Hemet City Council
February 22, 2022

13.C

Created: 2022-01-21 08:52:29 [EST]
(Supp. No. 64, Update 2)

(4)Lighting. The use shall maintain lighting to provide illumination for the security and safety of parking and access areas. The lighting shall be provided at a level of no less than one foot-candle throughout in parking lots and access areas.
(5)Security/surveillance. Surveillance cameras and equipment shall be installed to record all purchases and attempted purchases of alcoholic beverages in accordance with the specifications provided by the police department. The equipment shall be able to record a minimum of 24 hours of operation. The facility operator shall maintain the recordings for the prior 60 days. (6)Graffiti. The owner or operator of the use shall remove or paint over any graffiti within 48 hours of the graffiti being painted or marked upon the premises.
(7)Displays and signs. There shall be no interior displays of alcoholic beverages or signs which are clearly visible to the exterior. There shall be no exterior advertising or sign of any kind promoting or indicating the availability of alcoholic beverages. No more than 25 percent of the square footage of each window and glass-paneled door shall bear advertising or signs of any sort, and all advertising and signage shall be placed in a manner that ensures that law enforcement personnel have a clear and unobstructed view of the interior of the premises.
(8)Litter. The owner or operator of the use shall remove litter from the premises daily, and shall keep the premises swept to prevent debris build up. Trash bins in approved enclosures shall be provided. (9)ABC training. The owner or operator of the use shall provide ABC approved or certified training for all employees who sell or serve alcoholic beverages within 30 days of opening for business, and all new employees thereafter shall be trained within 30 days of the date of their employment. (10)Additional conditions. In approving a conditional use permit to establish a use selling alcoholic beverages, the decision making body may impose additional reasonable conditions on the use to ensure that it operates in a manner that provides adequate protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare.
(h)Public convenience or necessity.
(1) When ABC requests that the city make a determination whether the public convenience or necessity (PCN) would be served by the issuance of a proposed ABC license, the provisions of this subsection (h) shall govern.
(2) A PCN determination shall be made by the planning commission if the proposed use would require a conditional use permit under this section. If ABC requests a PCN determination for a use that is exempt from the permit requirement of this section, the director shall make the PCN determination. The director or the planning commission may consult with the chief of police in making its determination. A noticed public hearing is not required for a PCN determination. (3) A PCN determination shall be based on the following findings:
a. The public convenience would be served by the establishment of the proposed use. b. The proposed use is not anticipated to be a source of nuisance behavior associated with the excessive consumption of alcoholic beverages, or the exposure of alcoholic beverages to minors. c. The proposed use would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. d. The proposed use would not increase the severity of existing law enforcement or public nuisance problems in the surrounding area.
e. The proposed use is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs of the general plan and any applicable specific plan, this section and any applicable zoning regulations contained in this chapter.

13.C

Created: 2022-01-21 08:52:29 [EST]
(Supp. No. 64, Update 2)

(Ord. No. 1858, § 1(Exh. A), 1-22-13)
Secs. 90-91—90-99. Reserved.

Sec. 90-100. Homemade food operator permit.
(a)Purpose. Pursuant to Government Code § 51035(a), the city must allow cottage food operations in residential dwellings, but can impose reasonable standards on cottage food operations to minimize potential effects on surrounding residences. The purpose of this section is to establish reasonable standards for cottage food operations as allowed by state law.
(b)Definitions. The following definitions shall apply unless subsequently amended under the Health and Safety Code of the State of California
Cottage food operation or homemade food operation means an enterprise that is operated by a cottage food operator, and has not more than one full-time equivalent cottage food employee, not including a family member or household member of the cottage food operator, within the registered or permitted area of a private home where the cottage food operator resides and where cottage food products are prepared or packaged for direct, indirect, or direct and indirect sale to consumers. A cottage food operation includes both of the following:
(a)Class A or direct sales cottage food operation is a cottage food operation that may engage only in direct sales of cottage food products from the cottage food operation or other direct sales venues described in Health and Safety Code § 113758(b)(4).
(b)Class B or indirect sales cottage food operation means a cottage food operation that may engage in both direct sales and indirect sales of cottage food products from the cottage food operation, from direct sales venues described in paragraph (4) of subdivision (b), from offsite events, or from a third- party retail food facility described in Health and Safety Code § 113758(b)(5).

Cottage food operator or homemade food operator means an individual who operates a cottage food operation in his or her private home and is the owner of the cottage food operation.

Cottage food product or homemade food product means non-perishable foods not requiring refrigeration, including foods that are identified by the Health Department as cottage foods, and that are prepared for sale in the kitchen of a cottage food operation.

Health department means the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health.

Private home means a dwelling, including an apartment or other leased space, where individuals reside.

Registered or permitted area means the portion of a private home that contains the private home's kitchen used for the preparation, packaging, storage, or handling of cottage food products and related ingredients or equipment, or both, and attached rooms within the home that are used exclusively for storage. (c)Permit and business license required. An individual may conduct a homemade food operation in a private home provided he/she obtains a business license in conformance with chapter 18 of the Hemet Municipal Code and a homemade food operator permit from the director. If a business license for a homemade food operator is not renewed, the homemade food operator permit shall automatically expire with the business license. A fee for the processing of a homemade food operator permit may be established from time to time by resolution of the city council.
(d)Application for permit. Applications for homemade food operator permits must be submitted to the director on a form prescribed by the city. The application shall include the following information and documentation:

13.C

Created: 2022-01-21 08:52:29 [EST]
(Supp. No. 64, Update 2)

(1) The name, address, telephone number, and e-mail address of the proposed homemade food operator and description of the property on which the homemade food operation is to be located, including the registered or permitted area of the homemade food operation. The proposed homemade food operator must reside at the site of the homemade food operation. (2) A statement of whether the proposed homemade food operator owns the property on which the homemade food operation is to be located or is a tenant or lessee at the property. If the proposed homemade food operator is not an owner of the property, the application must include the property owner's written consent to the application and the proposed homemade food operation. (3) A description of the homemade food products to be produced by the proposed homemade food operation, all of which must be consistent with the list of approved cottage food products posted on the health department website which may be amended from time to time. (4) A statement of whether the proposed homemade food operation will involve direct sales and/or indirect sales, as those terms are defined by this chapter, and whether there will be direct sales to customers at the site of the proposed homemade food operation. (e)Issuance of permit. Upon receipt of a completed homemade food operator permit application, applicable fee, and confirmation that the application contains truthful information and the applicant has or will comply with the requirements of this section, the director shall issue a homemade food operator permit subject to the standards and conditions set forth in subsection (i) of this section. The applicant must agree in writing to comply with such standards and conditions. The homemade food operator permit is non-transferable and shall be valid for one year upon issuance. In order to renew a homemade food operator permit, a homemade food operator must submit a completed application on a city-approved form to the director. The renewal application must be submitted no later than 30 days prior to the expiration date of the existing homemade food operator permit.
(f)Coordination with health department. Upon approval of a city-issued homemade food operator permit, the city shall provide a copy of the homemade food operator permit to the health department via United States Postal Service first class mail, facsimile, email, or other method prescribed by the health department within 14 days of the issuance of the permit.
(g)Annual renewal fee required. An annual fee for the renewal of a homemade food operator permit shall be established by resolution of the city council. The purpose of the renewal fee is to recover the cost of staff time to confirm the applicant's compliance with permitting and licensing requirements of the health department and to determine whether or not the operator remains in compliance with city standards for the zone in which the homemade food operation is located.
(h)Limitations on homemade food operation permit. A maximum of one homemade food operation permit shall be deemed active and approved at any time for each private home. If more than one permit has been issued for the same private home, only the most recently approved application shall be deemed to be active. All other prior applications shall be deemed void. Such limitation shall not preclude a resident from also obtaining a home occupation permit pursuant to section 90-72, for a non-food-related home-based business. (i)Conditions. The following conditions shall be observed at all times by the holder of a homemade food operator permit:
(1) A homemade food operation shall comply with all permitting and licensing requirements of the health department and shall obtain certification from the health department prior to, or within 14 days of, the issuance of a homemade food operator permit.
(2) Signs or advertising shall not be displayed on the premises except for signage permitted under section 90-1250(2).

13.C

Created: 2022-01-21 08:52:29 [EST]
(Supp. No. 64, Update 2)

(3) The homemade food operation shall not have more than one full-time equivalent employee, not including a family member or household member of the homemade food operator, within the registered or permitted area of a private home where the homemade food operator resides and where homemade food products are prepared and packaged.
(4) The homemade food operation, including the storage of inventory, supplies, and equipment, shall be conducted wholly within the registered or permitted area of a private home. (5) Displays or sales activity of any kind shall not be visible from the exterior of the premises. (6) On-site direct sales of homemade food products are permissible only between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Sunday. There cannot be more than two homemade food product customers on the premises of a homemade food operation at any single time. All sales shall be conducted indoors.
(7) Homemade food operators may load cottage food products into a vehicle outside of an enclosed garage only between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Sunday. Vehicles shall not idle while being loaded with homemade food products.
(8) A maximum of one vehicle not larger than 10,000 pounds gross vehicle weight rating, used in conjunction with a homemade food operation, shall be parked on the driveway or in a garage space of the homemade food operation site. No commercial vehicle owned, leased, or otherwise operated for the specific use of the homemade food operator shall be parked in the street. (9) A homemade food operation shall comply with all applicable noise regulations for the zone in which it is located.
(j)Grounds for revocation of permit. Any homemade food operator permit may be revoked by the director upon violation of any requirements of this chapter, upon notification by the health department that the Class A or the Class B permit has been revoked, or upon failure to comply with any of the conditions or limitations of the permit, unless such violation is corrected within three days of the giving of written notice thereof. A permit may be revoked for repeated violation of the requirements of this chapter, notwithstanding further notice.
(k)Appeal revocation of permit. A decision of the director may be appealed to the planning commission as prescribed in section 90-43.6.
(i)Enforcement. Every person who violates any provision of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be subject to the penalties as set forth in section 1-8. Each day that such violation exists shall be deemed a new and separate offense. Neither the arrest, prosecution, conviction, imprisonment, or payment of any fine for the violation of this section shall satisfy or diminish the authority of the city to institute administrative or civil actions seeking enforcement of any or all of the provisions of this section. (Ord. No. 1861, § 1(Exh. A), 4-23-13)

13.C

Sec. 90-79- Outdoor Dining Parklet Permit
(a)Intent. The intent of this article is to allow outdoor seating parklets for restaurants within existing parking lot space. This option offers support to the community’s business, and provides a creative way of activating underutilized commercial development, and greater opportunity to enjoy outdoor dining options for the community and the public. (b) Definition. The following terms shall have the following meanings for the purpose of this chapter:

Buffer means the space between the parklet area and the adjacent parking spaces or travel lanes.

Parklet means a seating platform that converts curbside parking spaces into vibrant community spaces that may provide amenities such as: seating, landscaping, bicycle parking, art, among others.

Parklet is a semi-temporary restaurant seating area constructed on a raised platform in a parking space. The parklet also includes other design features, such as protective deck railing, shade structure, outdoor seating, landscape planters, and ambient lighting. A parklet is a small public gathering space, occupying up to two parking stalls as applicable, on a public street, and within an existing commercial center, whether owned privately or publicly, that is maintained by the business owner or property owner for a temporary period of time.

Parklet base means a raised platform that provides a base for tables, chairs, umbrellas, and other elements.

Parklet screen means the vertical elements separating the parklet base from adjacent travel lanes and parking spaces that may include; landscaping, planters, railing, among other elements.

Pedestrian Pathway means a paved path or walkway owned privately, or owned by the city or other public entity that is specifically designed for pedestrian travel.

Public right-of-way means any public street, road, avenue, highway, named or unnamed alley, lane, court, place, trail, parkway, sidewalk or other public way, operated and/or controlled by the city or other public entity, or subject to an easement owned by or dedicated or granted to city.

Sidewalk means portion of a highway, other than the street or roadway, set apart by curbs, barriers, markings or other delineation specifically designed for pedestrian travel and that is owned by the city or other public entity, excluding any parkway. (c) Parklet Permit Submittal Process

1.Temporary Use Permit. It shall be unlawful for any person to operate or construct a parklet within an existing parking space or public right-of-way parking space without obtaining a Temporary Use Permit for a Parklet as required by this article. Parklets shall only be permitted as set forth in this article.

2.Conditional. A parklet permit is conditional at all times and may be suspended, revoked or cancelled by the city prior to expiration of the permit term.

3.Permit term. The term of a permit shall not exceed one year per permit.

