original Project. The Modified Project would complete street improvements on all four surrounding streets. Therefore, because of the Modified Project proposing less intensive development than the Original Project and proposing to complete the surrounding street system, no new impacts would occur, and the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged.
b) The Prior EIR determined, “The project site is not designated as a fire hazard severity zone within the Local Responsibility Area (LRA) for Eastvale (Cal Fire 2015).
Therefore, no impact would occur.”
55 The Project site is not located in a fire hazard
severity zone56. The Project site is generally flat, completely surrounded by development and no wildland areas are within close proximity to the Project site per the California Depart of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire) website. Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
c) No infrastructure that could exacerbate wildfire is proposed as part of the Modified Project. The Original Project included underground utility lines in the streets, as is proposed with the Modified Project. Underground utility lines do not pose a risk of starting or exacerbating a wildfire. Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant. d) The Project site is generally flat with no slope areas or areas that could cause mudslides. The Project site currently drains from north to south. The southern boundary of the Project site is Limonite Avenue, a six-lane arterial roadway with a 14- foot wide median. Storm flows will be collected in storm drains within the Project site and connected to an existing storm drain in Limonite Avenue. The Hydrology Study for the Modified Project prepared by Hunsaker & Associates Irvine, Inc. (Appendix G), documents that post-development flows would be captured in a detention basin and metered out into the existing storm drain. If runoff was to exceed the storm drain system, flows would be captured in Limonite Avenue. Downstream flooding as a result 55 Leal Draft Master Plan EIR, July 2015, Section 3.10.6, Page 3.10-7 56 CalFire (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection). 2022. CalFire website. http://www.fire.ca.gov/.
235
City of Eastvale Page 126
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
of runoff or drainage changes is not anticipated. Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.
Conclusion: The Modified Project is not located in a fire hazard severity zone. The Project site is completely surrounded by development and no wildland areas are within close proximity to the Project site. The Modified Project would not conflict with or impede implementation of the City’s emergency response plan nor cause significant risk as a runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes. Therefore, no new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant.
236
City of Eastvale Page 127
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
2.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Issues:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation
is Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to 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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project
are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects, the effects of other
current project, and the effects of probable future
projects.)
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
a) The Modified Project would not change the biological conclusions included in the Prior EIR. The Modified Project would not change the limits of disturbance, which encumbers the entire site, and the condition of the Project site remains essentially unchanged from the time of the Prior EIR. The Modified Project would not cause impacts to sensitive species or habitats. The Prior EIR determined impacts to biological resources would be less than significant with mitigation. A Biological Assessment of the Modified Project determined impacts to biological resources would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Mitigation Measures 3.7.2 and 3.7.3 presented in the Prior EIR have been fulfilled. Mitigation Measure 3.7.1 remains applicable as presented in the Prior EIR to reduce impacts to nesting birds to less than significant. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.7.1.
The Modified Project would also not change the conclusions presented in the Prior EIR regarding impacts to major periods of California history or prehistory. The Modified Project would not change the limits of disturbance compared to the Original Project 237
City of Eastvale Page 128
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
and no conditions or circumstances have changed relative to historical, archaeological, or tribal cultural resources on the Project site. Therefore, the analysis and conclusions presented in the Prior EIR remain unchanged for the Modified Project. The Prior EIR identified Mitigation Measures MM 3.8.1 through 3.8.4 to reduce impacts associated with archaeological and paleontological resources to less than significant. Mitigation Measure MM 3.8.1 has been satisfied and is no longer applicable, and Mitigation Measures MM 3.8.2 and 3.8.3 remain applicable to the Modified Project. Mitigation Measure 3.8.4 has been revised, which requires that a qualified paleontologist evaluate any paleontological discoveries during grading. The potential for paleontological discoveries has not changed since certification of the Prior EIR and the limits of disturbance have remained the same. This mitigation measure is being revised in this Addendum to require a qualified paleontologist monitor grading activities on the eastern portion of the site, which is more efficient for grading activities instead of the requirement to call a monitor to the site to evaluate paleontological resources if found during grading. Therefore, no change in analysis from the Prior EIR would occur and Mitigation Measure MM 3.8.4 remains applicable to the Modified Project as modified. No new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts would occur with the Modified Project and no new mitigation is necessary. Impacts would remain less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures.
b) The Modified Project would not change the permitted land uses, limits of disturbance or extent of construction activities, and the condition of the Project site remains essentially unchanged from the time of the Prior EIR. The Project site is surrounded by urban development and represents one of the last remaining undeveloped areas of the City and the General Plan calls for a mix of uses. The Modified Project reduces development intensity which would in turn reduce the number of average daily vehicle trips by approximately 27,764 trips as compared to the Original Project. Therefore, the short-term construction impacts and long-term operational impacts would remain consistent with the analysis provided in the Prior EIR. There would be no changes to the analysis or conclusions regarding cumulative impacts as a result of the Modified Project. The findings of significance presented in the Prior EIR would remain without change and without intensification as a result of the Modified Project.
c) The Master Plan and Original Project contemplated refinement when additional Project-specific details became available and contemplated flexibility to address future market demand. The Modified Project is consistent with the Original Project, the City’s General Plan, the City’s Zoning Code, and the vision of future development on the Project site. As under the Original Leal Master Plan, the Modified Project’s growth would be an implementation of the long-range planning process for the project site as envisioned in the City’s General Plan. The Prior EIR determined the Original Project would cause six (6) significant and unavoidable impacts within the following three (3) topic areas: Transportation/ Traffic, Air Quality, and Noise. Throughout the analysis in 238
City of Eastvale Page 129
Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum No. 1
this Addendum, evidence has been provided that while those significant and unavoidable impacts would remain, the Modified Project would not cause new impacts or more severe impacts to human beings, either directly or indirectly.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21083.05, Public Resources Code. Reference:
Section 65088.4, Gov. Code; Sections 21080(c), 21080.1, 21080.3, 21083, 21083.05, 21083.3, 21093, 21094, 21095, and 21151, Public Resources Code; Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino,(1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 296; Leonoff v. Monterey Board of Supervisors, (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 1337; Eureka Citizens for Responsible Govt. v. City of Eureka (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 357; Protect the Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th at 1109; San Franciscans Upholding the Downtown Plan v. City and County of San Francisco (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 656.
SECTION 3.0 SOURCES
Carlson Strategic Land Solutions. Biological Assessment of the Leal Property located in the City of Eastvale. March 25, 2022.
Duke CRM. Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment. October 2021.
Hillmann Consulting. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment. March 23, 2022.
Hillmann Consulting. Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report. March 23 2022.
Hunsaker & Associates Irvine, Inc. Preliminary Hydrology Analysis for Leal Ranch (Tentative Map No. 38290). November 29, 2021.
Hunsaker & Associates Irvine, Inc. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (PWQMP) for Tentative Map No. 38290. November 29, 2021.
Hunsaker & Associates Irvine, Inc. Sewer System Development Analysis. December 6, 2021.
Kimley Horn. Water Supply Assessment. December 2021.
LGC Geotechnical, Inc. “Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation Including Near Surface Organic Content for the Proposed Approximately 160‐Acre “Leal” Property, City of Eastvale, California. June 21, 2021. Geotechnical Responses to Comments April 5, 2022.
RK Engineering Group, Inc. Leal Master Plan Amendment Project Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas and Energy Impact Study. December 22, 2021 RK Engineering Group, Inc. Leal Master Plan Amendment Noise Impact Study.
December 21, 2021.
RK Engineering Group, Inc. Leal Master Plan Amendment Project Traffic Study.
November 17, 2021.
239
Appendix A
240
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
APRIL 2022
CITY OF EASTVALE
Eastvale City Council
Mayor Clint Lorimore
Mayor Pro Tem Todd Rigby
Council Member Brandon Plott
Council Member Christian Dinco
Council Member Jocelyn Yow
Eastvale Planning Commission
Chair Houston Laney
Vice Chair Kevin Mensen
Commissioner Josh Lee
Commissioner Andrea Hove
Commissioner Michael Rochelle
Executive
Henry Garcia, Interim City Manager
Gina Gibson Williams, Community Development Director
Erica L. Vega, City Attorney
Planning
Gustavo Gonzales, Planning Manager
Jamie Cerda, Senior Planner
Allen Lim, Assistant Planner
Engineering
Jimmy Chung, City Engineer
Cassandra Sanchez, Principal Civil Engineer
Dahi Kim, Senior Engineer
Consultant
Peter Minegar, MBI
Mark Teague, Placeworks
DEVELOPER
A.J. Jarvis, The New Home Company
Matt Gibson, The New Home Company
Peter Carlson, Carlson Strategic Land Solutions
John Moreland, KTGY
Xiaofan Li, KTGY
Doug Staley, Hunsaker & Associates
Joey Valadez, Hunsaker & Associates
Sarah Kleinberg, Jackson Tidus
241
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
1.1 DRAFTAPRIL 2022
1 INTRODUCTION AND VISION
1.1. BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
In the City of Eastvale, a recently
incorporated and rapidly growing city in
northwestern Riverside County, the Leal
property holds significance as one of two
major undeveloped pieces of land in the city.
The idea of planning for the site’s
development originated in the 2012 Eastvale
General Plan. The Land Use Chapter of the
General Plan adopted at that time supported
the development of a mixed-use project on
the site in cooperation with the property
owner and/or the developer.
In 2013, the City of Eastvale City Council
initiated a long-range planning process for
the property. The effort was born out of the
desire to create the mixed-use town center
project on the site and to safeguard against
unsatisfactory development taking the
project’s place. The Leal Master Plan is the
product of this planning process and is a
critical step toward bringing unique,
regionally significant development to the site.
In December of 2017, the City of Eastvale adopted the initial Leal Master Plan. The multiple step process was established in the original Master Plan. This Leal Master Plan is the first amendment to the initial Master Plan as contemplated in the development process.
1.1.1. What Is a Master Plan?
This Master Plan is a long-range planning document that documents how the site will be developed. This Master Plan describes the community’s vision for the project area, identifies appropriate land uses, includes the development standards that are necessary to achieve the vision, defines the character of the project’s development, lists the steps involved with the development process, and provides guidance on implementation of the plan.
The adoption of this Master Plan represents the second step in planning for the site’s development. This document establishes general parameters for development of the Leal property (and the process for defining more specific standards tailored to the ultimate project to be proposed by the property owner/developer). Subsequent development plans will provide precise City of Eastvale Demographics
Eastvale offers the developers of the Leal
Master Plan excellent opportunity to serve an
affluent and growing population. Current
projections for 2018 show the following:
Eastvale 10-Mile
Radius
Population 68,706 1,070,150
Average
Household Income
$130,730 $90,507
Average Annual
Increase in
Household Income
2013-2018
0.94% 3.47%
Eastvale is the most diverse high-income city in
California, with a population that includes 40
percent Latino residents, 9 percent black, 24
percent Asian and 24 percent white.
242
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 1.2
development plans for each planning area, facilitating the actual construction of developments.
Note to the Reader: See Chapters 4 and 5 of this Master Plan for detailed information on required future submittals.
Implementation of this Master Plan will ensure that desirable, high-quality development is constructed on the site in an orderly and cohesive fashion. All development occurring on the site is required to comply with this Master Plan.
1.1.2. Community and Stakeholder Input
The original adopted Leal Master Plan was created and adopted in a public forum. The document represents a blending of the City’s goals, the owner’s ambitions, and the public’s aspiration for the property. The participants’ contributions to the project are as follows:
1.1.2.1. City Council and Planning Commission
Throughout the planning process, staff was provided with input from the City Council and Planning Commission on important aspects of this Master Plan.
Ultimately, the Planning Commission and City Council were responsible for selecting the Master Plan Amendment’s overall concept and the land use program and for reviewing and approving the final Master Plan Amendment.
1.1.2.2. Property Owner
Before and during the preparation of
this Master Plan, City staff met
regularly with the Leal family who has
for decades owned the property and
the property owner’s development
representatives. These meetings
helped establish the vision for the
property and the legacy that the
family hopes to leave in the form of
the proposed new development.
1.1.2.3. Public Outreach
The preparation of the original Master
Plan included a significant online
public outreach campaign, including
a website dedicated to the project
and numerous postings on the City’s
social media outlets.
The project website provided
background information on the
Big Ideas for the Leal Property
When the City asked for “big ideas” and themes
for the project site, residents provided
thousands of responses, mostly via social
media. The following were the top listed
categories:
• Lifestyle Centers
• Downtown
• Indoor Regional Mall
• Amusement
• Arts/Cultural
• Concerts/Special Events Venue
• Hospital/Medical Center
• Civic Uses
• 1950s Main Street
• University or Community College
• Sports/Recreation
• Hotel/Resort
• Giant Cow Statue
243
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
1.3 DRAFT APRIL 2022
project and the property, as well as City and project-related documents, and kept the public apprised of upcoming meetings. The website also featured an interactive section that allowed users to share their input on important aspects of the project.
Initially, participants were asked to submit their suggestions for “big ideas” and “themes” for the project site. Residents responded to the City’s call for ideas, submitting thousands of comments. Subsequently, an online poll was created to see which of the ideas held the greatest level of support in the community. Of the nearly 2,000 survey responses received, the three most popular categories were:
• Lifestyle Centers
• Downtown
• Indoor Regional Mall
244
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 1.4
1.2. OBJECTIVES
The General Plan goal of bringing a mixed-use development to the site will be realized through the adoption and the implementation of the Leal Master Plan. This Master Plan seeks to achieve the following objectives:
• Facilitate transformation of the project area into Eastvale’s Downtown. • Encourage a mix of uses, including retail, experiential uses, office, civic, residential, and recreation/entertainment, that respond to market demand. • Create a Downtown Village destination in Eastvale to meet the needs of patrons from the community and the region.
• Include heavily landscaped spaces, further reinforcing Eastvale’s Tree City USA designation.
• Implement high-quality architecture and design that creates a sense of place and enhances the aesthetic and visual quality of the neighborhood. • Design the site in an efficient fashion that perpetuates a compact, urban form of development.
• Provide safe and entertaining gathering places for Eastvale residents. • Develop the site in an orderly, comprehensive, and cohesive manner that avoids the piecemeal development of the site with a mix of incompatible uses that do not relate to one another.
• Expand the city’s economic base by generating substantial property and sales tax revenue.
• Provide employment opportunities for residents, improving the city’s jobs/housing balance and reducing vehicle miles traveled.
• Provide the infrastructure necessary to meet project needs in an efficient and costeffective manner. • Provide medium- and high-density housing opportunities. • Provide ample access for pedestrians, bicyclists, and automobiles throughout the site.
245
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
1.5 DRAFT APRIL 2022
1.3. VISION
The City envisions the project area emerging as the City’s Downtown and a destination within the region. The area will be anchored by a downtown village and surrounded by a mixture of complementary office, civic, residential, and recreation/entertainment uses.
All aspects of the project will exhibit the hallmarks of thoughtful, high-quality design and landscape.
Note to the Reader: For more information on the vision and the quality of the project’s design, refer to Chapter 2, Project Character.
246
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 1.6
1.4. LOCATION
The project area encompasses the Leal property, an approximately 160-acre landholding that (as of 2014) included one of the city’s last operating dairies and a horse farm.
Shown in Figure 1.1: Regional Context Map, the project area is in the northeastern section of Eastvale, approximately one-half mile from the Interstate 15/Limonite Avenue interchange, and south of State Route 60. The site is bounded by 58th Street to the north, Hamner Avenue to the east, Limonite Avenue to the south, and Scholar Way to the west, as shown in Figure 1.2: Local Context Map. The project area is situated immediately west and north of existing commercial and retail developments and is south and east of established and newly developed residential neighborhoods of varying densities. 247
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
1.7 DRAFT APRIL 2022
1.5. RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER DOCUMENTS
1.5.1. General Plan
The Leal Master Plan implements the City of Eastvale General Plan. The land uses permitted by this Master Plan are consistent with the goals, policies, and general land uses described in the General Plan.
1.5.2. Municipal Code
This Master Plan functions as the zoning document for the project area, except as discussed below.
This Master Plan incorporates zoning provisions that vary from, and supersede, those included in the City of Eastvale Zoning Code and introduces additional provisions not found in the Zoning Code. For these development standards, the Master Plan distinguishes between those provisions that apply to the entire project area and the provisions that only apply to individual land uses.
This Master Plan references regulations in the Eastvale Zoning Code. Where the Zoning Code is referenced, the Zoning Code in place at the time of a development project’s submittal will be used.
Where this Master Plan is silent on any issue, the applicable standard in the Eastvale Zoning Code will be used.
248
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 1.8
Figure 1.1: Regional Context Map
249
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
1.9 DRAFT APRIL 2022
Figure 1.2: Local Context Map
250
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 1.10
1.6. PLAN ADMINISTRATION
1.6.1. Use of This Master Plan
This Master Plan will be used as the basis for establishing standards of development and evaluating proposed development projects for the Leal property and is intended to be used by a broad range of persons, including:
• The City Council and Planning Commission in decision-making activities. • City staff in evaluating project consistency with the standards set forth in this Master Plan.
• The development community in preparing development proposals. • Residents and citizens seeking to understand the vision for the Leal property and the type of development which may occur.
1.6.2. Interpretations of the Master Plan
The City of Eastvale Planning Department is responsible for the administration, implementation, and enforcement of this Master Plan. The Community Development Director or their designee is responsible for making determinations of consistency with this Master Plan as follows:
1.6.2.1. Determination of Intent
Whenever the Community Development Director determines that an ambiguity exists in how a particular standard or regulation applies, or a formal request for an interpretation is made by an applicant, property owner, or interested party, the Community Development Director or their designee will prepare an official interpretation of intent in accordance with the procedure set forth in Eastvale Zoning Code Section 1.5.1 (Official Zoning Interpretation).
1.6.2.2. Determination of Similar Land Use
Recognizing that every conceivable land use cannot be identified in this Master Plan and anticipating that new land uses will evolve over time, the Community Development Director or their designee has the authority to approve uses when their operation, impacts, and scale are similar to those land uses listed in this Master Plan.
Determinations of similar land use will be made pursuant to Section 1.5.1 (Official Zoning Interpretation) of the Eastvale Zoning Code.
1.6.2.3. Amendments to the Master Plan
Over time, various sections of this Master Plan may need to be revised, as economic conditions or City needs dictate. The policies presented in this Master Plan contain some degree of flexibility, but any Master Plan amendments must be judged by relatively fixed criteria. Minor modifications to the plans, guidelines, 251
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
1.11 DRAFT APRIL 2022
regulations and standards contained in this Master Plan may be approved at the discretion of the Community Development Director or their designee as described in Section 5.4.1. Major modifications that do not meet the criteria for minor modifications described in Section 5.4.1 shall require a formal amendment to the adopted Master Plan. Major modifications are described in Section 5.4.2.
Amendments to this plan may be initiated by a developer, any individual property owner, or the City, in accordance with the Eastvale Zoning Code.
1.6.2.4. Actions Which Are Not Amendments to this Master Plan The following are not considered amendments to this Master Plan:
• Determinations of similar use, as discussed in this chapter. • Minor modifications to the Master Plan, as outlined in Chapter 5 of this Master plan.
252
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
2.1 DRAFT APRIL 2022
2 INTRODUCTION AND VISION
2.1. INTRODUCTION
The City’s vision for the Leal Master Plan area is a development that provides employment, retail, public uses, entertainment, and housing in a carefully laid out environment designed to create a memorable and enjoyable experience for both visitors and residents. The City and community expect that development of the Leal property will be of the highest quality, both in design and construction.
The envisioned level of quality is reflected in other regionally significant projects in Southern California, such as Downtown Claremont, downtown Temecula, and downtown Brea. All of these developments are noteworthy for their focus on creating a vibrant and attractive experience for visitors, incorporating vertical development (multiple stories) into a village setting, and for their attention to detail in a variety of features.
This Chapter expresses the City’s vision for the Leal Master Plan. The expected level of quality is shown as it should be expressed in various aspects of the project, including:
• Site design
• Circulation
• Architecture
• Landscaping
• Public Spaces
• Buffers/Adjacencies
• Street Furnishings
• Thematic Features
• Signage
2.2. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
Attention to detail and incorporation of high-quality materials is a key aspect of developing high quality projects. While the examples provided on the following pages focus on distinguishing characteristics within the Downtown concept, all portions of the project will be required to achieve a similar level of quality and attention to detail. 253
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 2.2
2.2.1 Site Design
The following principles accompany the vision for Leal Master Plan to form the foundation for the planning and design of the community. • Create a magical destination.
• Provide energy, vitality and create a central gathering place within the City. • Public and private spaces are designed to enhanceand complement one another.
• Along retail corridors, wide sidewalks and shaded paseos lined with street trees and outdoor seating create an inviting environment for both window shopping and socializing, focusing on the human scale and experience. • Diversify Eastvale’s economy by providing a range of uses within close proximity to each other.
254
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
2.3 DRAFT APRIL 2022
2.2.1 Site Design
Effective site design facilitates access and mobility and integrates building design and orientation, private space, and public space to create a vibrant destination. The following bullets describe the site design vision.
• Downtown will provide opportunities for retail commercial and office uses, as well as central gathering places for residents to interact and connect. This commercial/retail hub should be visually prominent, as it is strategically located at the intersection of Limonite and Hamner Avenue to capture visibility and attract shoppers and direct visitors to this destination center. • Downtown will be surrounded by higher density neighborhoods that gradually transits to lower density neighborhoods.
• A village green located adjacent to the Downtown will provide a wide variety of active and passive recreation amenities.
• Neighborhoods will be designed to connect to open space and park amenities, shopping, public and civic facilities, and recreational facilities via streets, paseos and pedestrian trails.
• A community wide linear park system will provide focus on community connections and pedestrian experience.
• Wide sidewalks and shaded paseos lined with trees and outdoor seating create an inviting environment both in the Downtown and residential areas. • Public and private spaces are designed to enhance and complement one another.
• The project is integrated into the surrounding environment to provide for multiple points of access.
• On-street parking, landscaped bulb-outs, and special paving treatments provide convenient access in an aesthetically pleasing manner.
• Parking is conveniently located to destinations and should be tucked away or integrated into parking structures so as not to dominate the experience. 255
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 2.4
256
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
2.5 DRAFT APRIL 2022
2.2.2 Circulation
A carefully devised circulation network allows pedestrians, bicyclists, automobiles, and delivery vehicles to operate without conflict.
• Entries and gateways into the project are distinct and identifiable. • Circulation patterns are simple and obvious.
• Paving and landscaping materials distinguish the types of circulation routes. • Plant and material selection along circulation routes are used to identify distinct districts within the overall project.
The Leal Master Plan has six major points of access: two points of access from Limonite Avenue, two points of access from Hamner Avenue, one point of access from 58th Street, and one point of access from Scholar Way, as shown in Figure 3.1, Land Use Plan.
In addition to these major entry points, secondary access may be provided from the major streets surrounding the project as part of subsequent Major Development Review for the Planning Areas.
All of the project’s access points will provide an opportunity to create a sense of arrival by creating entryway statements or gateways with landscaping, signage, and buildings. See Section 4.3.3 in Chapter 4 for the design standards for the major entry points.
An internal circulation system is established and shall be designed to be consistent with Chapters 4 and 5 of the Design Standards and Guidelines for residential and nonresidential site and street design.
Pedestrian paths and bicycle lanes identified on circulation cross sections on Section
6.2 shall be designed to comply with the following:
• Pedestrian and bicycle access shall be provided along all major roadways and internally within each development to allow connectivity from the streets to the businesses and residences.
• Pedestrian and bicycle connections shall be provided from the street to the interior of the development that minimize conflicts with vehicular traffic. • Sidewalks shall be shown on each street section.
• Pedestrian and bicycle access shall be consistent with Chapters 4 and 5 of the Design Standards and Guidelines for residential and nonresidential site design. 257
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 2.6
2.2.2 Circulation
258
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
2.7 DRAFT APRIL 2022
2.2.3 Architecture
The Leal Master Plan is designed to include distinctive, identifiable neighborhoods of a walkable size and scale with an appropriate mix of housing types. This section provides the framework for high quality design and expresses the desired character of future development.
Community-wide Residential Development
This section identifies key architectural and site design elements that should be considered in all residential areas within the Leal Master Plan community. These guidelines intend to establish a diversified, yet cohesive level of quality in home design that reflects the character of the surrounding environment while allowing for flexibility in design.
Architecture Forward Design
• Within the Downtown, buildings fronting onto the street shall be designed so that active and articulated architecture visually dominates the street and allows for direct views of the street and outdoor living space to enhance the sense of security. This can be achieved by orienting doors and windows toward the streets and public areas.
• Garages shall be set behind the front face of the building or be oriented to alleys or motorcourt drives to minimize the visual dominance of garages along the street.
Building Siting and Orientation
• In general, buildings shall be located and oriented to define public streets and primary open space areas, as appropriate to the product type. • Front entries shall face the streets, courtyards, paseos, or open spaces. • Units shall be sited and design so that each building shall have roof exposure to the south or east, or a portion of the roof with a flat roof. • Unit entries shall not be provided on 58th Street, Hamner Avenue, or Limonite Avenue.