13.C

4.Renewal. A new permit issued without additional review or additional fees, provided there will be no changes to the permitted parklet, unless the city determines that the parklet no longer meets the requirements of this article.

5.Application. Application for a parklet permit shall be made to the Community Development Director on such application form and subject to such written procedures as the Director may establish for that purpose.

6.Plan and other materials to accompany application. The following plan and other materials shall be submitted with the application for a parklet permit. a. Written approval from all owners of properties, and tenants of commercial properties, abutting or adjacent to the proposed outdoor seating parklet.
b. A detailed plan, drawn to scale that clearly illustrates the location and design of the proposed parklet, full design details, wind load resistance calculations, emergency removal plan, installation details, insurance coverage, plus the parklet bond or deposit and all required fees.

Where applicable, the plan must show all of the following:

1. The layout and arrangement of the proposed Parklet, including full design details, wind load resistance calculations, emergency removal plan, installation details, overall dimensions and the type, design, sidewalk clearance, and placement of any barriers and furnishings such as, but not limited to, tables, chairs, umbrellas, planters, shade structures, bike racks and any other appurtenances to be located within the boundaries of the proposed Parklet.

2. Photographs or other graphic representations, together with specifications, which depict the design, materials and colors of chairs, tables, umbrellas, barriers and other appurtenances to be located within the boundaries of the proposed Parklet.

3. Photographs of the proposed site of the Parklet area, showing the relationship of the site to the adjacent sidewalk and buildings.

4. A written letter that includes detailed description of the manner of removal of the Parklet upon the expiration and non-renewal.

5. Such additional information as the Director may reasonably require as needed to determine compliance with the provisions of this division.

6. An application fee for the parklet Temporary Use Permit review shall accompany the application submittal requirements, which are filed with the community development director. The fee(s) shall cover the costs of processing the applications in accordance with a schedule adopted from time to time by city council resolution.

7. Applications which are deemed incomplete and with no activity to complete the application for a period of 12 months from the filing date are considered automatically withdrawn and may be subject to a refund in accordance with this section. Applications which have been withdrawn will require a new application and fee to be submitted in order to process the application.

8. Application fee refunds shall be authorized by the director for applications that are withdrawn upon written request and proof of payment by the applicant, in accordance with a refund schedule based upon staff time spent of the project.

13.C

Requests for application fee refunds shall be valid for a period of up to six months from the date of withdrawal.

9. Portions of application fees paid to another jurisdiction or agency for services to be rendered in connection with the application shall not be refunded by the city.

Nothing contained in this section shall prohibit another jurisdiction or agency from refunding fees directly to the applicant. If fees have been paid out to another jurisdiction or agency, the administrative fee related to coordinating the review of applications by other jurisdictions or agencies is nonrefundable.

7.Review. Complete application supplements shall be reviewed for compliance with the standards, criteria and conditions of this article and city ordinances and must be approved by the following city departments/divisions: community development, public works, engineering, fire, building and safety, and any other city department or division deemed necessary by the Community Development Director.

8.The Development Review Committee shall review the preliminary application to evaluate considerations, such as buffers from traffic/drive aisles, decking materials, aesthetics, tables and seating arrangements, ADA accessibility, barriers and railing, seating, shade, vegetation and landscaping, amenities, bike parking, trash, lighting, emergency access, interference with utilities or other on-site improvements, and other safety elements.

9.Permit issued. Parklet permits will be issued based on application supplements that meet all requirements of this article and city code, including the posting of a parklet bond or deposit and submittal of certificates of insurance. Approval of a parklet permit is conditional at all times. In addition to the parklet permit, a building permit and/or revocable encroachment permit may be required. The applicant shall be responsible for submitting the necessary applications and fees for such permits and for obtaining all necessary permits in accordance with city code.

10.Denial. A parklet permit shall be denied when:
a. The applicant has been found to have had a violation of City Code that has been unresolved.
b. It is necessary to prevent a nuisance from developing or continuing; c. It is necessary to protect the public safety;
d. The application supplement does not comply with the requirements of this article or applicable law;
e. All necessary permits have not been obtained.
f. The applicant misrepresented or provided false information in the permit application. g. The Parklet permit has been suspended more than two times in a 12-month period on grounds of noncompliance pursuant to this section.
h. The Parklet creates a public nuisance or a hazard to the public health, safety or welfare.
i. The Community Development Director finds in writing that there is a superseding public need relative to the portion of the public right-of-way occupied by or otherwise affected by the Parklet.

13.C

(d) Insurance, Indemnification and Bonding

1. Before a Parklet permit is issued under this article, a certificate of insurance will be required in an amount not exceeding $1,000,000.00 which names the city as a co-insured for protection against claims of third persons for personal injuries, wrongful deaths and property damage. The city officers and employees shall be named as additional insureds. The certificate shall not be subject to cancellation or modification until after 30 days' written notice to the city. A copy of the certificate will remain on file in the city clerk's office.

2. By obtaining a parklet permit, the permittee agrees that it shall indemnify and hold harmless the city and its commissioners, officers, employees and agents from all liabilities, damages, losses and costs, including but not limited to reasonable attorneys' fees, arising from applicant's installation or use of the parklet. The permittee shall pay all claims and losses and shall defend all suits, in the name of the city, its employees and officers, including but not limited to appellate proceedings, and shall pay all costs, judgments and attorneys' fees which may issue from any such proceedings. An applicant shall execute a hold harmless agreement as provided by the city prior to the issuance of a permit under this article.

3. Bond. Prior to issuance of a building permit for approved parklet, the applicant shall post a parklet bond or deposit with the Building and Safety Division, in an amount satisfactory to the city, to cover the costs associated with removal of the parklet and restoration of the right-of- way in the event the applicant fails to do so when required. Only the following types of bonds or deposits will be accepted: (i) bond issued by a surety company authorized to do business in California, (ii) deposit of a cashier check or bank draft of any national bank or state bank, (iii) deposit of a certified check drawn on a financial institution acceptable to the city, as determined by the finance department, or (iv) deposit of a U.S. postal money order.

(e) Parklet location.

Parklets shall only be permitted in those areas which meet each of the following location criteria:

1. Parklets may be located within an existing parking space within a commercial site, along the frontage in conjunction with the operation of a bonafide restaurant, coffee shop, donut, ice cream or other food eatery. Parklets in the right-of-way may utilize on-street parking space on a street with a posted speed limit of 35 mph or less and are located within a commercial setting and as described above. An outdoor dining area to be shared between establishments may vary from these requirements as approved by the Community Development Director.

2. Parklets may be located in all commercials zones and specific plan areas meeting the above criteria.

3. A revocable encroachment shall be approved prior to issuance of building permits when Parklet is located within an on-street parking space.

4. Parklets shall not be located in front of or restrict access to fire hydrants.

5. Parklets shall not be located in front of or interfere with bus stops.

6. Parklets shall not obstruct access to storm inlets, manholes or other utility access points, including above grade utility facilities.

13.C

(f) Parklet Site Development Standards
General standards. Parklets shall conform to each of the following general standards:

1. Shall be well designed in conformance with the design standards, attractive, comfortable, and inviting, as determined by the city.

2. The parklet may be located within an existing parking space, up to a maximum of two (2) spaces.

3. The proposed temporary use shall not reduce the site’s required off-street parking by more than 20 percent.

4. Parklets shall have a minimum 3 feet clearance from adjacent parking spaces.

5. A minimum 3-foot clearance from the travel lane to provide adequate protection to occupants.

6. The proposed Parklet will not cause a safety hazard.

7. The proposed Parklet will not cause undue motor vehicle traffic congestion in the surrounding area.

8. ADA parking spaces shall not be removed, unless replaced. If re-located shall comply with Title 24 accessibility requirements.

9. Outdoor seating shall be served by an accessible path of travel.

10. An accessible path of travel shall be maintained for pedestrian and disabled access circulation to and within the customer dining area. Said path of travel shall be not less than four (4') feet in width and comply with the California Building Code.

11. Exiting shall not be impeded by outdoor seating.

12. Structures shall be permitted through the City of Hemet Building Division and all applicable permit fees shall apply.

13. Outdoor seating areas are permitted and required to be in compliance with California Fire and Building Code Chapter 10 provisions for emergency egress from any building exit through and from the proposed seating area(s).

14. Portable pre-manufactured heating units shall be used in compliance with CA Fire Code Chapter 3.

15. All electrical and plumbing must meet City requirements.

16. Drainage: Parklet design and installation shall not negatively impact existing site drainage and shall keep existing flow lines and gutters clear. Curbside drainage shall not be impeded; a drainage canal underneath the platform shall be installed when necessary.

17. Encourage usage of shared parklets among restaurants.

18. Sight lines: Sight lines at existing driveways (and intersections) shall be verified; clear zones will need to be protected.

13.C

19. Parklets should not be allowed where a bus stop or bus pad is located. A minimum clear area of 60-feet for bus parking/stopping plus 20-feet pull in/out distance on both sides of the clear area (minimum total of 100-feet).

20. Parklets shall not impede Bicycle routes.

21. Access point(s) to parklets shall be provided via sidewalk or pedestrian pathways. No openings/access shall be allowed towards roadways and/or drive aisles.

22. If an enclosure wall or fence is provided for the outdoor dining area, it must include appropriate additional detailing and architectural enhancements as deemed sufficient by the Director and complement the design, scale, colors and materials of the adjacent building.
(g) Prohibited in Parklets.

Prohibited Uses. The following are prohibited in Parklets:

1. Advertising

2. Consumption of alcohol except in compliance with a valid ABC license.

3. Smoking

4. Gas or diesel generators

5. Electric cords that cross the public or pedestrian sidewalk

6. No advertising or business identification shall be permitted.

7. No outdoor merchandise shall be allowed in the parklet.

8. No food preparation, food or beverage storage, refrigeration apparatus, or equipment shall be allowed in the parklet.

9. No food cooking (BBQ) griddle, burners, hot plate, external flame cooking apparatus shall eb allowed in the parklet.

10. No amplified entertainment shall be allowed in the parklet, except as authorized by special events permit.

11. Flashing lights.

12. Excessive decoration

13. Decking of plywood, lattice or concrete material is prohibited, in addition to synthetic turf, carpet, or similar coverings are prohibited.

14. Plastic furniture or non-commercial grade furniture is not permitted.

15. Chain link, rope, wire/steel cable, wood lattice, industrial tarps, prefabricated plastic/vinyl fencing and concrete block are prohibited.

16. Pop-Up Tents, except as authorized under Temporary Use Permit approval.

13.C

(h) Design Standards.

Design standards. Parklets shall conform to each of the following design standards:

1. Parklet Base:
a. All parklets shall require a platform base. The finished floor height of the platform base shall be level with the elevation of the adjacent public sidewalk, and may not have more than a one-half inch gap (vertical or horizontal) from the curb.

2. Decking Material:
a. Plastic or composite decking
b. Treated wood decking
c. Treated wood decking tiles
d. Concrete pavers on a pre-engineered pedestal system.

3. Color. Decking platform and skirting materials shall be limited to blacks, grays, browns, natural wood finishes, and similar neutral colors.

4. Stormwater Management. Platforms shall be designed as to not impede the flow of stormwater and drainage. A minimum six-inch horizontal bap below the decking surface shall be provided between the curb face and base frame along the gutter to allow rainwater to naturally flow without obstruction.

5. Railing/Barrier
a. All parklets shall provide protective safety railing or similar barrier around the parklet. b. The railing or barrier shall be a minimum of 42 inches from the finished platform deck surface and shall be a maximum of 50 inches from the asphalt surface of the parking space.

The railing barriers shall be attached to the platform base. The railings may not be attached to the roadbed or curb.

6. Safety Elements Requirements
a. a. A five-foot long wheel stop shall be installed two feet from either side of the parklet side screens, creating a buffer zone. Two-foot buffer zones may include elements that increase the visibility of the parklet.
b. b. Two white safe-hit type 2 surface mount delineators shall be installed in line with wheel stops, seven feet from the curb edge.

7. Materials
a. Parklets should be constructed of high-quality, durable, non-reflective, and aesthetically pleasing materials. Steel, finished woods, salvaged building materials, and sustainably sourced materials are recommended. All walking surfaces should be non-slip and weather resistant to ensure safety and accessibility. The parklet should also be designed for ease of disassembly and potential for recycling or reuse of materials.

8. Landscaping
a. Landscape plantings help soften the space and can provide an aesthetically pleasant buffer along the street-facing parklet edge. Drought-tolerant landscape elements can include planter boxes, hanging planters, green walls, or ACA accessible raised beds.