Corner Lot Buildings
• Corner lots for single-family detached homes generally have wider than minimum required side setbacks from the adjacent public rights-of-way as compared to interior side setbacks (refer to product-specific standards in Chapter 4, Development Standards). This additional setback area is intended for landscaping and/or single-story architectural elements such as porches and courtyards.
• To respond to adjacent streets and intersections appropriately, buildings on corner lots shall be designed for a two-sided corner exposure, addressing the increased public visibility by allowing for architectural enhancements on the side elevation facing the street.
259
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 2.8
• Corner lot buildings shall feature enhanced elevations that provide a similar level of detail on the street side as the front elevation. Enhancements may include. o Wrap-around porches or courtyards
o Principal window treatments
o Roof plane breaks
o Accent colors, materials and detailing
o Garage access from the side street for conventional single-family homes
Building Form, Massing and Articulation
• Building massing (three-dimensional form of a building, referring to the perception of the general shape and form, and size) along the street shall be varied to create a quality streetscene.
• To reflect a variety of forms and create massing breaks, use horizontal and vertical offsets, such as interconnection and lapping of building forms and heights.
• Plane offsets cantilevered upper floors and varied roof forms are encouraged to avoid large expanses of flat, monotonous walls and roofs in alleys and motorcourts.
• To add interest to building facades, building articulations such as roof overhangs, balconies, and projections should be used in the design of building frontages. • For attached residential buildings, break down the scale of the buildings into smaller elements through varied building massing and forms, such as varying setbacks on building elements/facades, varying roof lines and directions, incorporating single-story elements or open balconies that provide negative space at prominent corners, utilizing shed roof forms and trellis elements, etc. • To prevent long expanses of blank walls, walls shall be articulated at least every 20 feet horizontally on each floor. Articulation shall mean a change in material, massing break of at least one foot (1’), or including a window, projecting porch, balcony (recessed or projecting), or other decorative element (e.g. decorative attic vent).
Colors and Materials
• Building materials and colors shall be appropriate to the overall neighborhood design theme and relate to the selected architectural style. Frequent changes in materials shall be avoided.
• Provide a variety in texture and color to allow for diversified expressions of individuality on building elevations, while maintaining visual cohesiveness throughout the community.
• Where color or material changes occur on the building, such changes shall only occur at inside corners or wrapped to appropriate termination points where they provide a finished appearance from the street.
260
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
2.9 DRAFT APRIL 2022
• Color and materials should wrap columns and posts in their entirety. • Exposed gutters and downspouts must be colored to match or complement the surface to which they are attached.
• Colors shall be neutral tones or muted colors complementary to the chosen architectural style and compatible with the character of surrounding development. Reserve bright or dark colors for trim or accents only.
Roofs
• Select simple and efficient roof forms, pitches and materials that are consistent with the architectural style of the building. Consider roof forms in relationship to the building mass to improve massing relief along public streets and on other publicly visible elevations.
• Varied roof forms, offsets and materials consistent with the architectural style of the building are encouraged to create variation in the skyline and diversity in the streetscene.
• Flat roofs with parapets or decorative cornices are permitted where appropriate to the architectural style of the building.
Mechanical Equipment
• All exposed air conditioning/heating equipment, soft water tanks, and pool and spa equipment shall be hidden from view in vaults, wells, enclosures, behind walls/fences or screened by landscape. Enclosures shall be constructed similarly and finished to match the building or material which they are attached.
Trash Enclosures
• Areas provided for trash and recycling bins shall be concealed from public view. • Where trash and recycling material collection facilities are shared by several units/buildings, the collection facilities shall be screened by architectural enclosures. The screening enclosure materials and colors shall be similar or complementary to the exterior materials and colors used on the adjacent principal buildings.
261
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 2.10
262
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
2.11 DRAFT APRIL 2022
Detached Residential Development Design Guidelines and Standards • Side entries are allowed to give the product design greater flexibility and varies the curb appeal.
• For rear loaded and detached cluster homes, front yard and common area landscaping will be provided by the builders.
• Provide visual harmony by applying a common family of details throughout the cluster complex.
• Provide paving within the courtyards to enhance their use and identity as pedestrian entries to the homes.
• Individual unit entries of cluster homes shall be clearly discernible from the courtyard or access drive.
• Where a central courtyard is provided for detached cluster homes, living space windows shall orient toward the courtyard.
• Provide a minimum of three (3) floor plans in each Planning Area. • There shall be a minimum of three (3) elevations for each floor plan, for a minimum total of nine elevations.
• No more than two buildings in a row may be plotted with the same elevation style.
• The same plans may be plotted adjacent to each other or across from each other, provided they have different elevation styles.
• Detached cluster units with front facades bordering streets I, E, F, H & G shall have their entries oriented to these streets.
263
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 2.12
264
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
2.13 DRAFT APRIL 2022
Attached Residential Development Design Guidelines and Standards Attached residential buildings tend to have larger building masses. As such, attached residential design should be carefully considered to convey a sense of human scale.
Building typology and chosen architectural style should reflect the building’s location within the community, and all buildings should exemplify quality design.
Townhomes and Attached Motorcourt Homes
• Where attached residential buildings are located adjacent to single family detached homes, minimize impacts on the adjoining residences with a sensitive transition in scale, massing and height, and design the transition to ensure resident privacy.
• Design the front elevation of attached residential buildings to clearly delineate individual units as a way of breaking up mass.
• Articulate the front building facades to promote individual unit identity by incorporating overhangs, recesses, porches, glazed doors, accent materials and colors, etc., consistent with the architectural style of the building. • External unit and building entries shall be designed in a manner that is clearly visible to pedestrian and/or vehicular approaches.
• Rear facades along alleys, driveways, or visible from backbone streets shall not be void of articulation. These elevations shall include massing breaks and/or architectural details (i.e. shutters, gable vents), as appropriate to the architectural style of the building.
• Attached residential buildings sited adjacent to lower-density residential neighborhoods should be sensitive to the scale of those neighborhoods. Step down building heights to match the adjacent buildings as a transition to lower adjacent development heights.
• When located next to open space or a paseo, arrange groups of attached residential buildings so that the buildings front onto paseos or the open space. In the event that fronting onto these open spaces is not feasible, the residential buildings shall front onto a courtyard, pathway, or other gathering space that would directly connect to the open space or paseo.
Apartment/Flats
• Building configuration shall form adequately-sized courtyards and gathering spaces, where applicable. Accessible from inside the building or from external pedestrian pathways, courtyards or gather spaces should feature enhancements such as trellises, shade trees, or outdoor furniture. • Step down corners and ends of multi-family buildings over two-stories in height at highly visible locations, softening the building edges and enhancing the streetscene.
• Provide pedestrian-oriented elements and details on facades facing public sidewalks. Elements such as balconies and awnings can add visual interest and richness to the street environment.
265
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 2.14
• Transitional spaces such as porches, covered entries or stoop entries shall be provided for ground floor units facing public street. Where common building entries are provided, they should be well defined along the street and/or parking lot edges.
• Arrange attached residential buildings and site landscaping in such a way that they screen parking areas from public view and minimize the impact of parking lots and garages on the public streetscape.
• Parking lots shall be broken up into smaller segments by landscaped islands, but should remain connected to facilitate internal circulation for a common complex.
• Provide a minimum of two (2) unit plans for each building, and a minimum of two (2) building plans (with the ability to add elements to corner units as necessary) in each Planning Area.
• Residential development adjacent to internal Street E, F, G, H and I shall include a primary pedestrian entry along this street frontage facing either the street or a courtyard or a paseo that is accessible by the residents. • All primary entrances for multi-family dwellings shall provide unit identification. • ... Exterior elevations shall include at least three (3) materials that accentuate or correspond to variations in building massing and plane changes, but not having too many different materials to avoid a chaotic appearance. Glazing (windows) and accent materials such as shutters and railings may count towards this requirement.
266
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
2.15 DRAFT APRIL 2022
267
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 2.16
Downtown District Design Guidelines and Standards
The Downtown District will function as a vital commercial center for the City.
Appropriate land uses for these areas include residential, commercial, retail services, restaurants, offices, paseos, recreational facilities, community venues, and civic facilities. The mixed- use areas are a place for working, shopping, dining and gathering.
Businesses will be situated along the street and provide convenient access for vehicles, pedestrian walkways and landscape areas.
General Criteria
• Buildings shall front onto a street or spine, which may be designed either as a vehicle free zone or in such a manner as to allow for use by both pedestrians and motor vehicles. When vehicles are allowed, design features shall be incorporated to define pedestrian movement through changes in paving materials or grade, articulated walks with landscaping, or overhead structures. • Both vertical (different uses within the same building, with commercial or office uses located on the ground floor and with office or residential uses located above) and horizontal (single-use buildings located side-by-side or adjacent to each other on a development site) mixed-use are encouraged in the Downtown District. The mix of land uses may be, but are not limited to, commercial mixed with residential or mix of uses of retail, restaurant, office, and civic uses. • Vertical mixed-use projects are encouraged for 3-story and higher buildings, such as first floor retail with office or residential uses above. Visually, this arrangement divides the façade into two basic parts: the upper façade and the storefront. • Large monolithic buildings, such as movie theaters and cultural venues, must be set back from a street designated for pedestrian activity and lined with smaller businesses in front to create a more appealing streetscene. • Plaza areas in mixed-use settings are encouraged and may include seating, fountains, and landscaping.
• Open views into the retail space at the storefront level will enhance the pedestrian experience by providing a visual connection to the use inside the building. On upper levels, windows should continue the aesthetics of the building while serving the occupants’ need for privacy.
• Primary entrances into retail buildings shall be clearly marked and provide a sense of welcome and convenient access into the building interior. • Corner buildings shall be designed with enhanced treatments. These treatments may include: larger building element at the corner, more ornamentation than adjacent buildings, or a plaza to define the space. In addition, corner buildings typically have both primary and secondary façades that relate to the streets on which they front.
• The ground floor of the commercial component of a mixed-use building shall have a finished ceiling height of a minimum of 12 feet. 268
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
2.17 DRAFT APRIL 2022
Building Form, Massing, and Articulation
• Iconic buildings in the Downtown District are encouraged and may include architectural features such as bell or clock tower or similar statements. • Architecture shall address public areas with high quality materials and should contain architectural elements and other detail relating to the human scale. • Groups of buildings shall be arranged in clusters around elements such as pedestrian walkways or landscaped areas.
• Retail and restaurant buildings with facades parallel to the street with covered pedestrian arcades are encouraged. Long unarticulated facades shall be avoided along the primary pedestrian corridor.
• No building wall facing a public street should extend more than 25 feet vertically or horizontally without a visual break created by a minimum 1 foot architectural/massing offset. (See graphic footnote 1 in below) • Within PA3 and PA5, the ground floor shall incorporate abundant glazing. At least thirty (30) percent of the exterior walls on the ground floor facing the identified pedestrian corridor shall include glass windows, glazed doors, or other openings, as illustrated in below. Percentage of fenestration shall be calculated based on the length of the facade frontage and the floor-to-ceiling height of the ground floor, excluding the areas for parking garage ingress/egress. (See graphic footnote 2, above)
• Adjacent to Streets H or G within Planning areas 2, 3, 4 and 5, at least 50 percent of the building (commercial, civic, or residential) shall be located within the 0 to 15 feet of the right-of-way from Streets H and G. The other 50 percent may be reserved for expanded outdoor dining opportunities, courtyards, paseos, or 269
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 2.18
driveways connecting to surface lots behind the building. Parking lots are not allowed between the building and the street along these corridors.
Materials and Colors
• A mixture of high-quality materials in highly visible locations and in varying quantities have a large impact on the perceived quality of the area. • Colors should be carefully chosen to complement the architectural style or tenant of each building.
• Exterior elevations shall include at least three (3) materials that accentuate or correspond to variations in building massing and plane changes, but not having too many different materials to avoid a chaotic appearance. Glazing (windows) and accent materials such as shutters and railings may count towards this requirement.
• Colors shall be neutral tones or muted colors complementary to the chosen architectural style and compatible with the character of surrounding development. Reserve bright or dark colors for trim or accents only.
Services, Utilities, and Storage
• Service, loading, and storage areas should be located away from the streets and activity area. When service areas are not able to be located away from streets or activity areas, screening elements such as walls, fences, architectural treatments, landscaping, or similar screening element shall be incorporated. In all cases, the screening shall be integrated into the design and not appear as an afterthought.
270
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
2.19 DRAFT APRIL 2022
271
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 2.20
272
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
2.21 DRAFT APRIL 2022
2.2.4 Landscape
Landscaping can have a significant visual impact on a project through the quality of landscaping materials selected and the how landscaping is integrated throughout the project site. Landscaping both visually ties a project together and identifies distinct districts.