13.C

b. Planters may be incorporated into the design of the railing or barrier.

9. Furniture
a. Furnishing should be of quality materials and designed for outdoor use. b. Furniture may be metal, finished wood, vinyl or other consistent furniture material.

Plastic furniture or non-commercial grade furniture is not permitted.

10. Lighting/Misting Systems
a. Self-contained low-voltage lighting systems, such as solar or battery powered lights are encouraged. Flashing lights and cords are prohibited.
b. Misting systems shall be integral to the parklet structure. Water supply for misting system shall not be permitted to extend or spray into the public sidewalk or other location.

11. Parklet Fixtures
a. Shall not be placed outside or hang over the designated parklet area. b. Shall not be physically attached, chained or in any manner affixed to any structure, tree, signpost, or light pole.
c. Shall be commercial-grade furniture.
d. Shall be maintained in a clean, sanitary and safe manner. e. Shall maintain a minimum vertical clearance of seven feet.

12. Roof Materials
a. Shall not be placed outside or hang over the designated parklet area. b. The maximum height of any roof or shade structure shall not exceed 12 feet in height. (i) Maintenance Responsibility and Operations.

1. Parklets shall be maintained in a clean, sanitary and safe manner at all times; free of debris, grime, and graffiti. The restaurant operator shall maintain the outdoor dining area in a clean and safe condition at all times, and shall properly dispose of all trash generated by the operation.

2. All removable tables and chairs must be removed and stored at the close of business.

3. During non-business hours, items placed in Parklet such as materials, furniture shall either be removed from the Parklet or secured.

4. Food trays or carts may not be stored in Parklets

5. The Parklet area shall be kept in a safe condition cat all times, and all landscaping shall be kept in good health

6. Permittees shall keep Parklets free of litter and debris and keep the portion of the Traffic Barriers within the Parklet area clean and well-maintained.

13.C

7. Permittee shall comply with all applicable California Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) regulations regarding alcohol use for their operations within a Parklet. Permittees are solely responsible for securing a valid ABC license to allow/extend business operations within the Parklet. A Parklet permit does not constitute approval to serve alcohol without an approved ABC license.
(j) Suspension, revocation and removal.

1. The Community Development Director shall have the authority to order the removal of any parklet, parklet base, parklet fixture, parklet screen, and other objects on public property which are used in connection with any parklet which does not have a valid parklet permit, after 48 hours' notice directing such removal. Such notice may be given by hand delivery to such person responsible for the unpermitted parklet or by posting such notice on the offending parklet or parklet fixture.

2. Any parklet permit may be revoked and any parklet may be removed, relocated or adjusted at any time, as determined to be necessary by city, in order to perform work in, on, above or under the private property or right-of-way in the area of the parklet or for any municipal purpose.

When feasible, the city will give the applicant 30 calendar days’ notice to remove the parklet at the applicant's expense.

3. A parklet permit may be revoked or suspended by a special magistrate if it is determined that:
a. Any required certificate of use or health permit has been suspended, revoked or cancelled
b. The permittee does not have the required insurance;
c. The permittee has been found in violation of the parklet standards on three separate occasions;
d. It is necessary to prevent a nuisance from developing or continuing; e. It is necessary to protect the public safety;
f. The permittee fails to comply with the insurance and bond requirements of this article; g. The permittee fails to obtain all necessary permits, including building permits or right-of- way permits
h. In order to comply with applicable law.

4. The parklet permittee shall remove the parklet, including the parklet base, parklet fixtures and parklet screen, at permittee's costs, within ten days of expiration of the parklet permit or within the time provided by notice of removal from the city. Upon complete removal of the parklet to the city's satisfaction, and completion of any necessary repairs to public property, the city will return the parklet bond or deposit, or issue consent to the bond cancellation.

5. In the event the parklet is not timely removed, the city may remove the parklet and parklet base, parklet fixtures and parklet screen. In the event of an emergency where notice cannot be given, the city may remove a portion or all of a parklet. In the event that the city must remove the parklet and/or parklet base or parklet fixtures, the city may use the parklet bond funds for the removal, disposal and repair of public property and the permittee shall reimburse the city for any costs of removal, disposal or repair that exceed the bond amount.

13.C

GJ\IO3U'l-hOOI\J—\
1112131415161718192021222324252627282930323334353637383940414243444546 CITYOFHEMETHemet,CaliforniaPLANNINGCOMMISSIONRESOLUTIONNO.PC2022-009ARESOLUTIONOFTHEPLANNINGCOMMISSIONOFTHECITYOFHEMET,CALIFORNIA,RECOMMENDINGTHATTHECITYCOUNCILADOPTANORDINANCETOAMENDV ARIOUSSECTIONOFCHAPTER90(ZONING)OFTHEMUNICIPALCODEFOROUTDOORSEATINGPARKLETSFORRESTAURANTS,INCLUDINGDESIGNCRITERIA.WHEREAS,pursuanttoGovernmentCodesections65854and65855,thePlanningCommissionhastheauthoritytoreviewandmakerecommendationstotheCityCouncilregardingamendmentstotheCity’szoningordinance;andWHEREAS,onJanuary20,2022theCitygavepublicnoticebypublishingnoticeinthePressEnterprisenewspaperoftheholdingofapublichearingregardingconsiderationofZoningOrdinanceAmendment21-007,anamendmenttotheCity’szoningordinance;andWHEREAS,onFebruary1,2022,thePlanningCommissionheldthenoticedpublichearingatwhichinterestedpersonshadanopportunitytotestifyinsupportof,oroppositionto,theproposedamendmenttotheCity'szoningordinanceandwhichthePlanningCommissionconsideredtheproposedamendmenttotheCity’szoningordinance;andWHEREAS,theCityhasanalyzedthisproposedprojectandhasdeterminedthatitisexemptfromtheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct(“CEQA”)undersection15061(b)(3)oftheCEQAGuidelinesbecauseitcanbeseenwithcertaintythatthereisnopossibilitythattheactivityinquestionmayhaveasigni?canteffectoftheenvironment;andWHEREAS,attachedasExhibit“A”istheproposedOrdinance;andNOW,THEREFORE,thePlanningCommissionoftheCityofHemetdoesResolve,Determine,FindandOrderasfollows:SECTION1:ENVIRONMENTALFINDINGSThePlanningCommission,inlightofthewholerecordbeforeit,includingbutnotlimitedto,theCity’sLocalCEQAGuidelinesandThresholdsofSigni?cance,thedirectionofthePlanningCommissionatitsmeetingonFebruary1,2022anddocumentsincorporatedPlanningCommissionResolutionNo.PC2022-009OutdoorSeatingParkletsZOA21-007Page1of3Page 77 of 111

13.C

unicipalCode
(OCD\ICDU'I-hOOIUA
thereinbyreference,andanyotherevidence(withinthemeaningofPublicResourcesCodeSections21080(e)and21082.2)withintherecordorprovidedatthepublichearingofthismatter,hereby?ndsanddeterminesasfollows:1 CEQA:TheCityhasanalyzedthisproposedprojectandhasdeterminedthatitisexemptfromtheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct(“CEQA”)undersection15061(b)(3)oftheCEQAGuidelineswhichprovidesthatCEQAonlyappliestoprojectsthathavethepotentialforcausingasigni?canteffectontheenvironment.TheamendmentsproposedbythisOrdinancedonotrelatetoanyphysicalprojectandwillnotresultinanyphysicalchangetotheenvironment.Therefore,itcanbeseenwithcertaintythatthereisnopossibilitythatthisOrdinancemayhaveasigni?cantadverseeffectontheenvironment,andthereforetheadoptionofthisOrdinanceisexemptfromCEQApursuanttoSection15061(b)(3)oftheCEQAGuidelines.SECTION2:ZONINGORDINANCEAMENDMENTFINDINGSPursuanttoHemetM Section90-41.5(a),thePlanningCommissionmakesthefollowing?ndingswithrespecttothiszoningordinanceamendment:1 ThezoningordinanceamendmentisinconformancewiththelatestadoptedgeneralplanfortheCity.Finding:TheproposedtextamendmentisconsistentwiththefollowingGeneralPlangoalsandpolicies:LU-4.3:In?llDevelopmentandRe-Use:Activelypromotetheadaptivere—useandin?llofeconomicallyunderutilizedobsolete,anddilapidatedcommercialandindustrialsites,andfosterrehabilitationconsistentwithsurroundingusesandtheneedsofthecommunity.LU13.7:ReuseofUnderutilizedProperties:Encouragethereuseofvacant,underutilized,orobsoletecommercialandindustrialbuildingswithhighervalueusesthatareconsistentwiththeGeneralPlangoalsandpolicies.LU-1.2JobCreation-PromotejobgrowthwithinHemetbyestablishinglandusepatternsthatencouragecommercialandindustrialgrowthopportunities,improvetheCity'sjob-housingbalancereducecommutedistancesandtime,lowervehicleemissions,andprovideeconomicgrowthandstabilityforallsegmentsoftheCity'spopulation.Thezoningordinanceamendmentwillprotectthepublichealth,safetyandwelfare.Finding:Theproposedzoningcodeamendmentwouldallowoutdoorseatingparkletsforrestaurantswithinexistingparkinglotspaces.Thiswouldalsorequireareductionintherequiredparkingstandards,allowforsemi—permanentstructureswithinanexistingparkingspace,andspeci?cdesignguidelines.TheintentofthisarticleistoallowoutdoorseatingparkletsforrestaurantswithinexistingparkinglotPlanningCommissionResolutionNo.PC2022-009OutdoorSeatingParkletsZOA21-007Page2of3Page 78 of 111

13.C

QOCXJ\lO'>O‘l-l>OJl\)—\
space.Thisoptionofferssupporttothecommunity’sbusiness,andprovidesacreativewayofactivatingunderutilizedcommercialdevelopment,andgreateropportunitytoenjoyoutdoordiningoptionsforthecommunityandthepublic.Thedesignstandardsandcriteriasetforthintheproposedzoningcodeamendmentwouldprotectsthepublichealth,safetyandwelfarebyestablishingandupdatingzoningrequirementsthathelpensuretheaccurateandorderlyexecutionofadoptedlandusepolicyandprocedures.SECTION3:PLANNINGCOMMISSIONACTIONSThePlanningCommissionherebytakesthefollowingactionThePlanningCommissionapprovesResolutionrecommendingthattheCityCounciladopttheproposedOrdinancewhichisattachedheretoandincorporatedhereinbyreferenceasExhibitPASSED,APPROVEDANDADOPTEDthis1stdayofFebruary,2022bythefollowingvote:AYES:ChairWuerth,ViceChairVanArsdale,CommissionerBeamesderfer,CommissionerLemkeNOES:NoneABSTAIN:NoneABSENT:None airPIngCommissionATTEST:

CorinaHernandez,ReSecretaryHemetPlanningCommission
PlanningCommissionResolutionNo.PC2022-009OutdoorSeatingParkletsZOA21-O07Page3of3Page 79 of 111

13.C

Hemet City Council
Parking Exceptions for Outdoor Dining ZOA 21-007
February 22, 2022

13.C

Strategic Plan Integration
Organizational Effectiveness
Partnership & Collaboration

1. To pursue partnerships that will increase the
opportunities available to the community,
including our businesses, unemployed, and youth
populations.

The proposed action aligns with Council adopted
objective: Develop programs to offer support to the
community’s businesses. Due to impacts of the Covid-
19 pandemic and continued impacts on our local
restaurants, allowing for an outdoor seating dining
options would support our community businesses.

1. To identify the work needed inside the
City organization to effectively provide
services to the community and ensure
financial stability.

The proposed action aligns with Council
adopted objective: Evaluate existing practices
to ensure continuity with industry best
practices by evaluating the municipal code.

13.C

Applicant: City of Hemet
Property Owners: Varies
Project Location: Citywide
Zoning: Commercial Zones
Project Information

13.C

• Temporary Outdoor Seating Approved due to Covid-19 Pandemic on July 14,2020 Background

13.C

Project Description
• Amend the zoning code to allow outdoor
seating parklets for restaurants within
existing parking lot spaces.
• Reduced parking requirements
• Semi-Permanent Parklet Structure
• Specific Design Guidelines

13.C

Intent
• Offers support to the community’s businesses.
• Provides a creative way of activating underutilized
commercial development.
• Enjoyment of outdoor dining options for the
community and public.

13.C

Parklet Concept

13.C

Parklet Concept

13.C

Parklet Concept

13.C

Housing Element Update
Overview of Process
• Temporary Use Permit
• Term one (1) Year with option of extensions
• Written approval from all owners of properties, and
tenants of commercial properties, abutting or adjacent to the proposed outdoor seating parklet.
• Parklet must be designed for quick removal upon
expiration of permit.

13.C

Parklet Site Standards
• Parklet may be located
within an existing parking
space, up to a maximum
of two (2) spaces.
• The proposed temporary
use shall not reduce the
site's required off-street
parking by more than 20%
• Parklets shall have a
minimum buffer of three
(3) feet from adjacent
parking spaces and travel
lane.
• ADA parking shall not be
removed, unless replaced.

If re-located shall be
subject to Title 24.
• Accessible path of travel
shall be maintained and
not less than four (4) feet
at all times.
• Life Safety Components
• ABC Licensing
Compliance if alcohol
served within the parklets.

13.C

Housing Element Update
Prohibited Uses
• Advertising
• Amplified Sound, unless approved
under special permit.
• No outdoor merchandise
• Flashing lights
• Excessive Decoration
• Pop-Up Tents
• No Food Preparation
• No Food Cooking (BBQ)
• Smoking
• Gas or diesel generators
• Other prohibitions on decking/railing
materials and furniture.
• Food Trays or Carts may not be
stored in Parklets

13.C

Housing Element e
Design Standards
• Quality of Materials
• Landscaping
• Furniture
• Lighting & Misting
• Roof Materials
• Shading
• Umbrellas
• Parklet Base Design
• Decking Material
• Colors
• Stormwater
• Railing/Barrier
• Safety Elements

13.C

Maintenance & Revocation
• Maintenance Responsibility
• Revocation of Parklet Permit
• Necessary to protect the public
safety.
• Compliance with Permit Criteria
• Timely Removal of Parklet

13.C

CEQA
• California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
under Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA
Guidelines, which provides that CEQA only
applies to projects that have the potential for
causing a significant effect on the environment
• ZOA 21-007 – Not a physical project or physical
change

13.C

Public Notification
• Advertised in the Press Enterprise (10 day
hearing notice) on February 10, 2022
• No communications received in favor or in
opposition.

13.C

Recommended Action
It is respectfully recommended that the City Council:

1. Open a public hearing and take testimony, if any; and

2. Waive full reading, read by title only, and introduce an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Hemet,
California, Adopt City Council Resolution and find that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA and approve
Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 21-007 based on the
findings outlined therein.

13.C

Discussion & Follow Up

13.C

Findings

13.C

Findings

13.C

Ordinance

13.C

Ordinance

13.C

Ordinance

13.C

Ordinance

13.C

Ordinance

13.C

Ordinance

13.C

Ordinance

13.C

Ordinance

13.C

Ordinance

13.C

Ordinance

13.C

Ordinance

13.C

Diagram

13.C

City of Hemet
City Council Meeting

STAFF REPORT

Meeting: City Council Meeting - Feb 22 2022
Department: Community Development
Submitted by: Christopher Lopez, City Manager
H. P. Kang, Community Development Director;

☐ Receive and File ☐ Consent Calendar ☐ Business Item ☒ Public Hearing

TITLE:

An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, Approving Zone Change 21 -004, Amending the Official Zoning Map to Change the Zone District Designations of Thirty -Three (33) Parcels Totaling 25.06 Acres, to Change the Office Professional (OP) and General Commercial (C-2) Zones to the Multiple Family (R-3) Zone

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

It is respectfully recommended that the City Council:

1. Open a public hearing and take testimony, if any; and

2. Waive full reading, read by title only, and introduce an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, Approving Zone Change 21-004 Amending the Hemet City Zoning Map to Change the Zone District designations for thirty-three (33) parcels totaling 25.06 acres to change the Office Professional (OP) and General Commercial (C -2) zones to the Multiple Family (R -3) Zone. (State Street Corridor); and

3. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, Adopting A Negative Declaration (Nd) (State Clearinghouse No. 2021120350); For Change of Zone No. (Zc 21-004), Amending the Official Zoning District Designations of Thirty -Four (33) Parcels Totaling 25.06 Acres to Change the Existing Zoning On Properties West Of State Street From Professional Office (Op) to Multiple Family Residential (R-3) North of Oakland Avenue, and From General Commercial (C-2) Between Oakland Avenue and Menlo Avenue to Multiple Family Residential (R-3).

BACKGROUND:

Previously, the City Council adopted an ordinance approving an Objective Development and Design Standards (ODDS) to allow multiple -family residential development in the city with previously set standards. This will aid in the construction and operation of housing needs that the city had been allocated by the Southern California Associatio n of Governments (SCAG). With the zone change, builders can proceed with the development of multi -family housing to bring the city closer to meeting the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation.

13.D

Without the approval of the zone change, it would be difficult to collaborate with interested developers to quickly move on projects that will address the housing needs of the city and opportunities to provide housing for the City's population. Additionally, the area is adjacent to a future transport ation hub that will provide access to jobs, goods and services which may encourage residential development.

On February 1, 2022, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending approval and adoption of the Zone Change (ZC) 21 -004, rezoning the existing zone from Office Professional (O -P) to Multiple Family Residential (R-3) on 10.14 acres north of Oakland Avenue and west of State Street; and from General Commercial (C -2) to Multiple Family Residential (R -3) on 14.92 acres on the west side of State Street between the Hemet Vista Apartments and West Oakland Avenue.

Additionally, the Planning Commission discussed removing one parcel from the zone change request to maintain the potential for future commercial development at the southwest corner of State and Oakland (APN 443-050-001 1.87 acres), thereby making a total of 33 parcels and a reduction of total acreage from 26.93 to 25.06 acres.

ANALYSIS:

In the face of a state-wide housing crisis, the State of California has determined that the City of Hemet, like most cities in the region, has made insufficient progress in meeting its Regional Housing Needs .

This deficiency is summarized on the following table:

The City has taken steps to address housing sufficiency by adopting an Objective Design and Development Standards (ODDS) ordinance. The ordinance serves to streamline the review and approval of qualifying development proposals, updating review procedures to meet state requirements, and rezoning properties along State Street for high density development to be anchored by a regional mobility hub. These actions were made possible under a SB 2 Planning Grant Program that was awarded to the City by the State Department of Housing and Community Development.

This change of zone will establish Multiple Housing Residential zoning for properties that qualify for review and approval under the ODDS ordinance. These properties are presently zoned for Office Professional and General Commercial zones for which no demand for those uses has been demonstrated. Moreover, a developer has acquired the lands located north of Menlo Avenue to develop workforce housing. With these land use changes, and state law permitting accessory dwelling units on developed residential lots, future housing opportunities will emerge.

DISCUSSION:

The City has initiated a change of zone on two blocks of land located along the we st side of N. State Street, between the Hemet Vistas Apartments at the north, and W. Oakland Avenue at the south. The City proposes a change of zone from Office Professional (O-P) to Multiple Family Residential (R-3) for

13.D

the Northern Block and from General Commercial (C-2) to Multiple Family Residential (R -3) for the Southern Block (“Project”).

Northern Block
The Northern Block is located at the intersection of W. Menlo Avenue and N. State Street and is bound by existing single-family residential uses to the west; N. State Street to the east; an apartment complex to the north; and W. Menlo Street to the south. The parcel numbers are: 439-281-035, 439‐060-009, - 010, -011, -014, -015, and -024. The block is 10.14 acres, owned by the Housing Authority of Riverside County, and consists of the Workforce Development Center and their parking lot, and vacant land owned by Palm Communities. The General Plan and Zoning designations are Mixed Use (MU) and Office Professional (O -P) respectively. The Housing Authority owns and operates the Workforce Development Center and has entered into an agreement with Palm Communities to build 152 units of workforce housing on 7.76 acres within the Northern Block. At the time of the preparation of this IS/MND, an application for the housing project has not been submitted to the City for review and approval because the application relies u pon R-3 zoning. Thus, this development is not a part of the proposed Project. Under the provisions of SB 35 and similar legislation, the housing project will be exempt from CEQA. The Workforce Development Center and parking lot will remain in place. The development program proposes 19.6 du/ac, which is consistent with the maximum density of 18 -30 du/ac.

Southern Block
The Southern Block consists of approximately 14.92 acres, owned by the Housing Authority of Riverside County and individual property owners. The area is bound by W. Menlo Avenue to the north; W. Oakland Avenue to the south; N. State Street to the east; and N. Alessandro Street to the west. The parcel numbers are: 443 -050-002, -003, -004, -006, -007, -012, -013, -016, -017, -018, -020, -021, - 022, -023, -024, -025, -026, -027, -028, -029, -030, -031 -033, -039, -040. The General Plan and Zoning designations are Mixed Use (MU) and General Commercial (C -2) respectively. The Housing Authority owns the majority of the block with vacant land; however, there are several single-owner parcels along the southern and western boundaries and a mobile home park in the northeast corner along W. Menlo Avenue and N. State Street. The SB2 Planning Grant assigns a density of 18 -30 du/ac for this block.

There are no planned developments proposed at this time.

Future Development
Future development within the Project area will be subject to applicable City review and approval under the provisions of state law. Development proposals are expected to be reviewed under the ODDS ordinance to streamline and accelerate development of work force housing for low and moderate income households. The provisions of the ODDS ordinance are in addition to the provisions of the R-3 Zone with respect to the uses permitted and development standards. A development may seek a certain number of incentives and concessions, such as parking, setbacks, unit size, and other requirements as part of the application review.

Surrounding Development
Development surrounding the proposed change of zone area is mixed as shown in the following table.

13.D

Alternative
One alternative is to wait for a future opportunity for a builder to come in and construct housing at a different location of the city. It may be challenging to assemble smaller pieces of properties to adequately design for a large affordable multiple -family project. The city has not experienced a new (affordable or market rate) multiple-family projects in several years and it may be difficult to find a builder as we proceed in to the future with the rising cost of building materials, interest rates, land cost, etc.

Tribal Consultation
The City commenced the AB 52 process by transmitting letters of notification on September 29, 2021 to the California Native American tribes, identified by the California NAHC, that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the Project area. That process concluded on October 29, 2021. Notices were sent to the Agua Caliente Band, Augustine Tribe, Cabazon Tribe, Cahuilla Tribe, Los Coyotes Tribe, Morongo Tribe, Pala Band, Pechanga Tribe, Quechan Tribe, Ramona Band, Rincon Band, Santa Rosa Tribe, Soboba Tribe, and Torres-Martinez Tribe. The City received one (1) response from the Quechan Tribe deferring to other local Tribes.

Proposed Findings:

Pursuant to Section 90-41.5(a) of the Hemet Municipal Code, the followin g findings must be made by the approving authority.

1. The change of zone is in conformance with the latest adopted general plan for the city. ZC 21 -004 meets the following goals and policies of the Hemet General Plan:

a. Policy LU-1.3 Housing Opportunities. Create a broad range of housing opportunities for all segments of the community and ensure that a balance of housing types and densities are available for existing and future residents.

b. Policy LU -1.4 Walkable Neighborhoods. Create walkable neighborhoods and integrate pedestrian trails and paths into a safe, cohesive, and varied transportation system that provides connectivity to nearby land uses and encourages physical activity and less dependence on the automobile.

13.D

c. Policy LU -1.10 Land Use District Identity. Encourage the establishment of distinct districts and neighborhoods that have a unique identity and character defined by design elements that include edge and entry treatments, architectural features, landscape pallet, streetscape, and community signage requirements.

d. Policy LU-1.14. New Residential Communities. Design new residential communities to complement existing neighborhoods and assure a high level of livability. Est ablish cohesive development patterns united by a landscape and architectural design framework, and recreational amenities that create a distinct sense of place.

e. Policy LU -2.4 Concentrate Land Uses. Promote efficient use of land resources through compa ct building design, infill development, and land use patterns that reduce infrastructure costs and make more effective use of existing and planned transportation systems and public facilities, and minimize impacts to natural environment resources.

CEQA Review:

A Negative Declaration (ND) has been prepared and circulated for a 30 -day comment period for the proposed project. The ND addresses a comprehensive range of issues in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The ND determine d that no mitigation measures are required.

Adoption of the Negative Declaration certifies that the proposed project would not have a significant impact on the environment.

The Draft Negative Declaration was circulated for a 30 -day public review period co mmencing on December 13, 2021 and ending on January 13, 2022. At the time that the staff report was prepared, staff received one comment that was provided by the Lake Hemet Municipal Water District. The comment and its response is included in Attachment F.

STRATEGIC PLAN INTEGRATION:

GOAL ONE: QUALITY OF LIFE:

To ensure that Hemet is safe, clean, attractive and comfortable for all who live, work, and visit.