The City of Eastvale has been proudly designated as a “Tree City USA” by the Arbor Day Foundation by providing commitments to installing and maintaining an urban forest. The City and this Master Plan continues this commitment to provide an urban forest to improve the visual appeal, increase property values, reduce home colling costs, and remove air pollutants. The following landscape guidelines are required for the Master Plan:
• To create an urban forest as quickly as possible, fast-growing tree species appropriate to the area and climate shall be used.
• Trees shall be planted as soon as practicable in project phasing to encourage more mature tree growth once buildings are occupied.
• The project should have a consistent plant palette, though variations may occur from street to street.
• Streets, promenades, public plazas, and smaller open spaces should have distinctive planting and landscaping treatments, making them unique and enjoyable pedestrian experiences.
• Plants are selected for specific purposes to enhance the project experience. • Plant and material selection along circulation routes are used to identify distinct districts within the overall project.
• Streets designated as “Enhanced Parkways’ on Figure 3.2: Open Space/Parks shall include a double-row planting of trees where the trees are planted at an average of least 20 feet on center. This requirement does not include intersecting streets or driveways. Special exceptions may be made for portions of the right-of-way that include utilities that preclude the planting of trees and for visibility of non-residential buildings.
• Surface parking lots shall have a minimum 6-foot wide landscape buffer from all street rights of way, measured from property line. Curbs and parking overhangs may be included within this required buffer.
• Where pedestrian circulation crosses a vehicular travel zone, a change in material, color, or grade is required.
• Landscape must permit adequate sight distance for vehicular and nonvehicular circulation. • All new landscape areas must have irrigation installed.
No plants from the California Invasive Plant Council List shall be planted. 273
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 2.22
2.2.4 Landscaping
274
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
2.23 DRAFT APRIL 2022
2.2.5 Public Spaces
Public spaces bring people together and allow for
community events such as concerts, markets,
exhibits, and celebrations.
• Public spaces reflect the needs of the
community and project.
• Furniture, signage, paving materials and
patterns, colors, landscaping, and other
design features of the public space are used
to create a sense of place and purpose.
• Surrounding buildings and uses are designed
to interact with the public space and viceversa.
• Common outdoor open space in the form of
a pocket park, plaza, courtyard, garden,
play area or outdoor amenity should be
provided. Common outdoor open space
must have a minimum dimension of 15 feet
in all directions.
• In the Downtown District, the sidewalk along
the designated pedestrian corridor shall
have a minimum clear width of 10 feet
(illustrated below). The sidewalk may
incorporate pedestrian-friendly amenities
such as tables and chairs and outdoor
seating, but these elements shall be located
outside of the 10-foot clear dimension.
•
275
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 2.24
2.2.5 Public Spaces
276
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
2.25 DRAFT APRIL 2022
2.2.6 Buffers & Adjacencies
The need to create buffers and address adjacencies between uses also provides an opportunity for continuation of the project theme and elevation of the quality of development.
• Freestanding and retaining walls shall have a minimum 30-inch planter on each exposed side of the wall to allow for the planting of shrubs, flowers, and/or groundcovers to help conceal the wall. Private yards for single-family and multifamily dwellings, open fencing (e.g. tubular steel), and enclosed private areas (e.g. pool deck) are not subject to this guideline.
• Landscaping shall be used as a transition between public and private space. • Planters matching the theme of the project and planted with colorful flowers are used to separate vehicle and foot traffic and add to visual appeal of the project.
277
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 2.26
2.2.6 Buffers & Adjacencies
278
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
2.27 DRAFT APRIL 2022
2.2.7 Screens, Fences, & Walls
Screens, fences, and walls act as buffers between land
uses, distinguish private space from public space and
provide privacy.
• Fences and walls incorporate the project theme
and add to the overall visual continuity of the
project.
• Landscaping is effectively employed to screen
undesirable uses from sight.
279
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 2.28
2.2.7 Screens, Fences, & Walls
280
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
2.29 DRAFT APRIL 2022
2.2.8 Street Furnishings
Street furnishings shall reflect and complement the
overall character of the project and provide consistency between distinct districts, creating an enjoyable and
memorable experience.
• Benches and other features are designed to
reflect the project theme.
• Tree grates and other project features
incorporate the project logo.
• Trash receptacles, newspaper kiosks, light fixtures
all feature similar design aesthetic and accent
details.
• Bicycle racks are designed for form and function.
281
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 2.30
2.2.8 Street Furnishings
282
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
2.31 DRAFT APRIL 2022
2.2.9 Thematic Features
Thematic elements incorporated into various design features have a significant impact on establishing a sense of place and identity for a project. • Project logo may be incorporated into street furnishings, walkways, and signage. • Artwork/mural on walls within the Downtown District is allowed. Utility boxes may be wrapped with art to provide visual interest on utilitarian infrastructure and may be permitted throughout the entire Master Plan area. • Material selection and special paving patterns for public spaces shall continue the project theme.
• Project themes are incorporated into building design to reinforce project identity. 283
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 2.32
2.2.9 Thematic Features
284
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
2.33 DRAFT APRIL 2022
2.2.10 Signage
Signage plays a significant role in the visual quality of a community. Signs announce one’s arrival at a distinct location, direct the flow of traffic, and provide information to the community through a variety of sign types, which are coordinated around a common theme.
General Signage Guidelines
• Signs shall be limited to a maximum of three (3) colors unless the use of corporate color schemes or logos dictates the use of more than three (3) colors. There should be a significant contrast between lettering colors and background colors for legibility.
• Signs for the Downtown District shall be enhanced, including halo-lit, reverse halo-lit, externally illuminated, non-illuminated, or other acceptable “highquality” design acceptable to the City and approved through a comprehensive sign program.
• Sign conduits, transformers, junction boxes, etc. must be concealed from view. • No sign shall be placed in such a manner that visibility of signs on an adjacent property is obscured.
• Signs should not extend above the eave line or parapet of the buildings on which they are located, except where such signs form an integral part of the building.
• Select sign colors and materials that contribute to legibility and design integrity. • The sign copy shall be appropriately sized for the sign structure or wall. Signs should not be too large to overwhelm the elevation, nor should they be too small to be illegible. Sign shall not be more than 80 percent of the width of the unit frontage to which is attached.
• The sign structure shall be consistent with the architectural style of the building that it is placed on or close to.
• Signage may move or rotate, but the mechanism for moving or rotating shall not be visible.
• The use of propellors, flags, or noise-creating devices as part of a permanent sign shall not be allowed.
• The use of light-reflecting materials, messages appearing for less than 30 seconds, or flashing/moving lights is prohibited.
Major and Minor Tenant Identification
The purpose of these signs is to identify major and minor tenants within the Master Plan area. There are typically three (3) different types of signs utilized for tenant identification:
• Monument sigs.
285
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 2.34
• Walls signs.
• Projecting signs.
Monument Sign Guidelines
• Use a consistent color scheme and design on all free-standing signs within the Downtown District.
• Signs shall be constructed of permanent, durable materials. • Monument signs should be designed with the width of the base of the sign equal to or more than the width of the sign face.
• Plastic is prohibited except for use for the sign copy. Exterior grade acrylic (e.g. plexiglass) is acceptable.
Wall and Projecting Sign Guidelines
• Locate signs as close to the customer entrance as possible. • Raceways and sign supports shall not be visible.
• Internally illuminated box signs and banners used as permanent signs are prohibited.
• Projecting signs shall be placed perpendicular to the building wall and should not extend above building eave of a sloped roof or highest point on a flat roof. • Projecting signs shall be attached to the building fascia or canopy with an attractive and decorative support.
• Exterior signs shall be constructed of permanent and durable materials. • Creative signage designs and techniques are encouraged.
Changeable Signage
The purpose of changeable signage is to create excitement and provide a visually interesting commercial area. Two (2) styles of this signage used in within the Downtown District to achieve this goal are “pageantry” and “marquee signs.” Pageantry
Pageantry includes flags, pole-mounted banners, kiosks, canopies, lights, directories, ground-mounted graphics, wrapped utility boxes, or other similar, temporary or permanent (but changeable) elements. The intent is to allow regular changes to the pageantry elements in terms of color, design, and other visual content so the pageantry signage can always look current. The intent of pageantry is to help advertise for special events such as fairs, public gatherings, concerts in the park, farmer’s markets, etc. and to allow for a variety of different methods to advertise community events within the plan area.
Guidelines for pageantry include:
286
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
2.35 DRAFT APRIL 2022
• Pageantry may be located in any portion of the Downtown District. Pageantry may be placed on street lights and over the public rights-of-way, provided applicable permits have been obtained from Public Works. • Air-inflated signs, moving signs, paper, cardboard, Styrofoam, stickers, and decals are not acceptable forms of pageantry (directories and kiosks excepted). • Pageantry shall not include flashing, flickering, rotating, or moving lights. • Temporary promotional advertising (banners) is not considered to be pageantry. • Kiosks and directories should provide vertical breaks in the sign structure. • Individual panels shall be recessed, framed, or treated to avoid a flat appearance of the sign face.
Marquee Signs
Marquee signs are typically used to provide information about current showings or events for theaters and live entertainment uses. Guidelines for marquee signs include:
• Marquee signs may project or be integrated into the building to promote enhanced articulation.
• Plain, rectangular marquee signs without any articulation are discouraged.
• Marquee signs may be manual or electronic.
• Marquee signs may include advertisements.
Directional Signage
The purpose of directional signage is to direct the flow of vehicular and pedestrian traffic within the Mixed-Use District.
Directional and Wayfinding Signs
Directional and wayfinding signs are typically horizontal signs with tenant names and directional arrows. Guidelines for directional/wayfinding signs include:
• Directional and information signs shall be attractive, clear, and consistent in theme, location, and design.
• Place directional signs at strategic locations throughout the Downtown district, providing directions to key destinations and facilities such as parking facilities for automobiles and bicycles, transit stops, and walking and bicycling routes to nearby parks, plazas, neighborhoods, shopping, civic and other destinations. • The project name may be located on the sign in a smaller, more understated manner to not detract from the wayfinding.
• Directional and signs with exposed Unistrut supports shall be avoided. • The placement of directional signs shall not limit sight lines. 287
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 2.36
• Wayfinding signs may be co-located with other streetscape furniture in the Downtown district, such as light standards and transit shelters, where possible, to enhance visibility and reduce visual clutter in the public realm. • Provide consistency between wayfinding/information signs and street furniture throughout the Downtown district. This can include customized poles and mounts for regulatory signs and lighting fixtures, and an area logo, font, and color scheme.
• Elements such as pole banners or decorative paving elements can serve as public art, branding, and wayfinding.
Temporary Signage
The purpose of temporary signage is to inform the public of a special event of limited duration, such as a grand opening. The duration and requirements for Temporary Signs shall adhere to the provisions within Section 5.7 of the EMC. The guidelines below apply to temporary signage:
• Temporary signage should not be affixed onto the roof of a building, a window or landscape area.
• Temporary signage material should consist of vinyl, nylon, canvas, or cloth. • Temporary signage should be well maintained.
288
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
2.37 DRAFT APRIL 2022
289
CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT CHARACTER
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 2.38
290
CHAPTER 3 – LAND USE PROGRAM
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
3.1 DRAFT APRIL 2022
3 LAND USE PROGRAM
3.1. INTRODUCTION
On December 13, 2017, the City of Eastvale City Council adopted a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation for the Leal Property from Business Park, High Density Residential, and Medium Density Residential to “Leal Property” or as shown on the General Plan Land Use Map, the “Leal Policy Area.” As part of this General Plan Amendment, the City Council adopted Policy LU-8.1, which is a land use table that specifies permitted land uses and development intensities. This chapter further describes the land use program for the Leal Master Plan and its consistency with General Plan Policy LU-8.1. The land use program establishes the types and intensity of development allowed within the Leal Master Plan. A land use map specifying locations for these uses is provided in Figure 3.1, Land Use Plan. Access roads showing in the Land Use Plan are described in Section 2.2.2, Circulation Plan.
Concurrent with the City Council’s adoption of a General Plan Amendment in 2017 for the Leal Property, the City Council certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse No. 2015031028). The adoption of this Master Plan Amendment was accompanied by an Addendum to the Leal Master Plan EIR, which provides further detailed environmental review of the land use program. The environmental analysis presented in the Addendum to the Leal Master Plan EIR determined that to avoid new or more severe significant impacts, the maximum development intensity on the Leal Property is 2,500 residential units and 595,000 square feet of general commercial, office, and civic center uses. Since that land use limitation has been established by the environmental analysis, this Master Plan Amendment incorporates that limitation as the maximum permitted land use intensities.