Objective 1: Enhance the visual appearance of the community to make it attractive and reduce blight.

The proposed action aligns with Council adopted Objective 1: Enhance the visual appearance of the community to make it attractive and reduce blight. Zoning Code Section 90 -42 of the Hemet Municipal Code implements the following goals of the Strategic Plan:

1. To improve the city's image by preserving and enhancing the community's aesthetic beauty and natural assets and by building upon the rich and diverse cultural heritage of the community by converting blighted vacant land into multi-family residential housing.

2. To manage the city's growth by protecting and preserving the environment and maximizing the use of public infrastructure by concentrating housing and development where public facilities and infrastructure are available or maybe upgraded without disturbing sensitive habitats and natural features.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact associated with Zone Change 21-004.

13.D

ATTACHMENT(S):

Attachment 1: CC Ordinance ZC 21-004
Attachment 2: CC_Resolution Neg Dec for ZC 21-004
Attachment 3: PC Resolution ZC 21-004
Attachment 4: Exhibit A General Plan Land Use Map
Attachment 5: Exhibit B Zoning Map Existing
Attachment 6: Exhibit C Zoning Map Proposed
Attachment 7: Exhibit D Aerial Map ZC21-001 042021
Attachment 8: Exhibit E Initial Study Negative Declaration Attachment 9: Exhibit F Initial Study Negative Declaration_Response to Comments 01.25.22-2 Attachment 10: ZC 21-004 State Street Pesentation 22 Feb 2022

13.D

City Council Ordinance No. 2022-
ZOA 21-004

1 2
3 4
5 6
7CITY OF HEMET
8Hemet, California
9ORDINANCE NO.
10 11
12AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
13OF HEMET APPROVING ZONE CHANGE 21-004
14AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP TO CHANGE
15THE ZONE DISTRICT DESIGNATIONS OF THIRTY-
16THREE (33) PARCELS TOTALING 25.06 ACRES TO
17CHANGE THE OFFICE PROFRESSIONAL (OP) AND
18GENERAL COMMERCIAL (C-2) ZONES TO THE
19MULTIPLE FAMILY (R-3) ZONE.
20 21WHEREAS, Section 90-6 (Official Zoning Map) of Chapter 90 (Zoning) of the 22Hemet Municipal Code designates the location and boundaries of the various zone 23districts established by Chapter 90 as shown on the official zoning map; and 24 25WHEREAS, on February 22, 2022, the City Council conducted a duly noticed 26public hearing to consider Change of Zone 21-004; and 27 28WHEREAS, approval of these ordinance amendments will not detrimentally 29affect the health, safety, and welfare of residents of the City of Hemet; and 30 31WHEREAS, on February 1, 2022, the Planning Commission was presented with 32a draft of this Ordinance and, after conducting a duly noticed public hearing, voted to 33recommend that the City Council approve an Ordinance; and 34 35WHEREAS, on the February 22, 2022, the City Council considered the 36Ordinance, the Planning Commission’s findings, and the record of information regarding 37Zoning Ordinance Amendment No, 21-004 as a duly noticed public hearing, at which 38time interested persons has an opportunity to provide testimony on this matter. 39 40NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Hemet does Resolve, 41Determine, Find and Order as follows:
42 43
44 45
46

13.D

City Council Ordinance No. 2022-
ZOA 21-004

1SECTION 1: AMENDMENT OF SECTION 90-6 (OFFICIAL ZONING MAP) 2 3In compliance with State law, Section 90-6 (Official Zoning Map) of Chapter 90 (Zoning) 4of the Hemet Municipal Code is hereby amended to change the zone district 5designation for thirty-three (33) parcels totaling 25.06 acres to change the existing 6Office Professional (OP) and General Commercial (C-2) Zones to Multiple Family (R-3) 7zone, as shown in Exhibit A, and incorporated into the Official Zoning Map in Exhibit B, 8and listed by Assessor Parcel Map Number in Exhibit C, which is attached hereto and 9incorporated by reference.
10 11This new Section would create Objective Design and Development Standards for 12multiple family and mixed use development projects. The ordinance would function as 13an Overlay Zone additive to the standards of R-3 Zone set forth in Section 90-381 of the 14Hemet Municipal Code.
15 16
17SECTION 2: ZONE CHANGE FINDINGS
18 19Pursuant to Hemet Municipal Code Section 90-41.5 (b) and in light of the record before it 20including the staff report dated September 22, 2022, and all evidence and testimony heard at 21the public hearing for this item, the City Council hereby finds as follows:
22 231. The change of zone is in conformance with the latest adopted general plan for the city. 24ZC 21-004 meets the following goals and policies of the Hemet General Plan:
25 26a. Policy LU-1.3 Housing Opportunities. Create a broad range of housing 27opportunities for all segments of the community and ensure that a balance of housing 28types and densities are available for existing and future residents. 29 30b. Policy LU-1.4 Walkable Neighborhoods. Create walkable neighborhoods and 31integrate pedestrian trails and paths into a safe, cohesive, and varied transportation 32system that provides connectivity to nearby land uses and encourages physical activity 33and less dependence on the automobile.
34 35c. Policy LU-1.10 Land Use District Identity. Encourage the establishment of 36distinct districts and neighborhoods that have a unique identity and character defined by 37design elements that include edge and entry treatments, architectural features, landscape 38pallet, streetscape, and community signage requirements. 39 40d. Policy LU-1.14. New Residential Communities. Design new residential 41communities to complement existing neighborhoods and assure a high level of livability. 42Establish cohesive development patterns united by a landscape and architectural design 43framework, and recreational amenities that create a distinct sense of place. 44 45e. Policy LU-2.4 Concentrate Land Uses. Promote efficient use of land resources 46through compact building design, infill development, and land use patterns that reduce 47infrastructure costs and make more effective use of existing and planned transportation 48systems and public facilities, and minimize impacts to natural environment resources.

13.D

City Council Ordinance No. 2022-
ZOA 21-004

1SECTION 3: CEQA: A Negative Declaration (ND) (SCH #2021120350) has been prepared 2and circulated for a 30-day comment period for the proposed project. The ND determined that 3no mitigation measures are required. Adoption of the Negative Declaration certifies that the 4proposed project would not have a significant impact on the environment. 5 6SECTION 4: SEVERABILITY.
7 8If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this 9Ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court 10of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of 11this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance, 12and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, 13irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, 14clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional. 15 16
17SECTION 5: EFFECTIVE DATE.
18 19This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days from its passage by the City 20Council of the City of Hemet.
21 22
23SECTION 6: PUBLICATION.
24 25The City Clerk is authorized and directed to cause this Ordinance to be published 26within fifteen (15) days after its passage in a newspaper of general circulation and 27circulated within the City in accordance with Government Code Section 36933(a) or, to 28cause this Ordinance to be published in the manner required by law using the 29alternative summary and posting procedure authorized under Government Code 30Section 39633(c).
31 32INTRODUCED at the regular meeting of Hemet City Council on the 22nd day of 33February 2022.
34 35
36APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of February, 2022 by the following vote:
37 38________________________________
39Malcolm Lilienthal, Mayor
40 41
42 43ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
44 45
46___________________________ _______________________________ 47John P. Maier, City Clerk Steven P. Graham, City Attorney

13.D

City Council Ordinance No. 2022-
ZOA 21-004

1State of California )
2County of Riverside )
3City of Hemet )
4 5I, John P. Maier, City Clerk of the City of Hemet, do hereby certify that the 6foregoing Ordinance was introduced and first read on the day of 2022, and 7had its second reading at the regular meeting of the Hemet City Council on the day 8of , 2022, and was passed by the following vote:
9 10AYES:
11NOES:
12ABSTAIN:
13ABSENT:
14 15_________________________________
16John P. Maier, City Clerk
17

13.D

CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 22-
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (STATE ST. CORRIDOR)

13 2
3 4CITY OF HEMET
5Hemet, California
6CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 22-
7 8A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
9OF HEMET, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING A NEGATIVE
10DECLARATION (ND) (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO.
112021120350); FOR CHANGE OF ZONE NO. (ZC 21-004),
12AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING DISTRICT
13DESIGNATIONS OF THIRTY-FOUR (33) PARCELS
14TOTALING 25.06 ACRES TO CHANGE THE EXISTING
15ZONING ON PROPERTIES WEST OF STATE STREET
16FROM PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (OP) TO MULTIPLE
17FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-3) NORTH OF OAKLAND
18AVENUE, AND FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL (C-2)
19BETWEEN OAKLAND AVENUE AND MENLO AVENUE
20TO MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-3).
21 22
23WHEREAS, the proposed Change of Zone 21-004 is considered a “project” as 24defined by the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code §21000 et 25seq. (“CEQA”); and,
26 27WHEREAS, the City of Hemet, California, has reviewed Change of Zone 21-004 28in accordance with the authority granted by the California Government Code Section 2921080(d) and § 21082.2(d) and Hemet Municipal Code §90-41; and, 30 31WHEREAS, after completion of an Initial Study, the Community Development 32Director determined that there is no evidence that significant effects on the environment 33will occur as a result of Change of Zone 21-004 and adoption of a Negative Declaration 34is appropriate; and,
35 36WHEREAS, the City has consulted with, and requested comments from, 37members of the public and the agencies and persons referenced in CEQA Guidelines 38§15083 and §15086; and,
39 40WHEREAS, in accordance with Guidelines Section 15082, the City distributed a 41Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt an ND to the State Clearinghouse (SCH No. 422021120350), local and regional responsible agencies, and other interested parties on 43December 18, 2021 for a 30-day comment period which ended on January 18, 2022. 44Pursuant to Assembly Bill 52, the City provided consultation opportunities with Native 45American tribes.

13.D

CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 22-
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (STATE ST. CORRIDOR)

1WHEREAS, upon completion of the Initial Study, the City provided a Notice of 2Intent to the State Office of Planning and Research (OPR) on December 13, 2021 as 3required under CEQA Guidelines §15085 and provided a Notice of Intent to local 4agencies on December 13, 2021 as required under CEQA Guidelines §15087; and, 5 6WHEREAS, the Hemet City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on 7February 22, 2022, at which it received public testimony concerning the project and the 8Initial Study.
9 10WHEREAS, the City Council has analyzed this proposed project under an Initial 11Study and has determined that a Negative Declaration may be adopted pursuant to the 12California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under section 15102 of the CEQA 13Guidelines because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the 14activity in question may have a significant effect of the environment; and 15 16NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Hemet does Resolve, 17Determine, Find and Order as follows:
18 19SECTION 1. FINDINGS
20 21The City Council, in light of the whole record before it, including but not limited to the 22City’s local CEQA Guidelines and Thresholds of Significance, the proposed Negative 23Declaration (ND) and all documents incorporated by reference therein, any comments 24received and responses provided, and other substantial evidence (within the meaning 25of Public Resources Code §21080(e) and §21082.2) within the record and/or provided 26at the public hearing, hereby finds and determines as follows:
27 281. Review Period of ND: That the City has provided the public review period for the 29Negative Declaration for the duration required under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15073 30and 15105.
31 322. Compliance with Law: That the Negative Declaration was prepared, processed, and 33noticed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources 34Code Section 21000 et seq.), and the CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of 35Regulations Section 1500 et seq.), and the local CEQA Guidelines and Thresholds of 36Significance adopted by the City of Hemet.
37 383. Independent Judgment: That the Negative Declaration reflects the Independent 39judgment and analysis of the City.
40 41Therefore, the City Council concludes that the project will not have a significant effect 42on the environment. Based on the foregoing findings, and on substantial evidence in 43the whole of the record, the City Council hereby takes the following actions:
44 45

13.D

CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 22-
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (STATE ST. CORRIDOR)

11. Adopt Negative Declaration: The City Council adopts the Final Negative Declaration, as 2shown in Exhibit 1A, for Change of Zone (ZC 21-004).
3 42. Notice of Determination: The City Council, in compliance with Public Resources Code 5§21152 and CEQA Guidelines §15094, directs the Community Development Director to 6prepare a Notice of Determination concerning certification of the Final Negative 7Declaration, and within five (5) days of project approval, file the Notice with the 8Riverside County Clerk for posting.
9 103. Location: The City Council directs that the Final Negative Declaration and all 11documents incorporated therein and forming the record of decision therefore, be filed 12with the Hemet Planning Department at the Hemet City Hall, 445 E. Florida Avenue, 13Hemet, California, 92543 and be made available for public review upon request 14 15SECTION 2. DETERMINATION AND ORDERS
16 171. Adopt a Negative Declaration: The City Council approves and adopts a 18Negative Declaration (State Clearinghouse (SCH No. 2021120350). 19 202. Notice of Determination: The City Council directs the Community Development 21Director to prepare a Notice of Determination concerning adoption of a Negative 22Declaration, and within five (5) calendar days of project approval, file the Notice 23with the Riverside County Clerk for posting.
24 256. Location: The City Council directs that the Negative Declaration (SCH No. 262021120350) for CZ 21-004 be filed with the Hemet Planning Department at the 27Hemet City Hall, 445 E. Florida Avenue, Hemet, California, 92543 and be made 28available for public review upon request.
29 30
31PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of February 2022 by the 32following vote:
33 34
35AYES:
36NOES:
37ABSTAIN:
38ABSENT:
39 40
41 42
43 44Malcolm Lilienthal, Mayor
45Hemet City Council
46