291
CHAPTER 3 – LAND USE PROGRAM
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 3.2
Figure 3.1: Land Use Plan
292
CHAPTER 3 – LAND USE PROGRAM
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
3.3 DRAFT APRIL 2022
3.2. LAND USE TYPES AND DEVELOPMENT POTENTIALS
The City of Eastvale General Plan Policy LU-8.1 references a land use table that has been summarized as follows:
Table 3-1:General Plan Land Use Table
Land Use Type
Minimum/
Maximum
Permitted
Details
Lifestyle Center 325,000 SF to 1,300,000
SF
Standard and mixed-use
retail
General Commercial Up to 225,000 SF “Big Box” Retail
Commercial Office Up to 920,000 SF
No Minimum
Hotel Up to 450 rooms
No Minimum
Permitted in Lifestyle and
General Commercial
Civic Center Not Specified Permitted anywhere on
Project
Residential Medium Density
(14 – 21 du/ac)
No Minimum
No Maximum
Single Family Attached,
condominiums,
townhomes,
Residential High Density (22 –
40 du/ac)
Minimum 500 du
Maximum 660 du
Townhomes,
condominiums, stacked
flats, and apartments
This land use table was incorporated into the General Plan as a general guide to the development of the Leal Property, recognizing that further development planning and detail would occur subsequent to the General Plan Amendment. The Leal Master Plan Amendment provides the next stage in refinement of the development plan and thus refines the proposed land use mix of uses and intensities.
General Plan Policy LU-8.1 includes two residential land use categories, Medium-Density and High-Density. The two residential land use types include density ranges provided in dwelling units per acre and a general description of the types of residential products associated with each residential category.
The Leal Master Plan Amendment distinguishes between the two residential densities by location. The High-Density Residential is located within the Downtown area and consists of either vertical or horizontal mixed use, and primarily consisting of apartments1. Within the approximately 52-acre Downtown, residential uses could occur on approximately 21 acres2. The maximum of 660 dwelling units planned within the approximately 21 acres 1 The Leal Master Plan does not regulate ownership of residential units, therefore, there are no limitations on the number of rental or owned units.
2 The residential acreage within the downtown includes the aggregate of Planning Areas 2, 4, and 10. 293
CHAPTER 3 – LAND USE PROGRAM
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 3.4
where residential is permitted represents a density of approximately 31.0 dwelling units per acre, consistent with the High-Density residential category within the General Plan.
The remaining 1,840 dwelling units allowed on the project site would occur over approximately 87.54 acres3. This represents a density of approximately 21 dwelling units per acre, which is within the Medium-Density category.
As shown in Figure 3-1, the project site has been organized into different Planning Areas.
The Planning Areas represent specific development areas that would be developed either with commercial, residential or mixed-use developments. Other planning areas have been designed for parks and open space and others for right-of-way. Table 3-2, Land Use Summary by Planning Area, shows detailed information for each planning area within the Leal Master Plan area, including land use category and acreages.
Table 3-2:Land Use Summary by Planning Area
Planning Area
(PA)
Land Use
Category
Approximate
Area (AC)
Minimum
Intensity
DU/AC or
SQFT/FAR
Maximum
Intensity
DU/AC or
SQFT/FAR
2 Mixed Use4 12.6
660 DU5
102,575 sqft6
660 DUs7
Max 40
du/ac
No Max sqft
4 Mixed Use 6.5
5 Commercial Core 4.6
10 Mixed Use 4.5
3 Commercial Core 9.8 None None
1 Residential 7.3
3 The residential acreage within the Medium Density category includes the aggregate of Planning Areas 1, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, K, and L. The two parks are included in this acreage calculation because they serve those residential planning areas.
4 Subsurface detention and water quality features may be located in Planning Area 2 or Planning Area 1, or a combination of both.
5 A minimum density of 660 dwelling units is required within the Mixed Use portion of the Downtown, which equals over approximately 21 acres. The dwelling units may be allocated evenly across each planning area or clustered in one or more planning area provided the net density of any individual project does not exceed 40 dwelling units per acre. Net density is calculated by the number of dwelling units applied to only the acreage of the development less any streets, roads, parks, trails, or common open space. 6 A minimum FAR of 0.10 is applied to Planning Areas 2, 4, and 10, resulting in a minimum requirement of approximately 102,575 square feet. The minimum square footage requirement is approximate based on project site design and for purposes of calculating the minimum square footage per this section including Table3-1, square footage is calculated based on the gross size of the building, including storage, stairwells, mechanical rooms, etc.
The City may administratively reduce this minimum square footage requirement without the need for a Master Plan amendment if the City decides it would like additional commercial square footage under the 595,000 square foot cap on Lot 3 or if specific building design and/or site use warrants less square footage. 7 A maximum of 660 dwelling units is permitted in the Downtown area for consistency with the General Plan, since General Plan density is calculated by the total number of units applied to the approximately 21 acres of Mixed Use residential area.
294
CHAPTER 3 – LAND USE PROGRAM
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
3.5 DRAFT APRIL 2022
Planning Area
(PA)
Land Use
Category
Approximate
Area (AC)
Minimum
Intensity
DU/AC or
SQFT/FAR
Maximum
Intensity
DU/AC or
SQFT/FAR
6 Residential 5.6 20 du/ac8 1840 DUs
Max 40
du/ac9
7 Residential 14.1
8 Residential 3.9
9 Residential 4.4
11 Residential 16.6
12 Residential 17.3
13 Residential 13.2
14 Public Facility 1.2 0.6
A - D Right-of-Way 9.4 N/A
E - I Internal Streets 13.5 N/A
J-V Parks and Trails 14.1 N/A
Total 158.59
Maximum Development Intensity10 2,500 DU 595,000
3.2.1. Downtown (DT)
The Downtown District (DT) land use category accommodates a mix of residential uses, commercial and office uses such as retail and restaurants, general commercial and commercial office, civic center, and residential. The vision for a lifestyle center included in the City’s General Plan occurs within the Downtown District. The DT category applies to approximately 52 gross acres within planning areas 2, 3, 4, 5 and 10 located to the northwest of the Limonite Avenue/Hammer Avenue intersection, in the southeast corner of the Master Plan area. The Master Plan provides for up to 595,000 square feet of commercial, office and civic uses, under the DT land use category. Approximately 21 acres within the DT area can accommodate residential uses. A minimum of 660 dwelling units is required. The 8 Within the 87.54 acres of Residential Uses (Planning Areas 1, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, K, and L), a minimum of 730 dwelling units shall be constructed at a minimum net density of 20 dwelling units per acre. The dwelling units may be allocated within one or more planning areas provided the net density of any individual project does not exceed 40 dwelling units per acre. Net density is calculated by the number of dwelling units applied to only the acreage of the development less any streets, roads, parks, trails, or common open space. 9 A maximum of 1840 dwelling units is permitted in the Residential Uses area for consistency with the General Plan, since General Plan density is calculated by the total number of units applied to the 87.54 acres of Residential Uses area.
10 Maximum development intensity was determined through the Leal Master Plan EIR and Leal Master Plan EIR Addendum.
295
CHAPTER 3 – LAND USE PROGRAM
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 3.6
dwelling units may be allocated within one or more planning areas provided the net density of any individual project does not exceed 40 dwelling units per acre.
3.2.2. Residential Uses (RU)
The Residential Uses (RU) land use category applies to planning areas 1, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 13. The Master Plan envisions variation in product types, including both detached and attached residential housing types, within the residential category to promote diversity and dynamic neighborhoods. The appropriate residential product types are discussed in Chapter 4, Development Standards. Within the
87.54 acres of Residential Uses (Planning Areas 1, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, K, and L), a minimum of 730 dwelling units shall be constructed at a minimum net density of 20 dwelling units per acre. The dwelling units may be allocated within one or more planning areas provided the net density of any individual project does not exceed 40 dwelling units per acre. Net density is calculated by the number of dwelling units applied to only the acreage of the development less any streets, roads, parks, trails, or common open space. A maximum of 1,840 dwelling units11 is permitted in the Residential Uses area for consistency with the General Plan, since General Plan density is calculated by the total number of units over the 87.54 acres of Residential Uses area.
3.2.3. Public Facilities (PF)
The Public Facility (PF) land use category applies to a 1.2-acre area within planning area 14 located at northwest corner of the Master Plan area. The PF land use designation provides for the development of a fire station.
3.2.4. Parks and Open Space (P/OS)
The Master Plan also provides for compatible recreational uses serving the needs of the residents, such as paseo, parks, recreation facilities and open space, as shown in Figure 3.2, Open Space/Parks Plan, which totals approximately 14.12 acres.
11 The maximum number of dwelling units of 2,500 was determined by the Addendum to the Master Plan EIR to avoid new or more severe significant impacts. Assuming 660 units are constructed in the DT area, the remaining 1,840 units may be constructed in the RU area.
296
CHAPTER 3 – LAND USE PROGRAM
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
3.7 DRAFT APRIL 2022
Figure 3.2: Open Space/Parks
Illustrative purpose only, final design may vary.
297
CHAPTER 3 – LAND USE PROGRAM
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 3.8
3.3. PERMITTED USES
3.3.1. Permitted Uses by Land Use Category
Permitted uses within the Leal Master Plan area are identified on Table 3-3, Permitted Uses. Other use or activity not listed in Table 3-3 may be permitted within the Master Plan area if it is compatible with the intent of the Master Plan and is similar to a permitted use, subject to approval by the Community Development Director or his/her designee.
Table 3-3:Permitted Uses
Permitted (P): Permitted by right
Conditional (C): Permitted upon issuance of a Conditional Use Permit Not Permitted (blank): Not permitted
Temporary Use (T): Permitted short-term activities
LAND USE RU DT PF P/OS
Agricultural Workers Housing
Bungalow Courts P
Caretakers Unit P
Congregate Care Facilities (7 or more persons) P P
Dwelling, Multiple Family2 P P1
Dwelling, Second Unit2 P P1
Dwelling, Single Family2 P P1
Dwelling, Two Family2 P P1
Emergency Shelters
Family Day Care, Large P P
Family Day Care, Small P P
Group Homes (6 or fewer persons) P P
Home Occupations P P
Live-Work Units, subject to Section 3.4.2.2 of the
Leal Master Plan P
Planned Residential Developments P P P P
Restricted Single-Family Residential Subdivisions P P P P Senior Housing P P P P
Banks and Financial Institutions P
Barber and Beauty Shops P
Bars and Cocktail Lounges C
298
CHAPTER 3 – LAND USE PROGRAM
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
3.9 DRAFT APRIL 2022
LAND USE RU DT PF P/OS
Boutique Wine and Beer Stores (Type 20 ABC
Licenses), per Section 3.3.2.5 of the Leal Master
Plan
P
Breweries, Wine Blending Businesses, and
Distilleries (without a tasting room), subject to
Section 3.3.2.4 of the Leal Master Plan
Breweries, Wine Blending Businesses, and
Distilleries (with a tasting room), less than 1,000
square feet subject to Section 3.3.2.4 of the Leal
Master Plan
P
Breweries, Wine Blending Businesses, and
Distilleries (with a tasting room), greater than
1,000 square feet subject to Section 3.3.2.4 of
the Leal Master Plan
C
Cigar, Cigarette and Tobacco Sales
Cigar, Hookah, and Cigarette Lounges
Clinics/Office, including Medical, Dental,
Chiropractic P
Day Care Centers
Department Stores
Drive-In or Drive-Through Operations or Facilities
(any use)
Farmers Markets, Carnivals, and other similar
temporary events, subject to Eastvale Zoning
Code Section 1.5.G, Temporary Events and
Permits
T
Fortune-Telling, Spiritualism, or Similar Activity
Grocery Stores/Market/Specialty Food Stores P
Hardware and Home Improvement Centers
Hotels C
Liquor Stores (Type 21 ABC Licenses), subject to
Section 3.3.2.5 of the Leal Master Plan
Massage Parlors, Turkish Baths, or similar personal
service establishments
Medical Marijuana Dispensary
Motels
Nurseries and Garden Supply Stores
Outdoor Kiosks and Vendor Carts C
Religious Institutions C C C C
299
CHAPTER 3 – LAND USE PROGRAM
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 3.10
LAND USE RU DT PF P/OS
Restaurants and other eating establishments,
including fast food restaurants and sandwich
shops (excluding drive-through uses), without
alcoholic beverage consumption
P
Restaurants and other eating establishments
with alcoholic beverage consumption (Types 41
and 47 ABC Licenses), subject to Section 3.4.2.3
of the Leal Master Plan
C
Retail Sales and Services, <30,001 sq. ft. P
Retail Sales and Services, >30,000 sq. ft.
Schools, Business and Professional, including Art,
Barber, Beauty, Dance, Drama, Music and
Swimming
P
Swap Meets
Tattoo Parlors
Theaters, not including Drive-Ins
Tourist Information Centers
Wedding Chapels
Animal Hospitals
Animal Training
Apiaries
Aquaculture
Auction Houses
Automobile Parts and Supply Stores
Automobile Service and Repair
Bail Bonds/Pawnshops
Blueprint and Duplicating Services
Boat and other Marine Sales and Rental
Boat Services
Body and Fender Shops and Spray Painting
Building Materials Sales Yards
Building Movers Storage Yard
Car Washes
Casinos, including Card Clubs/Rooms
300
CHAPTER 3 – LAND USE PROGRAM
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
3.11 DRAFT APRIL 2022
LAND USE RU DT PF P/OS
Check-Cashing and Payday Advance
Discount Stores (i.e., 99 Cents Only Store, Dollar
General, Dollar Tree, etc.)
Employment Agencies
Equipment Rental Services
Equipment Sales and Storage
Feed and Grain Sales
Gasoline Service Stations, with or without the
concurrent sale of beer and wine for offpremises consumption Golf Cart Sales and Service
Golf Courses, not including the construction of
buildings
Laboratories, Film, Dental, Medical, Research, or
Testing
Liquid Petroleum Service Stations
Lumber Yards, including only incidental mill work
Meteorological Towers
Mini Storage
Mobile Home Sales and Storage, Trailer Sales
and Rental House Trailers
Mobile Home Sales Lot
Parcel Delivery Services
Petroleum and Bulk Fuel Storage, above ground
Printers or Publishers
Professional Offices P
Real Estate Offices, Temporary P P P P
Sale, Rental, Repair, or Demonstration of
Motorcycles, Scooters, and Motorbikes
Sex-oriented Businesses
Stations, Bus and Taxi
Tire Recapping
Tire Sales and Service, not including recapping
Trailer and Boat Storage
301
CHAPTER 3 – LAND USE PROGRAM
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 3.12
LAND USE RU DT PF P/OS
Travel Trailers and Recreational Vehicle Sales
and Service
Truck and Trailer Sales and Rental
Truck Service
Airports
Ambulance Services
Cemeteries, Crematories and Mausoleums
Communications and Microwave Installations
Fire and Police Stations P P
Hazardous Waste Facilities
Heliports
Hospitals
Mortuaries
Public Infrastructure Facilities, including, but not
limited to, drainage, water quality and flood
control facilities and public communications
facilities
P P P P
Public Utility Substations and Storage Yards
Sewage Treatment Plants
Art Gallery, Library, Reading Room, Museum P
Community Auction and Sales Yards P
Fraternity and Sorority Houses
Indoor Amusement/Entertainment Facility:
Establishments providing indoor amusement and
entertainment services as primary uses for a fee
or admission charge, including dance halls,
ballrooms, electronic game arcades, dance
classes, karate, yoga, etc.
C
Establishments with four or more electronic
games or coin-operated amusements, or where
50 percent or more of the floor area is occupied
by amusement devices, are considered an
electronic game arcade as described above;
three or fewer machines are not considered a
land use separate from the primary use of the
site.
C
Indoor Fitness and Sports Facility:
Predominantly participant sports and health
activities conducted entirely within an enclosed
building. Typical uses include bowling alleys,
C
302
CHAPTER 3 – LAND USE PROGRAM
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
3.13 DRAFT APRIL 2022
LAND USE RU DT PF P/OS
billiard parlors, ice/roller skating rinks, indoor
racquetball courts, indoor climbing facilities,
soccer areas, athletic clubs, and health clubs.
Outdoor Commercial Recreation:
Facility for various outdoor participant sports
and types of recreation where a fee is charged
for use (e.g., amphitheaters, amusement and
theme parks, golf driving ranges, health and
athletic clubs with outdoor facilities, miniature
golf
courses, skateboard parks, stadiums and
coliseums, swim and tennis clubs, water slides,
zoos)
C P
Private Recreation or Event Facilities P
Public Recreation, Nonprofit Community Centers
and Clubhouses, Social Halls, Parks, Playgrounds,
Community Recreation Facilities, Plazas, Trails
and Paseos, Community Gardens, Open Space
and other similar recreational uses
P
Recycling Collection Facilities
Schools, Private C
Note 1: Residential uses, including live-work, are not allowed in the Planning Area 3 and 5 in Downtown (DT), except as outlined in the Development Agreement.
Note 2: Residential use types are further defined in Chapter 4.
3.3.2. Standards Related to Specific Uses
The following standards apply to specific uses within the Leal Master Plan. Uses not listed here will be subject to a determination by the Community Development Director.
3.3.2.1. Outdoor Kiosks and Vendor Carts
A. Signage: All signs on outdoor kiosks and vendor carts shall be regulated by Section 4.5, Signage, of this Master Plan.
B. Minor Development Review: Prior to commencement of each outdoor kiosk and vendor cart on public property, the business owner shall obtain approval from the Community Development Director for the size, design, and aesthetic characteristics, to ensure the facility is consistent with the overall characteristic of the development.
303
CHAPTER 3 – LAND USE PROGRAM
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 3.14
3.3.2.2. Live-Work Units
For live-work development in the Planning Areas 2, 4, and 10, the following commercial/residential activities, conducted wholly within enclosed buildings, shall be permitted, provided the commercial/office uses shall occur in conjunction with residential uses and are not standalone uses:
A. Apparel - custom tailoring and sales of apparel, clothing and other sewing products made on the premises
B. Artists and craft/sculpture products, sales galleries, and studios C. Internet-based commerce (no inventory, no pornography) D. Office - creative/tech-based offices and services
E. Office - professional offices and services
F. Photographer/photography studios
G. Residential uses in conjunction with office, retail or other work-related uses as permitted herein for live-work development
H. Spas and personal care to include esthetician/body sculpting with proof of training, nail salons and hair salons (for single patron use only and subject to Homeowners Association/Property Owners Association approval)
I. Similar uses permitted by the determination of the Community Development Director.
The property development standards set forth below shall apply to all live-work units within the confines of the Leal Master Plan:
A. Live-work units include the combination of residential living units and workspace of a building for self-employed residents. Ground floor residential living may be permitted in live-work units.
B. Where live-work uses are operated, the workspace shall be limited to a maximum of 50 percent of the entire unit (minus porches and garages).
C. The working area of a live-work unit shall be used exclusively for work activities and not for residential purposes.
D. Storage of hazardous materials necessary for work activities in live-work occupancies may be stored in controlled areas per the current California Building Code used by the City of Eastvale.
E. The residential portion of the live-work unit shall only be occupied by the individual and his/her household that has their professional occupation established in the same unit.
304
CHAPTER 3 – LAND USE PROGRAM
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
3.15 DRAFT APRIL 2022
F. Live-work units are single-tenant spaces that include both residential and commercial/office square footage in a single unit providing for a business to be conducted solely by the resident. In no instance shall the work portion of the live-work unit be sub-leased.
G. Noise levels generated by live-work spaces shall conform to the requirements of the Eastvale Municipal Code for residential use.
H. All signage and lighting shall comply with the requirements of the Leal Master Plan and the Eastvale Zoning Code and must be approved the City of Eastvale.
3.3.2.3. Alcohol Sales with a Bona-Fide Eating Establishment The sale of beer, wine, or spirits is permitted as an accessory use for any bona-fide eating establishment under a “Type 41 License” or a “Type 47 License” of the California Department of the Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) Board.
In addition to the design guidelines and development standards contained in the Leal Master Plan, the following performance standards shall apply to accessory alcohol sales with a bone-fide eating establishment:
A. Food shall be available for purchase at all times during restaurant operating hours.
B. Alcohol sales shall not exceed 50 percent of gross receipts for the establishment.
C. Any sale of spirits for consumption off-premises is strictly prohibited. The consumption of spirits shall be limited to the restaurant area as defined per applicable license from the ABC Board.
D. Beer and wine may be purchased for off-premises consumption; however, the beer and wine sold for off-premises consumption may not be consumed on the premises that it was purchased on.
3.3.2.4. Breweries, Wine Blending Businesses, and Distilleries Accessory beer, wine, or distilled spirit tastings is permitted within an alcoholic beverage manufacturing facility, provided the area devoted to tastings shall provide parking at the same rate as a restaurant or bar as described in Chapter 4, Table 4-8. The alcohol production area shall provide parking at the same rate as a manufacturing use as described in Chapter 4, Table 4-8. All such uses described within this section shall have an active, valid license from the ABC Board, as applicable.
In addition to the design guidelines and development standards contained in the Leal Master Plan, the following requirements shall apply to craft breweries, wine blending businesses, distilleries, and accessory tasting rooms:
305
CHAPTER 3 – LAND USE PROGRAM
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 3.16
A. A brewery, wine blending, or distillery use with a tasting room equal to or less than 1,000 square feet shall be permitted by right. An accessory tasting room of more than 1,000 square feet shall be required to apply for a Conditional Use Permit.
B. A brewery, wine blending or distillery use may not exceed production of 15,000 barrels per year.
C. All production activities and on-site storage shall be located completely within the facility. Off-site storage is permitted, provided it meets all applicable provisions of the underlying zone. The display of alcoholic beverages shall be located within the manufacturing area and accessory tasting room facility.
D. The brewery, wine blending, or distillery use and accessory tasting room use shall be allowed to operate and be open to the public during the following hours:
i. Manufacturing and Operation: 7:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M. Monday through Saturday; and
ii. Accessory Tasting Room Open to the Public: 11:00 A.M. to midnight daily, 11:00 A.M. to 1:00 A.M. on Friday and Saturday.
E. Service trucks used for the purposes of loading and unloading materials, ingredients, products, and equipment shall be restricted to the hours of 7:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. Monday through Friday and 9:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. on Saturday.
F. The consumption, tasting and sales of alcoholic beverages shall be limited to only those products produced on site.
G. Ancillary retail sales shall be limited to only those retail items directly associated with the on-site facility and accessory tasting room.
H. The brewery, wine blending, or distillery use or accessory tasting room shall not charge an admission fee, cover charge or require a minimum purchase.
I. A security plan, including a video surveillance system and exterior lighting plan, satisfactory to the Community Development Director, or his/her designee, shall be submitted to and approved prior to the issuing of a Certificate of Occupancy. The video surveillance system shall be installed to assist with monitoring the property on both the interior and exterior. A Digital Video Recorder (DVR) or similar video-recording device, capable of exporting images in TIFF, BMP, or JPG format shall be used. Recording shall be retained for no less than 30 days. Exterior lighting shall clearly illuminate the common areas surrounding the building including, but not limited to, the entrance and exit doors, as well as the business address.
306
CHAPTER 3 – LAND USE PROGRAM
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
3.17 DRAFT APRIL 2022
J. No more than 10 percent of the window display area (including any transparent doors) shall be allowed to bear advertising, signs or any other obstructions. All advertising, signage or other obstructions shall be placed and maintained to ensure a clear and unobstructed view of the establishment’s interior. Window signs displaying prices shall be prohibited. No advertising or signage shall be placed in the area above 3 feet or below 6 feet in height of all windows measured from grade.
K. Tours of the brewery, wine blending, or distillery use and accessory tasting room use shall occur on regularly scheduled days and times. The operator shall ensure that tours do not negatively impact adjacent businesses or property owners.
L. The use is not considered a nuisance as defined in the Eastvale Municipal Code;
3.3.2.5. Off-Premises Alcohol Sales
Boutique Wine and Beer Stores may permit the sale of wine and beer for offpremises consumptions under a “Type 20 License” of the ABC Board. General Liquor Stores may permit the sale of general alcohol sales, wine, and beer for offpremises consumptions under a “Type 21 License” of the ABC Board.
In addition to the design guidelines and development standards contained in the Leal Master Plan, the following performance standards shall apply to Boutique Wine and Beer Stores and General Liquor Stores:
A. The use does not result in any adverse effects, jeopardize, or endanger the health, peace, or safety of persons residing, visiting, or working in the surrounding area; The exterior lighting and security measures shall comply with applicable requirements.
B. The use is operated and maintained in a neat, quiet, and orderly condition and operated in a manner so as not to be detrimental to surrounding properties and occupants. This shall encompass the upkeep and maintenance of exterior facades of the building, landscaping, designated parking areas serving the use, fences, and the perimeter of the site, including all public sidewalks, alleys, and parkways; C. The use is not considered a nuisance as defined in the Eastvale Municipal Code;
D. The exterior lighting and security measures shall comply with applicable requirements (including, but not limited to Sections 120.05.050, Outdoor Lighting; 120.05.080, Neighborhood Preservation Standards; 120.05.060, Off-Street Vehicle Parking as applicable)
E. No more than 10 percent of the square footage of the windows and transparent doors of the premises shall be allowed to bear advertising, signs or any other obstructions including products, shelving, display items 307
CHAPTER 3 – LAND USE PROGRAM
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
DRAFT APRIL 2022 3.18
and/or coolers. All advertising, signage, product, shelving, display items and/or coolers shall be placed and maintained to ensure a clear and unobstructed view of the establishment’s interior. Window signs displaying prices shall be prohibited. No advertising or signage shall be placed in the area above 3 feet or below six (6) feet in height of all windows measured from grade.