13.D

CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 22-
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (STATE ST. CORRIDOR)

1ATTEST:
2 3
4________________________________ __________________________ 5John P. Maier, City Clerk Steven P. Graham, City Attorney 6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 29
30 31
32 33
34 35
36 37
38 39
40 41
42 43
44 45

13.D

CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 22-
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (STATE ST. CORRIDOR)

1State of California )
2County of Riverside )
3City of Hemet )
4 5I, John P. Maier, City Clerk of the City of Hemet, do hereby certify that the 6foregoing Ordinance was introduced and first read on the day of 2022, and 7had its second reading at the regular meeting of the Hemet City Council on the day 8of , 2022, and was passed by the following vote:
9 10AYES:
11NOES:
12ABSTAIN:
13ABSENT:
14 15_________________________________
16John P. Maier, City Clerk
17

13.D

U1-BOOI\J—\OCO®\IO3U'l-I>OJI\J-\O(.O®\IO3(J'l-hOOI\J—\O(O®\IO3U'l-§(aOI\)¥-|OCO®\IC>O'l-I>~(a>I\J-—\ CITYOFHEMETHemet,CaliforniaPLANNINGCOMMISSIONRESOLUTIONNO.PC2022-008ARESOLUTIONOFTHEPLANNINGCOMMISSIONOFTHECITYOFHEMET,CALIFORNIAADOPTINGANEGATIVEDECLARATION(ND)(STATECLEARINGHOUSENO.2021120350);FORCHANGEOFZONENO.(ZC21-004),AMENDINGTHEOFFICIALZONINGDISTRICTDESIGNATIONSOFTHIRTY-THREE(33)PARCELSTOTALING25.06ACRESFROMOFFICEPROFESSIONAL(O-P)TOMULTIPLEFAMILYRESIDENTIAL(R-3)ON10.14ACRESNORTHOFOAKLANDA VENUEANDWESTOFSTATESTREET;ANDFROMGENERALCOMMERCIAL(C-2)TOMULTIPLEFAMILYRESIDENTIAL(R-3)ON14.92ACRESONTHEWESTSIDEOFSTATESTREETBETWEENTHEHEMETVISTAAPARTMENTSANDWESTOAKLANDA VENUE.WHEREAS,theproposedChangeofZone21-004isconsidereda“project”asdefinedbytheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct,PublicResourcesCode§21000etseq.(“CEQA”);and,WHEREAS,theCityofHemet,California,hasreviewedZoneChangeNo.21-004inaccordancewiththeauthoritygrantedbytheCaliforniaGovernmentCodeSection21080(d)and§21082.2(d)andHemetMunicipalCode§90-41;and,WHEREAS,aftercompletionofanInitialStudy,theCommunityDevelopmentDirectordeterminedthatthereisnoevidencethatsignificanteffectsontheenvironmentwilloccurasaresultofChangeofZone21-004andadoptionofaNegativeDeclarationisappropriate;and,WHEREAS,theCityhasconsultedwith,andrequestedcommentsfrom,membersofthepublicandtheagenciesandpersonsreferencedinCEQAGuidelines§15083and§15086;and,WHEREAS,inaccordancewithGuidelinesSection15082,theCitydistributedaNoticeofIntent(NOI)toadoptaNegativeDeclaration(ND)totheStateClearinghouse(SCHNo.2021120350),localandregionalresponsibleagencies,andotherinterestedPLANNINGCOMMISSIONRESOLUTIONNO.PC2022-008ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT(STATEST.CORRIDOR)ZC21-004Page1Page 16 of 89

13.D

I\)—\OCOCIJ\IO3O'l-§0OI\J—\O(OCD\IO3U1-F(JOI\>—\O(DCI)\IO3U'l-FO0I\J—\O(O®\IO3O'l-h(.aOI\)—\ 43 partiesonDecember18,2021fora30-daycommentperiodwhichendedonJanuary18,2022.PursuanttoAssemblyBill52,theCityprovidedconsultationopportunitieswithNativeAmericantribes.WHEREAS,uponcompletionoftheInitialStudy,theCityprovidedaNoticeofIntenttotheStateOf?ceofPlanningandResearch(OPR)onDecember13,2021asrequiredunderCEQAGuidelines§15085andprovidedaNoticeofIntenttolocalagenciesonDecember13,2021asrequiredunderCEQAGuidelines§15087;and,WHEREAS,theCityhasanalyzedthisproposedprojectunderanInitialStudyandhasdeterminedthataNegativeDeclarationmaybeadoptedpursuanttotheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct(“CEQA”)undersection15102oftheCEQAGuidelinesbecauseitcanbeseenwithcertaintythatthereisnopossibilitythattheactivityinquestionmayhaveasignificanteffectoftheenvironment;andWHEREAS,theHemetPlanningCommissionconductedadulynoticedpublichearingonFebruary1,2022,atwhichitreceivedpublictestimonyconcerningtheprojectandtheInitialStudy.NOW,THEREFORE,thePlanningCommissionoftheCityofHemetdoesResolve,Determine,FindandOrderasfollows:SECTION1.FINDINGSThePlanningCommission,inlightofthewholerecordbeforeit,includingbutnotlimitedtotheCity’slocalCEQAGuidelinesandThresholdsofSigni?cance,theproposedNegativeDeclaration(ND)andalldocumentsincorporatedbyreferencetherein,anycommentsreceivedandresponsesprovided,andothersubstantialevidence(withinthemeaningofPublicResourcesCode§21080(e)and§21082.2)withintherecordand/orprovidedatthepublichearing,hereby?ndsanddeterminesasfollows:1.ReviewPeriodofNegativeDeclaration:ThattheCityhasprovidedthepublicreviewperiodfortheNegativeDeclarationforthedurationrequiredunderCEQAGuidelinesSections15073and15105.2.CompliancewithLaw:ThattheNegativeDeclarationwasprepared,processed,andnoticedinaccordancewiththeCaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct(PublicResourcesCodeSection21000etseq.),andtheCEQAGuidelines(14CaliforniaCodeofRegulationsSection1500etseq.),andthelocalCEQAGuidelinesandThresholdsofSigni?canceadoptedbytheCityofHemet.3.IndependentJudgment:ThattheNegativeDeclarationre?ectstheIndependentjudgmentandanalysisoftheCity.

PLANNINGCOMMISSIONRESOLUTIONNO.PC2022-008ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT(STATEST.CORRIDOR)ZC21-004Page2Page 17 of 89

13.D

cooo\lO)<J1~§mN—\
Therefore,thePlanningCommissionconcludesthattheprojectwillnothaveasigni?canteffectontheenvironment.Basedontheforegoing?ndings,andonsubstantialevidenceinthewholeoftherecord,thePlanningCommissionherebytakesthefollowingactions:1.AdoptNegativeDeclaration:ThePlanningCommissionadoptstheFinalNegativeDeclaration,asshowninExhibit1A,forChangeofZone(ZC21-004).2.NoticeofDetermination:ThePlanningCommission,incompliancewithPublicResourcesCode§21152andCEQAGuidelines§15094,directsstafftoprepareaNoticeofDeterminationconcerningcerti?cationoftheFinalNegativeDeclaration,andwithinfive(5)daysofprojectapproval,?letheNoticewiththeRiversideCountyClerkforposting.3.Location:TheCityCouncildirectsthattheFinalNegativeDeclarationandalldocumentsincorporatedthereinandformingtherecordofdecisiontherefore,be?ledwiththeHemetPlanningDepartmentattheHemetCityHall,445E.FloridaAvenue,Hemet,California,92543andbemadeavailableforpublicreviewuponrequestSECTION2.DETERMINATIONANDORDERS 1 AdoptaNegativeDeclaration:ThePlanningCommissionapprovesandadoptsaNegativeDeclaration(StateClearinghouse(SCHNo.2021120350).2 NoticeofDetermination:ThePlanningCommissiondirectstheCommunityDevelopmentDirectortoprepareaNoticeofDeterminationconcerningadoptionofaNegativeDeclaration,andwithin?ve(5)calendardaysofprojectapproval,filetheNoticewiththeRiversideCountyClerkforposting.6 Location:ThePlanningCommissiondirectsthattheNegativeDeclaration(SCHNo.2021120350)forCZ21-004befiledwiththeHemetPlanningDepartmentattheHemetCityHall,445E.FloridaAvenue,Hemet,California,92543andbemadeavailableforpublicreviewuponrequest.

PLANNINGCOMMISSIONRESOLUTIONNO.PC2022-008ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT(STATEST.CORRIDOR)ZC21-O04Page3Page 18 of 89

13.D

PASSED,APPROVED,ANDADOPTEDthis1stdayofFebruarybythefollowingvote:

AYES:ChairWuerth,ViceChairVanArsdale,CommissionerBeamesderfer,CommissionerLemkeNOES:NoneABSTAIN:NoneABSENT:None airP CommissionATTEST:

CorinaHer_nandez,RecorSecretaryHemetPlanningCommission
PLANNINGCOMMISSIONRESOLUTIONNO.PC2022-008ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT(STATEST.CORRIDOR)ZC21-O04Page4Page 19 of 89

13.D

ZC 21-004
Menlo/Oakland/State
General Plan Map

AREA NOT INCLUDED

AS RECOMMENDED BY
PC

13.D

ZC 21-004
Menlo/Oakland/State Zoning Map
Existing Zoning

AREA NOT INCLUDED

AS RECOMMENDED BY
PC

13.D

ZC 21-001
Zone Change C-2 & O-P to R-3 Multiple Family
Proposed Zoning Map
Proposed Zoning

AREA NOT INCLUDED

AS RECOMMENDED BY
PC

13.D

ZC 21-004
Oakland/Menlo/State Aerial Map

AREA NOT INCLUDED

AS RECOMMENDED BY
PC.

Commented [MA1]:

13.D

CITY OF HEMET

INITIAL STUDY

Date: December 9, 2021

Case Number: CZ No. 21-004

Project Title: State Street Corridor Change of Zone

Contact: Community Development Director
H.P. Kang (951) 765-2456
445 East Florida Avenue
Hemet, California 92543

Project Location: The Project site is comp rised of two (2) blocks located north of W. Oakland Avenue, west of N. State Street, generally east of N. Alessandro Street, and south of Hemet Vistas Apartments in the City of Hemet (“City”), as shown in Figure 1: Regional Vicinity and Figure 2:

Aerial Imagery Map.

Project Applicant Name and Address:

City of Hemet
445 E. Florida Avenue
Hemet, California 92543

General Plan Designation: MU – Mixed Use (Intensity range varies)

Existing Zoning: O-P – Office Professional north of Menlo Avenue; C-2 – General Commercial from Menlo Avenue to W. Oakland Avenue

Proposed Zoning: R-3 – Multiple Family Residential (max. 30 du/ac)

Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The Project site is designated as MU per the City’s General Plan and is zoned as O-P and C-2 per the City’s Zoning Map (see Figure 3: General Plan Land Use Map and Figure 4: Zoning Map). Immediate surroundings include residential uses zoned R-3 to the north, commercial uses zoned O -P, C-2, and C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial) to the east, residential uses zoned SP 16-001 (Downtown Specific Plan) to the south, and residential uses zoned R-1-7.2 (Single Family Residential) to the west.

General Plan Zoning Land Use
North HDR – High Density
Residential (18.1-30.0 du/ac)
R-3 – Multiple Family
Residential
Multi-family residential
(apartments)
East
OP – Office Professional
MU – Mixed Use
C-1 – Neighborhood
Commercial
C-2 – General Commercial
Office, Single family
residence (abandoned),
Commercial buildings
(strip mall), Gas station,
Industrial warehouse &
Vacant land
South MU – Mixed Use SP 16-001 – Downtown
Specific Plan
Single family residence &
Vacant land
West LDR – Low Density
Residential (2.1-5.0 du/ac)
R-1-7.2 Single Family
Residential
(min. lot 7,200 sq. ft.)
Single family residential &
Mobile homes

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

2 Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.)
• State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB)
• South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)

Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, has consultation begun is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.?