F. A copy of these performance standards, additional City or ABC Board imposed operating conditions, and a 24-hour complaint telephone number shall be posted in a conspicuous and unobstructed place visible from the entrance of the establishment in public view. 308
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
4.1 DRAFT APRIL 2022
4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
This chapter contains the permitted uses and development standards for the Leal Master Plan. Standards not addressed in this chapter are subject to the City of Eastvale Municipal Code in effect at the time of approval of this Master Plan. Additionally, in order to be approved by the City, development will need to comply with the quality expectations and community features identified in Chapter 2 of this Master Plan.
4.1. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
4.1.1. Downtown Development Standards
The Downtown (DT) District is envisioned to be the focal point in the City. The intent is to develop an open-air marketplace for retail and specialty uses that are not currently present in Eastvale and in nearby communities (including Live/Work units).
The mix of uses may be horizontal (different uses within a Planning Area separated horizontally) or vertical (different uses within the same building, with commercial or office uses located on the ground floor and with office or residential uses located above). The residential component of this land use district is intended to provide for the development of multi-family residential dwellings in an urban atmosphere.
Minimum and maximum development intensities and densities are outlined in Chapter 3 of this Master Plan.
DT District includes planning areas 2, 3, 4, 5 and 10.
Table 4-1 establishes the development standards for the Downtown District. A conceptual plotting example illustrating the setback requirements is shown in Figure 4.1.
Residential uses within the Downtown District are subject to the development standards provided in Table 4-1. Where Table 4-1 is silent on a development standard, the development standards presented later in this chapter for specific product types would apply for the project type proposed. If there is a conflict in development standards between Table 4-1 and the development standards for product types, Table 4-1 shall govern.
309
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
APRIL 2022 4.2
Table 4-1:Downtown Development Standards
RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS
NON-RESIDENTIAL/
MIXED-USE
BUILDINGS
Maximum Site Coverage 75% N/A
Maximum Building Height 65’ (4 stories)
Minimum Building Setbacks From
Hamner Avenue ROW 30’ 30’
Limonite Avenue ROW 30’ 30’
Lot Line Along Internal Street 6’ 6’
Minimum Building Separation
Residential - Front to Front (entries) - at
open space
20’ N/A
Residential - Side to Side (no entries) -
at open space
15’ N/A
Non-Residential/Mixed-Use – Side to
Side
N/A 15’
Figure 4.1 Downtown Setback Diagram
310
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
4.3 APRIL 2022
4.1.2. Residential Development Standards
The development standards and product types included herein are intended to establish the minimum design parameters. An appropriate mix of building types shall be incorporated into the residential land use and mixed-use districts to avoid monotonous neighborhoods.
Table 3-2 within Chapter 3 establishes permitted uses, including Dwelling – Multiple Family, Second Unit, Single Family, and Two-Family. Those permitted residential land use categories are further defined in this Chapter through the following description of residential product types permitted in the Master Plan area.
Development standards for residential uses within the Downtown District are presented above in Table 4-1. Development standards for residential uses within the Residential Uses District (Planning Areas 1, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 13) are presented below by housing type.
Conventional Single Family Detached Homes typically have street front orientation where primary entries and walks face the street or the side, and have private rear and side yards. Garages are in the front or side and face the street. Resident parking spaces are provided in garages and guest parking spaces are provided in driveways or on local streets.
Zero-Lot Line Homes are designed to fit together along a common property line by providing one home with a deeply recessed garage. Reciprocal use easements are used to maximize the side yard areas. Zero-lot line homes typically have street front orientation where primary entries face the street, and have private rear and side yards. Garages with driveways face the street. Resident parking spaces are provided in garages and guest parking spaces are provided in driveways or on local streets.
Rear Loaded Homes have street-facing primary entries and are designed to take garage access from a shared access drive behind the homes. Private yard space is provided in a side yard, a courtyard behind the front portion of the house or behind the house between a detached garage and the home. Resident parking spaces are provided in garages and guest parking spaces are provided in driveways (18’ minimum in length where provided), on the street or in a common parking area. Reciprocal use easements may be used to maximize side yard areas.
Detached Cluster Homes are single-family detached dwellings oriented on a shared access drive. Each cluster module typically consists of 4 to 10 dwelling units.
Resident parking spaces are provided in garages and guest parking spaces are provided on the street or in a common parking area. Reciprocal use easements may be used to maximize side yard areas.
Row Townhomes are single-family attached homes with primary entries facing street or common open space. The units have private outdoor living space.
Automobile access is via an alley or shared access drive. Resident parking spaces 311
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
APRIL 2022 4.4
are provided in garages, and guest parking spaces are provided on public or private local streets or in designated parking areas.
Attached Motorcourt Homes are buildings mixed with townhomes and flats. The entries are from the street or common open space. Automobile access is via an alley or shared access drive. Resident parking spaces are provided in garages, and guest parking spaces are provided on public or private local streets or in designated parking areas.
Apartments/Flats are buildings with either walk-up units or flats in multiple story configurations. The entries can either be external from the street or common open space, or internal and elevator served. Resident parking spaces are provided either in garages, surface parking, or in multiple story parking structures. The units tend to be for rent as opposed to for sale.
Detailed design standards per product types are presented below and shown in Tables 4-2 to 4-7.
312
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
4.5 APRIL 2022
4.1.2.1. Conventional SFD Residential
The development standards provided in Table 4-2 have been established to encourage forward-facing living space. A conceptual plotting example illustrating the setback requirements is shown in Figure 4.3. These standards allow for the placement of entries, windows, front porches and living spaces closer to the street to provide more active and visually interesting streetscape.
Table 4-2:Conventional SFD Residential Development Standards Conventional SFD Homes
Minimum Lot Size 2,500 sq. ft.
Minimum Lot Width1 40’
Maximum Building Coverage 70%
Maximum Building Height 50’ (3 stories)
Minimum Front Setback (from Property Line)
Living Space 8’ (15’ at the corner lots)
Porch, Courtyard or Balcony 4’
Front Entry Garage 18’ (full driveway)/
2’-5’ (no full driveway)
Minimum Side Setback (from Property Line)
Interior Side 4’
Internal Street Right-of-Way Side 6’
Minimum Rear Setback (from Property Line)
Living Space 10’
Patio Cover, Balcony or Deck 3’
1 The minimum lot width for knuckle and cul-de-sac lots shall be the average of the widths measured at the front and rear edges of the lot
313
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
APRIL 2022 4.6
Figure 4.3 Conventional SFD Residential Setback Diagram 314
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
4.7 APRIL 2022
4.1.2.2. Zero-Lot Line and Rear Loaded SFD Residential
Table 4-3 establishes the development standards for front loaded zero-lot line and rear loaded SFD residential development. A conceptual plotting example illustrating the setback requirements is shown in Figure 4.4. Note: Zero-Lot Line Homes may be front or rear loaded. In the event that a rear-loaded Zero-Lot Line Home is proposed, the Rear-Loaded Homes standards shall apply (with a maintenance easement for the side yard).
Table 4-3:Zero-Lot & Rear Loaded SFD Residential Development Standards Zero-Lot Line
Homes
Rear Loaded
Homes
Minimum Lot Size 2,500 sq. ft. 2,000 sq. ft.
Maximum Building Height 50’ (3 stories) 50’ (3 stories) Maximum Building Coverage 70% 70%
Minimum Front Setback (from Property Line)
Living Space 6’ 6’
Porch, Courtyard or Balcony 4’ 4’
Front Entry Garage 18’ (full
driveway/2’- 5’)
N/A
Minimum Side Setback (from Property Line)
Interior Side (one side/between
buildings)
3’/6’ 3’/6’
Internal Street Right-of-Way
Side
6’ 6’
Minimum Rear Setback (from Property Line)
Living Space 5’ 5’
Patio Cover, Balcony or Deck 3’ 3’
Rear Entry Garage Setback (from
Access Drive)
N/A 3’ to 8’ or 18’ min.
315
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
APRIL 2022 4.8
Figure 4.4 Front Loaded Zero-Lot & Rear Loaded SFD Residential Setback Diagrams
316
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
4.9 APRIL 2022
4.1.2.3. Detached Cluster Residential Development
Table 4-4 establishes the development standards for detached cluster residential development. A conceptual plotting example illustrating the setback requirements is shown in Figure 4.5.
Table 4-4:Detached Cluster Home Development Standards
Front-Loaded
Cluster Homes
Rear-Loaded
Cluster Homes
Minimum Lot Size 1,500 sq. ft. (or
Condo Map)
1,500 sq. ft. (or
Condo Map)
Maximum Building Height 50’ (3 stories) 50’ (3 stories) Maximum Building Coverage 70% 70%
Minimum Front Setback
Living Space from Internal
Street Right-of-Way
6’ 6’
Living Space from Access
Drive
4’ N/A
Living Space from Paseo
Walkway
N/A 10’
Minimum Side Setback
Interior Side (one
side/between buildings)
3’-3”/6’-6” 3’-3”/6’-6”
Internal Street Side (from
internal street right-of-way)
6’ 6’
Minimum Rear Setback (from Lot Line)
Living Space 4’ 4’
Patio Cover, Balcony or Deck 3’ N/A
Garage Face from Access Drive 3’ to 8’ or 18’ min. 3’ to 8’ or 18’ min. 317
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
APRIL 2022 4.10
Figure 4.5 Detached Cluster Home Setback Diagram
318
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
4.11 APRIL 2022
4.1.2.4. Row Townhomes
Table 4-5 establishes the development standards for row townhomes. A conceptual plotting example illustrating the setback requirements is shown in Figure 4.6.
Table 4-5:Row Townhome Development Standards
Row Townhomes
Minimum Parcel Size 1 ac
Maximum Site Coverage N/A
Maximum Building Height 50’ (3 stories)
Minimum Front Setback (from Internal Street Right-of-Way) Front Living Space 10’
Porch, Courtyard or Balcony 4’
Minimum Side Setback (from Internal Street Right-of-Way) Street Side 6’
Minimum Building Separation
Living Space 8’
Patio Cover, Balcony or Deck 3’
Front to Front (entries) - at open
space
20’
Side to Side with entries 20’
Garage Door to Garage Door at
Alley
28’
319
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
APRIL 2022 4.12
Figure 4.6 Row Townhome Setback Diagram
320
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
4.13 APRIL 2022
4.1.2.5. Attached Motorcourt Homes
Table 4-6 establishes the development standards for attached motorcourt homes.
A conceptual plotting example illustrating the setback requirements is shown in Figure 4.7.
Table 4-6:Attached Motorcourt Home Development Standards Attached Motorcourt Homes
Maximum Site Coverage 75%
Maximum Building Height 50’ (3 stories)
Minimum Front Setback (from Internal Street Right-of-Way) Front Living Space 10’
Porch, Courtyard or Balcony 3’
Minimum Side Setback (from Internal Street Right-of-Way) Street Side 6’
Minimum Building Separation
Front to Front (entries) - at open
space
20’
Side to Side (entries) 20’
Side to Side (no entries) 10’
Garage Door to Garage Door at
Alley
28’
321
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
APRIL 2022 4.14
Figure 4.7 Attached Motorcourt Home Setback Diagram
322
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
4.15 APRIL 2022
Apartments/Flats
Table 4-7 establishes the development standards for residential apartments/flats.
A conceptual plotting example illustrating the setback requirements is shown in Figure 4.8.
Table 4-7:Apartments/Flats Development Standards
Apartments/Flats
Maximum Site Coverage 75%
Maximum Building Height 65’ (4 stories)
Minimum Front Setback (from Internal Street Right-of-Way) Front Living Space 10’
Porch, Courtyard or Balcony 3’
Minimum Side Setback (from Internal Street Right-of-Way) Living Space 10’
Porch, Courtyard or Balcony 5’
Minimum Building Separation
Front to Front (entries) - at open
space
20’
Side to Side (no entries) - at open
space
15’
323
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
APRIL 2022 4.16
Figure 4.8 Apartments/Flats Setback Diagram
324
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
4.17 APRIL 2022
4.1.3. Public Facility Standards
PA 14 is a public-institutional planning area for a fire station located at the southeast corner of Scholar Avenue and 58th Street.
• Maximum Building Height: None.
4.1.4. Parks and Open Space Standards
The Parks and Open Space (P/OS) District includes Panning Areas J through V.
Planning Areas J, K, and L are parks and Planning Areas M through V are trails and open space areas. Planning Area J (PA J) is a village green located between PA 5 and 3, which could be used for community events, such as concerts, movies, art fairs, farmers markets, etc. Planning Area L (PA L) is adjacent to PA 6 and 8 and planned for a community park. Planning Area K (PA K) is adjacent to PA 7 and 12 and is planned as a private recreation facility for the residents of the Leal Master Plan.
• Parking Area Setback from Internal Backbone Street Right-of-Way: 10’ • Building and Structure Setback from Internal Backbone Street Right-of-Way:
6’
• Maximum Building Height: 40’ (2 stories); 15’ for accessory structure
4.1.5. Allowable Projections and Encroachments
An encroachment is a permitted allowance into a ground-floor or upper-level setback. A projection is an element that is allowed to project above the height limit. In all cases, all encroachments and projections shall comply with the California Building Code (CBC), as well as other applicable codes and regulations such as the American Disability Act. The permitted encroachments and projections are discussed below.
A. Detached accessory buildings, including garages, or parking spaces required in the absence of garages, may occupy not more than 25 percent of a required rear or interior side yard, provided such building is not more than 15 feet in height and the wall of such building or parking space is located not less than 6 feet from the nearest wall of a main building on the same lot or a contiguous lot.
B. A breezeway connecting a main building to another building may be permitted. Such breezeway shall remain open on one side and shall not be considered part of a main building.
C. A covered patio, attached or unattached, which is enclosed on not more than 3 sides may encroach into any setback provided the distance between the property line and the patio at the nearest point is not less than 6 feet.
325
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
APRIL 2022 4.18
D. Eaves, cornices, canopies, belt courses, sills, buttresses, bay windows, planter boxes, light fixtures, or other similar architectural features may encroach into any required setback, provided such extensions shall not be nearer than 2 feet to any property line. Where more than one building is located on the same lot or parcel, such features shall not be nearer than 2 feet to a line midway between the main walls of such buildings. Chimneys and fireplaces may encroach into any setback not more than 2 feet, provided such chimneys or fireplaces shall not be nearer than 3 feet to any property line. Where more than one building is located on the same lot or parcel, such chimneys or fireplaces shall not be nearer than 3 feet to a line midway between the main walls of such buildings.
E. Open, unenclosed stairways or balconies not covered by roofs or canopies may encroach into any setback not more than 3 feet.
F. Uncovered porches, platforms, or landings which do not extend above the level of the first floor of the building may encroach into any setback not more than 6 feet; provided, however, an open-work railing, glass or glass like material, no more than 3 ½ feet in height may be installed or constructed on such porch, platform, or landing.
G. Open-work fences, hedges, guard railings, or other landscaping or architectural devices for safety protection around depressed ramps may encroach into any required setback provided such devices are not more than 3 ½ feet in height.
H. Fences and walls, pursuant to Section 5.3 of the Eastvale Zoning Code.
I. Signs may project and/or encroach into any required setback or public right-of-way, subject to applicable requirements in this Master Plan and the Eastvale Zoning Code.
J. Landscape elements such as benches, fountains, and other decorative features may encroach into any setback, provided they do not obstruct any path of travel or intersection visibility requirements per the Eastvale Zoning Code.
K. Mechanical equipment may encroach into any required setback area up to the property line, provided the equipment is screened by landscape or material (e.g. wall) to the maximum extent feasible and allowed by the applicable utility provider.
L. Stairwells, elevator penthouses, mechanical equipment, and roof attachments such as flagpoles, towers, wireless masts, television antennas, and similar diminutive roof attachments, may project above the height limits set forth within the Leal Master Plan, provided such projections shall not exceed 20 feet above the prescribed height limit.
M. Parapets, security railing, and other appurtenances on a flat roof may project above the height limits set forth within the Leal Master Plan, 326
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
4.19 APRIL 2022
provided such appurtenances shall not exceed forty-two (42) inches above the prescribed height limit.
4.2. COMMUNITY FEATURES STANDARDS
Community features such as entry monuments, parks, and trails are significant components in the Leal Master Plan. The development and design standards for entryway statements shall be consistent with Chapter 2, Project Character, of this Master Plan and the following:
A. Entryways into the Master Plan shall be identified with special gateway treatments to announce arrival into the project area. The minimum sizes of each are shown in the figures below.
B. Entryway feature treatments may include public art and/or special architectural elements such as sculptures, signage, or enhanced landscaping. All entry points shall be defined through the use of landscaping, trees, and/or architectural elements.
C. Entryway statements shall satisfy the design guidelines provided in the Eastvale Design Standards and Guidelines.
D. Entryways should be designed to provide a clear sense of arrival and set the tone for the overall design quality in Eastvale.
327
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
APRIL 2022 4.20
4.3. PARKING
4.3.1. Parking Requirements
Vehicular and bicycle parking shall comply with the parking standards and requirements listed in Table 4-8, Parking Requirements, below.
Table 4-8:Parking Requirements
USE TYPE PARKING REQUIREMENTS
General Commercial/Retail Uses
General Retail including, but
not limited to, neighborhood,
community and regional
shopping centers, including
those with restaurants1
4 spaces/1,000 sq ft. of net leasable floor area,
except where reduced through a shared parking
and/or TDM (see Section 4.3.4)
Professional Business Offices 3 spaces/1,000 sq. ft. of net leasable floor area Breweries, Wine Blending
Businesses and Distilleries
2 spaces/3 employees on the largest shift plus 1
parking space per 100 square feet of tasting area.
Medical Uses
Medical and Dental Offices,
Clinics, and Medical Business
Offices
4 spaces/1,000 sq. ft. of net leasable floor area
Civic Uses
Civic Center, Police Station, Fire
Station and the like
3 spaces/1,000 sq. ft. of net floor area. Areas
devoted to storage, hallways, restrooms, utility
rooms and the like shall not be included within this
calculation.
Residential Uses
Single Family Detached
Residential - Conventional SFD,
Front-loaded Zero-lot Line SFD,
Rear-loaded SFD, and
Detached Cluster Homes
1 space/unit within a garage, 1 open space/unit
within the lot
Attached Residential - Row
Townhomes and Attached
Motorcourt Homes
1-bedroom or studio unit: 1.25 spaces/unit
2-bedroom dwelling unit: 1.5 spaces/unit
3+ bedroom dwelling unit: 2.0 spaces/unit
Attached Residential –
Apartments and Flats,
Residential Units in Mixed-Use
Residential Buildings
1-bedroom or studio unit: 1.25 spaces/unit
2-bedroom dwelling unit: 1.5 spaces/unit
3+ bedroom dwelling unit: 2.0 spaces/unit
1 For designated outdoor dining areas, no parking spaces are required for the first 500 square feet. Any outdoor dining area that is more than 500 square feet in size shall provide 1 space per 100 square feet for the area beyond 500 square feet.
328
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
4.21 APRIL 2022
Parking requirements for uses not indicated in Table 4-8, Parking Requirements, shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. Uses not specified shall be compared to a similar use or uses that could satisfy the minimum parking demand. When there is no similar use in Table 4-8, Parking Requirements, parking requirements found in Section 5.6 of the Eastvale Zoning Code shall apply or a parking study prepared by a firm acceptable to the Community Development Director shall be submitted that provides justification, and data supporting the proposed minimum parking requirement.
Parking may be shared within the Leal Area Master Plan, with some limitations.
Figure 4.9, Parking Distribution identifies the location of where parking may be shared for residential and commercial uses within the Master Plan area.
Figure 4.9 Parking Distribution
329
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
APRIL 2022 4.22
4.3.2. On-Street Parking
On-street parking spaces immediately adjacent to and on the same side of the street of a property along the internal backbone streets may be counted toward meeting the off-street parking requirement for that property. These spaces may be parallel or angled spaces. With respect to parallel parking spaces that are not marked, each 24-foot length may be counted as one space. No credit is allowed for street frontage where parking is prohibited, such as loading zones and red curb areas.
4.3.3. Tandem Parking
Tandem parking is permitted for both residential and commercial uses within the Leal Master Plan area. Two tandem parking spaces shall have a minimum depth of 36 feet and shall meet the Development Standards for Off-Street Parking Facilities in Section 5.6 of the Eastvale Zoning Code.
4.3.4. Alternative Programs for Parking
Shared parking and other alternative programs for parking may be permitted pursuant to Section 5.6.B of the Eastvale Zoning Code.
A Parking Management Plan/Transportation Demand Management is required for all non-residential uses that increase parking demand by ten (10) parking spaces.
The Parking Management Plan/Transportation Demand Management Plan may reduce the overall parking requirements by up to 25 percent, depending on the findings of said plan. This plan shall include at least the following items:
• Information related to carpooling, van pools and staggered work hours. • Projected effectiveness of carpool, vanpool, staggered work hours or similar transportation programs.
• Proximity to public transportation facilities serving a significant portion of employees and/or customers.
• Shared parking/overlapping parking demands.
• Specific parking management programs increasing parking efficiency, such as valet parking.
• Evidence that employees and/or customers utilize on transportation alternatives on a consistent basis.
4.3.5. Parking Lot Design
The design standards for the parking area shall be consistent with the Eastvale Design Standards and Guidelines and with the following:
A. Parking lots and structures shall be designed to be functionally and visually integrated and connected. Developments on separate parcels shall provide common access and parking areas.
330
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
4.23 APRIL 2022
B. All parking areas shall be screened with landscaping and/or decorative walls from all residential developments and pedestrians along the public right-of-way.
C. Parking lots should be visually separated into smaller units with landscaping or low walls however adjacent parking lots shall be connected for vehicle and pedestrian access.
D. Different landscape design should be used to differentiate major access aisles from the rest of the parking area.
E. Common parking areas shall be landscaped with shade trees to create an attractive pedestrian environment.
331
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1 CITY OF EASTVALE
APRIL 2022 4.24
4.4. SIGNAGE
Except as identified in the Leal Master Plan, signage shall conform to the applicable provisions of Eastvale Zoning Code, Section 5.7, Signs.
Downtown District: A comprehensive Sign Program for the DT District identifying the location and design standards of thematic signage elements, including the sign type, size, material, and illumination, shall receive the Community Development Director’s approval prior to the installation of signs. The standards shall include design standards for signs provided in the DT District and a Master Plan Area Map, consistent the signage guidelines included in Section 2.2.10 of the Leal Master Plan.
Residential Use Districts: Signage for the Residential Use (RU) Districts identifying the signage location and design standards, including the sign type, size, material, and illumination, shall receive Community Development Director’s approval prior to the installation of signs.
In addition to the sign types listed in Section 2.2.10, Signage, of the Leal Master Plan, the sign standards for the DT and RU Districts shall also address standards for the following, as applicable:
• Grand opening/coming soon signs for commercial and residential development
• For sale/lease signs for commercial and residential development • Model home signs
• Signs on kiosks
4.4.1. General Sign Standards
The following requirements shall apply to signs within the Leal Master Plan area:
A. All signs and community monumentation in the DT District shall be included as part of an approved Sign Program.
B. Projecting Signs Clearance. A minimum eight (8) feet vertical clearance is required from the bottom of a projecting sign, marquee, blade or awning to the sidewalk or grade immediately below the sign.
C. Moving or Animated Signs. Unless otherwise permitted herein, signs that include, but are not limited to, rotating, flashing, swinging, blinking, strobing, or otherwise changing appearance are prohibited, except for signs that include time and/or temperature that are located at least 100 feet away from a residential land use District. In cases where illuminated signs display temperature and time, said sign shall receive City approval and shall include a mechanism to reduce the brightness of said sign when in proximity to a residential neighborhood. Signs, except for public service time and temperature signs, shall not be flashing, animated, or revolving in nature.
332
CHAPTER 4 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
CITY OF EASTVALE LEAL MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT #1
4.25 APRIL 2022
D. Sign Illumination. All signs may be internally or externally illuminated. All direct light rays from all signs shall be confined onto the site on which the sign is located and shall not shine directly upon neighboring property. All exposed raceways are prohibited. Temporary lighting, such as search or flood lights that are used on a permanent basis, are prohibited.
E. Approval of Sign Modifications. The Planning Commission may grant approval of signs that do not comply with the regulations contained in the Leal Master Plan or in the approved Sign Program.
4.4.2. Changeable Signage
A. Pageantry
Pageantry is allowed in the DT District and includes flags, pole-mounted banners, community banners over the right-of-way, kiosks, canopies, lights, directories, ground-mounted graphics, and other similar temporary or permanent (but changeable) elements. The purpose of changeable pageantry signage is to create excitement and provide a visually interesting commercial area. The intent is to allow regular changes to the pageantry elements in terms of color, design, and other visual content so the pageantry signage can look current. Pageantry signage shall comply with the following:
1) No limit on the number of permitted pageantry signs. Maximum sign area per sign face shall be 24 square feet. Maximum height of the sign shall not exceed 20 feet. Minimum setbacks for the freestanding signs shall be the same as the setbacks established for the DT District.