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

The City commenced the AB 52 process by transmitting letters of notification to the California Native American tribes , identified by the California N AHC, that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the Project area on September 29, 2021, and the process concluded on October 29, 2021. Notices were sent to the following Tribes: Agua Caliente, Augustine Tribe, Cabazon Tribe, Cahuilla Tribe, Los Coyotes Tribe , Morongo Tribe, Pala Band, Pechanga Tribe, Quechan Tribe, Ramona Band, Rincon Band, Santa Rosa Tribe , Soboba Tribe, and Torres-Martinez Tribe. The City received one (1) response from the Quechan Tribe deferring to other local Tribes.

Sources to be Incorporated by Reference
• 2030 General Plan (January 24, 2012)
• 2030 General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) (January 12, 2012) • Hemet Municipal Code Chapter 90 (Zoning)

Persons Who Prepared Initial Study
Frank Coyle, Director of Planning
CASC Engineering and Consulting, Inc.
1470 E. Cooley Dr.

Colton, CA 92324
(909) 783-0101

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The City of Hemet has secured a planning grant under the SB 2 Planning Grant Program. The program consists of five distinct projects. This includes the following:

Project 1: Preparation of an Objective Design and Development Standards ordinance.

Project 2: A zone change to create an overlay district over the project areas Project 3: Design and development of a housing project at a future TOD center Project 4: Creation of an Electronic Plan Review program Project 5: A General Plan Amendment to incorporate VMT thresholds and a Housing Element Update

The City has initiated a change of zone, pursuant to Project 2, on two blocks of land located along the west side of N. State Street, between the Hemet Vistas Apartments at the north, and W. Oakland Avenue at the south. The City proposes a change of zone from Office Professional (O -P) to Multiple Family Residential (R-3) for the Northern Block and from General Commercial (C -2) to Multiple Family Residential (R -3) for the Southern Block (“Project”).

Northern Block
The Northern Block is located at the intersection of W. Menlo Avenue and N. State Street and is bound by existing single-family residential uses to the west; N. State Street to the east; an apartment complex to the north; and W. Menlo Street to the south. The parcel numbers are: 439 -281-035, 439‐060-009, -010, -011, -014, -015, and -024. The block is 10.14 acres, owned by the Housing Authority of Riverside County, and consists of the Workforce Development Center and their parking lot , and vacant land owned by Palm Communities. The General Plan and Zoning designations are Mixed Use (MU) and Office Professional (O-P) respectively. The Housing Authority owns and operates the Workforce Development Center and has entered into an agreement with Palm Communities to build 152 units of workforce housing on 7.76 acres within the Northern Block. At the time of the preparation of this IS/ND, an application for the housing project has not been submitted to the City for review and approval because the application relies upon R-3 zoning.

Thus, this development is not a part of the proposed Project. Under the provisions of SB 35 and similar legislation, the housing project will be exempt from CEQA. The Workforce Development Center and parking lot will remain in place. The development program proposes 19.6 du/ac, which is consistent with the maximum density of 18-30 du/ac.

Southern Block
The Southern Block consists of approximately 16.79 acres, owned by the Housing Authority of Riverside County and individual property owners. The area is bound by W . Menlo Avenue to the north; W. Oakland Avenue to the south; N. State Street to the east; and N. Alessandro Street to the west. The parcel numbers are: 443-050-001, -002, -003, -004, -006, -007, -012, -013, -016, -017, -018, -020, -021, -022, -023, -024, -025, -026, -027, -028, -029, -030, -031 -033, -039, -040. The General Plan and Zoning designations are Mixed Use (MU) and General Commercial (C -2) respectively. The Housing Authority owns the majority of the block with vacant land; however, there are several single-owner parcels along the southern and western boundaries and a mobile home park in the northeast corner along W. Menlo Avenue and N. State Street.

The SB2 Planning Grant assigns a density of 18-30 du/ac for this block. There are no planned developments proposed at this time.

Future Development
The proposed Project does not include any development. Thus, all future development within the Project site is subject to applicable City review and approval under the provisions of state law.

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

4

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

5

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

6

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

7

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

8 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:

The results of the analysis indicates the environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist.

Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry
Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology / Soils Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Hazards and
Hazardous Materials
Hydrology / Water
Quality
Land Use / Planning Mineral Resources
Noise Population / Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural
Resources
Utilities / Service
Systems
Wildfire Mandatory Findings of
Significance

Summary of potentially significant impacts that could occur with implementation of this project: (describe)

None – the Initial Study determined that all potential impacts are less than significant and do not require any mitigation measures as the Project proposes a change of zone and does not include any new development. Future projects will be evaluated at the time they are proposed.

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

9 DETERMINATION:

I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

Signature

Date

H.P. Kang, Community Development Director

City of Hemet, California

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

10 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST QUESTIONS

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I. AESTHETICS
Except as provided in Public Resources
Code Section 21099, would the project:

a) Have an adverse effect on a scenic vista?
b) Damage scenic resources, including,
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 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 light or glare
which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?

Sources

1. City of Hemet General Plan, adopted January 24, 2012 a. Chapter 2 – Land Use
b. Chapter 7 – Open Space and Conservation

2. Final Environmental Impact Report City of Hemet General Plan, certified January 12, 2012 a. Section 4.1 – Aesthetics

3. City of Hemet, Scenic Highway Setback Manual Design Criteria, adopted August 1990

4. California Department of Transportation, List of Eligible and Officially Designated State Scenic Highways, 2019. California State Scenic Highway System Map (arcgis.com)

Explanation of Checklist Responses

a) Have an adverse effect on a scenic vista?

No Impact: The City is characterized by its expanse of open space areas and scenic vistas such as the San Jacinto Mountains, the San Bernardino National Mountains, and the San Gabriel Mountains. The Project site is located within the northern portion of the City, which is an urbanized area filled with residential and commercial development. The nearest major scenic resource is the San Jacinto Mountain range, which is located over four miles northwest of the Project site. The area surrounding the Project provides distant views of the San Bernadino and San Jacinto Mountains. However, d ue to the intervening development and the distance and orientation in

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

11 relation to the Project site, prominent, distinct views of the San Bernadino and San Jacinto Mountains are not available from public viewing areas abutting the Project site, under existing conditions. Within the vicinity of the Project site are residential and public land uses which are built up and developed from one to two story buildings. The Project proposes to change the current zoning designations of O-P (Office Professional) and C-2 (General Commercial) to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential). Future development will be required to meet the development standard of Title 19 of the Municipal Code . Therefore, Project implementation would have no impact on scenic vistas.

b) Damage scenic resources, including, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?

No Impact: The Project site is not located within or adjacent to a scenic highway corridor and does not contain scenic resources, such as trees of scenic value, rock outcroppings, or identified historic buildings. The majority of the property is vacant and has been disturbed (i.e., disced and building foundations). The Project site contains scattered trees throughout the Northern and Southern Blocks; however, the trees remain from past development and do not appear to be of scenic value.

The developed portions of the property contain residential uses, commercial uses, a mobile home park, and the Workforce Development Center.

There are no State-designated or eligible scenic highways adjacent to the Project site. The nearest State-eligible scenic highway is a segment of Highway 74 located approximately 0.5 miles south of the Project site (CalTrans, 2019; Google Earth Pro, 2020). According to the City’s Scenic Highway Setback Manual Design Criteria, t he Project site is not located within a Scenic Highway Setback Overlay Zone. Additionally, the Project site is not located within a state scenic highway corridor and implementation of the proposed Project would not have a substantial effect on scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway corridor. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in adver se impacts to scenic resources adjacent to or near a State Scenic Highway. No impact would occur.

c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views 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?

No Impact: The Project site is located within an urbanized area and the proposed Project consists of a change of zone from O-P (Office Professional) and C-2 (General Commercial) to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential) . T he Project does not consist of any new development ; t herefore, Project implementation would not have a substantial effect on the scenic quality within the urbanized area surrounding the Project site. The surrounding area consists of an apartment complex; a mobile home park; single-family residential uses; and commercial uses, such as, strip malls, a gas station, and an industrial supply business. The proposed change of zone would be consistent with the existing zoning adjacent to the Project site , along the northern boundary. Additionally, any new development would be evaluated for compliance with the City Municipal Code and state law at the time of submittal. Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with regulations governing scenic quality and no impact would occur.

d) Create a new source of light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?

No Impact: The Project site is located within an urbanized area that contains commercial uses zoned C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial) and C-2 (General Commercial), and residential uses zoned R-3 (Multiple Family Residential) and R-1-7.2 (Single Family Residential). As discussed in Section

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

12 I (c), t he Project proposes a change of zone from O-P (Office Professional) and C -2 to R-3.

Therefore, light and glare associated with development under R-3 zoning already exists within the Project vicinity. Additionally, the Project does not propose new development and f uture development will be evaluated at the time of submittal. Thus, the proposed Project would not create a new source of light or glare and no impact would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES
Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance, as shown on the maps prepared
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?

b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?

c) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland to non-agricultural use?

Sources

1. City of Hemet General Plan, adopted January 24, 2012 a. Chapter 7 – Open Space and Conservation

2. Final Environmental Impact Report City of Hemet General Plan, certified January 12, 2012 a. Section 4.8 Agricultural Resources
i. Exhibit 4.2-1 Farmland

3. California Department of Conservation (CDC), California Important Farmland Finder (CIFF), 2016, accessed November 3, 2021. DLRP Important Farmland Finder (ca.gov)

Explanation of Checklist Responses

a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?

No Impact: The California Department of Conservation’s (CDC) Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) identifies and maps significant farmland. Farmland is classified using a system of five categories including Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Local Importance or Potential, and Grazing Land. The classification of farmland is determined by a soil survey conducted by the Natural Resources Conservations Service (NRCS), which analyses the suitability of soils for agricultural production. Based on the Important Farmland Finder, an interactive GIS application, the Project site is classified as “ Urban and Built-Up Land”

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

13 (CDC, 201 8; County of Riverside, 20 18). There are no agricultural resources located within or adjacent to the Project area. Therefore, the proposed Project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non -agricultural use and no impact would occur.

b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?

No Impact: According the General Plan EIR, the City’s planning area contains 2,189 acres of land that is under Williamson Act contracts. However, the Project site is not located in an area under a Williamson Act contract. Furthermore, the Project site is currently zoned O-P (Office Professional) and C-2 (General Commercial), with a land use designation of MU (Mixed Use). Thus, Project implementation would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use. No impact would occur.

c) Involve other changes in the existing environment that, because of their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use?

No Impact: The Project site is located within an urbanized area that does not contain any Farmland.

Furthermore, the Project proposes a change of zone from O-P (Office Professional) and C -2 (General Commercial) to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential). The proposed Project does not include any new development ; therefore, the Project would not involve any changes that could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use. No impact would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
III. AIR QUALITY
Where available, the significance criteria
established by the applicable air quality
management district or air pollution control
district may be relied upon to make the
following determinations. Would the project:

a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the air quality plan?

b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard?

c) Expose sensitive receptors to increased
pollutant concentrations?

d) Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors adversely affecting a
substantial number of people)?

Sources

1. City of Hemet General Plan, adopted January 24, 2012 a. Chapter 7 – Open Space and Conservation

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

14 2. Final Environmental Impact Report City of Hemet General Plan, certified January 12, 2012 a. Section 4.3 – Air Quality

3. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) a. Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), 2016

Explanation of Checklist Responses

a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the air quality plan?

No Impact: The Project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin ( SCAB) under the jurisdiction of South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The SCAQMD was created by the 1977 Lewis ‐Presley Air Quality Management Act, which merged four county air pollution control bodies into one regional district. Under the Act, the SCAQMD is responsible for bringing air quality in areas under its jurisdiction into conformity with federal and state air quality s tandards.

The Project site is located within the SCAB, a 6,745‐square mile subregion of the SCAQMD, which includes portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties, and all of Orange County. Existing air quality is measured at established SC AQMD air quality monitoring stations.

Monitored air quality is evaluated in the context of ambient air quality standards. These standards are the levels of air quality that are considered safe, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect the public health and welfare.

The determination of whether a region’s air quality is healthful or unhealthful is determined by comparing contaminant levels in ambient air samples to the state and federal standards. The U.S.

EPA has set National Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and monitoring requirements for six principal pollutants, which are called "criteria pollutants,” including Ozone (O3), Particular Matter (PM) (including both PM10 and PM2.5), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lea d (Pb). The SCAQMD has established that impacts to air quality are significant if there is a potential to contribute or cause regional and/or localized exceedances of the federal and/or state ambient air quality standards, such as the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). The federal Clean Air Act (CAA) requires areas that are not attaining the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) to develop and implement an emission reduction strategy that will bring the area into attainment in a timely manner. The SCAQMD has adopted a series of Air Quality Management Plans (AQMPs) to meet the state and federal ambient air quality standards. The most recent AQMP for the SCAB was published in 2016. The SCAQMD has developed regional and localized significance thresholds (LST) for criteria pollutants, which indicate that any projects in the SCAB with daily emissions that exceed any of the indicated thresholds should be considered having an individually and cumulatively significant air quality impact. Pursuant to the methodology provided in Chapter 12 of the 1993 SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, consistency with the AQMP is affirmed when a Project (1) does not increase the frequency or severity of an air quality standards violation or cause a new violation and (2) is consistent with the growth assumptions in the AQMP.

The Project proposes a change of zone from O -P (Office Professional) and C -2 (General Commercial) to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential). No new development is proposed by the Project; therefore, no construction or operational emissions will occur. Future development must conform with the Air Quality Ma intenance Plan (AQMP) and other regulations under the SCAQMD.

Therefore, the proposed Project would not obstruct implementation of any air quality plan and no impact would occur.

b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

15 No Impact: The SCAB is currently in nonattainment for Ozone (O3) and PM2.5 under state and federal air quality standards, and PM10 under state air quality standards. The AQMP states that individual projects that do not generate operational or construction emissions that exceed the SCAQMD’s recommended daily thresholds for project ‐specific impacts would also not cause a cumulatively considerable i ncrease in emissions for those pollutants for which the Basin is in nonattainment, and therefore, would not be considered to have a significant, adverse air quality impact. Alternatively, individual project‐related construction and operational emissions that exceed SCAQMD thresholds for project‐specific impacts would be considered cumulatively considerable.

The Project proposes a change of zone and does not include any new development. Therefore, the Project does not include any construction or operational activities that release criteria pollutants into the air. As discussed in Section III (a), future developments must conform with SCAQMD regional and local thresholds of significance . Thus, t he proposed Project w ould not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the region is non - attainment under applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. No impact would occur.

c) Expose sensitive receptors to increased pollutant concentrations?

No Impact: The Project proposes a change of zone and does not include any new development that requires earth moving or construction activities; therefore, the proposed Project would not expose sensitive receptors to increased pollutant concentrations. Thus, no impact would occur.

d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors adversely affecting a substantial number of people)?

No Impact: Sensitive receptors are defined as populations that are more susceptible to the effects of pollution than the population at large. The SCAQMD identifies the following as sensitive receptors: long-term healthcare facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, retirement homes, residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, and athletic facilities. The CARB has identified the following groups of individuals as the most likely to be affected by ai r pollution: the elderly over sixty-five (65), children under fourteen (14), athletes, and persons with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, emphysema, and bronchitis.

The nearest sensitive receptors to the Project site include the existing single-family residential uses and multi-family residential uses adjacent to the site. The proposed Project does not include the construction of any new development. The Project consists of a change of zone from O-P (Office Professional) and C-2 (General Commercial) to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential). Therefore, the Project would provide a change of zone that is consistent with surrounding zoning and land uses.

Future development will be evaluated to adhere to SCAQMD regulations. Therefore, the proposed Project would not release any emissions or odors into the air that would affect a substantial number of people. No impact would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

16 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have an 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 an 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 US Fish and Wildlife
Service?

c) Have an adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands 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?

f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?

Sources

1. City of Hemet General Plan, adopted January 24, 2012 a. Chapter 7 – Open Space and Conservation

2. Final Environmental Impact Report City of Hemet General Plan, certified January 12, 2012 a. Section 4.4 – Biological Resources
i. Exhibit 4.4-1 Vegetation Communities
ii. Exhibit 4.4-2 Special Status Species
b. Section 4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
i. Exhibit 4.9-1 Stormwater Drainage and Groundwater

3. County of Riverside, Environmental Programs, Transportation & Land Management Agency, accessed November 22, 2021. WR-MSHCP (rctlma.org)

4. Riverside Conservation Authority, MSHCP Information Map, accessed November 3, 2021. RCA MSHCP Information Map (arcgis.com)

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

17 5. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, BIOS Habitat Connectivity Viewer, accessed November 3, 2021. BIOS viewer 5.96.99 (ca.gov)

Explanation of Checklist Responses

a) Have an adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modi fications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

No Impact: The proposed Project consists of a change of zone and does not involve any new development. The environmental impacts of any future development will be evaluated under the Hemet Municipal Code and state law. Additionally, the Project area is urbanized and is not identified within a vegetation community, nor is the Project site located where special status plant or wildlife resources have been identified. The proposed Project is located within the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservatio n Plan (WR -MSHCP) planning area, which outlines policies for conservation of habitats and natural communities. However, the site is not located within a MSHCP Criteria Cell , and there are no known significant biological resources on the site.

Therefore, the Project would not have a substantial adverse impact on candidate, sensitive, or special status species. Thus, no impact would occur.

b) Have an 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?

No Impact: As stated above is Section IV (a), the Project consists of a change of zone and does not propose any new development . Future development would be evaluated under the Hemet Municipal Code and state law. The Project site does not contain, nor is it adjacent to, 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.

Therefore, no impact would occur.

c) Have an adverse effe ct on State or federally protected wetlands through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?

No Impact: The City contains water bodies and wetlands including the San Jacinto River, Diamond Valley Lake, San Diego Aqueduct, Hemet Channel, Lake Hemet Main Canal, Salt Creek Flood Control Canal, Bautista Wash, and the Casa Loma Canal Aqueduct. However, no wetlands exist at or near the Project site and t he proposed Project does not consist of new development .

Therefore, no impact would occur.

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?

No Impact: The Project site is located within a Limited Connectivity Opportunity Zone. No migratory wildlife corridors or native wildlife nursery sites are found within the Project site or the surrounding area. Therefore, the proposed Project would not interfere with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species , or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors; nor would the Project impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. Furthermore, the Project does not consist of any new development and future development would be evaluated under the Hemet Municipal Code and state law. Thus, no impact would occur.

e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources?

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

18 No Impact: The proposed Project does not include new development and therefore, would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. Future development would be evaluated under the Hemet Municipal Code and state law. Thus, no impact would occur.

f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?

No Impact: Although the proposed Project is within the Western Riverside County MSHCP, the Project site is not located within a Criteria Cell . Additionally, the Project does not propose any grading or construction of new buildings and/or facilities. Therefore, the pr oposed Project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans. Thus, no impact would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
a) Cause an adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant
to §15064.5?

b) Cause an 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?

Sources

1. City of Hemet General Plan, adopted January 24, 2012 a. Chapter 9 – Historic Resources
i. Figure 9.3 Notable Local Historic Sites

2. Final Environmental Impact Report City of Hemet General Plan, certified January 12, 2012 a. Section 4.5 – Cultural Resources
i. Exhibit 4.5-1 Cultural Resource Sensitivity

3. National Parks Service, National Register Database and Research GIS App, accessed November 3, 2021. National Register of Historic Places (nps.gov) Explanation of Checklist Responses

a-c) No Impact: The proposed change of zone does not involve any new development. Additionally, the City completed the AB 52 process by notifying the California Native American tribe s that are identified by the California NAHC to be traditionally and culturally affiliated with the Project area .

The City received one (1) response from the Quechan Tribe deferring to other local Tribes.

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

19 The Hemet Stock Farm is identified as a Notable Local Historic Site and is located directly south of the Project site. Although the Hemet Stock Farm is designated as a local historic site, the Farm is not located within the Downtown Historic Core, which identifies if an area is subject to demolition review. The Project site does not contain any local, state, or national historic resources and is located within an area of Low-Medium Cultural Resource Sensitivity. The proposed Project would not cause an adverse change in the significance of a historical or archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5.

Since no development is proposed as part of the change of zone, the potential for encountering human remains during grading, excavation, or construction activities is non-existent. Future development will be exempt from CEQA pursuant SB 35. However, a ny future proposed developments will be subject to plan review in which t he City may apply conditions of approval to address monitoring during earth moving activities and the disposition of any discovered human remains. Thus, no impact would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
VI. 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?

Sources

1. City of Hemet General Plan, adopted January 24, 2012 a. Chapter 5 – Community Services and Infrastructure

2. Final Environmental Impact Report City of Hemet General Plan, certified January 12, 2012 a. Section 4.14 – Public Utilities and Energy Efficiency

Explanation of Checklist Responses

a) Result in potentially significant environmental impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? No Impact: As the City and the surrounding region continues to grow and develop, the demand for energy consumption increases. State, county, and City building codes determine energy efficiency requirements for building construction. Changes to building codes over the years have resulted in substantial improvements in energy efficiency. This has translated into less energy required to light, cool, and heat buildings. In addition, green building techniques, such as the use of passive solar orientation, recycled building materials, improved insulation, energy star appliances, and onsite small-scale renewable energy generation have contributed to energy conservation.

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

20 The proposed change of zone would not result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during Project construction or operation because no new development is being proposed. While the use and/or construction of Multiple Family Residential uses could potentially have significant energy demands, any future development would be subject to compliance with energy standards in place at the time of construction. As such, no impacts would occur relative to the change of zone.

b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?

No Impact: The proposed change of zone would not conflict with or obstruct a State or Local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Any future project constructing or operating a Multiple Family Residential use would be subject to conform with State and Local regulations regarding renewable energy and energy efficiency. These regulations include encouraging the production and use of renewable energy resources, the effective management of energy resources, and the use of existing infrastructure to reduce environmental impacts. The proposed Project only involves a change of zone and does not authorize any new development, as such, no impacts would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential
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?

(ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
(iii) Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction?

(iv) Landslides?
b) Result in soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?

c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as
a result of the project, and potentially result
in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

21 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined
in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial direct or indirect
risks to life or property?

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?

Sources

1. City of Hemet General Plan, adopted January 24, 2012 a. Chapter 6 – Public Safety

2. Final Environmental Impact Report City of Hemet General Plan, certified January 12, 2012 a. Section 4.6 – Geology, Soils, Mineral and Paleontological Resources

Explanation of Checklist Responses

a-f) No Impact: The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (Act) was passed in 1972 to mitigate the hazard of surface faulting to structures for human occupancy. The Act’s main purpose is to prevent the construction of buildings used for human occupancy on the surface trace of active faults. The Act requires the State Geologist to establish regulatory zones, known as “Alquist-Priolo (AP) Earthquake Fault Zones,” around the surface traces of active faults and to issue appropriate maps. If an active fault is found, a structure for human occupancy cannot be placed over the trace of the fault and must be set back from the fault (typically 50 feet).

The City contains several areas designated as Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones due to the San Jacinto Fault that runs through the northeast portion of the City. The Project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zon e and does not contain a San Jacinto Fault line .

However, the Project site is situated in a seismically active region. As is the case for most areas of Southern California, ground shaking resulting from earthquakes associated with nearby and more distant faults may occur at the Project site. Other geologic hazards include earthquake liquefaction and landslides. Liquefaction is a process in which cohesion-less, saturated, fine-grained sand and silt soils lose shear strength due to ground shaking and behave as fluid. The Project site is located within an area with moderate liquefaction susceptibility . Landslides may result from heavy rain, erosion, removal of vegetation, seismic activity, or combinations of these and other factors. The Project site is relatively flat, contains no hillside or steep slopes on or in the vicinity, and is located within an urbanized area (Google Earth Pro, 2020). Additionally, future development must connect to a municipal waterway system; therefore, septic tanks and alternative waste water disposal systems will not be utilized.

The Project site is located within an area identified to have high Paleontological Sensitivity. The

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

22 area is classified as High B, which indicates that fossils are likely to be encountered at or below four feet of depth and may be impacted during excavation. However, the Project proposes a change of zone and does not involve earth moving and/or constructi on of new development. Future development must comply with federal and state requirements such as the California Seismic Hazards Mapping Act to assess the geological hazards of a project site (i.e., seismic ground shaking, liquefaction, landslides) and soi l stability. Furthermore, future development will need to assess the potential to directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site , or unique geologic feature. The City’s Municipal Code has many existing regulations that mitigate potential safety concerns related to new construction. The City of Hemet’s Building Regulations are included in the City’s Municipal Code as Chapter 14 (Buildings and Building Regulations). The City has adopted by reference the most recent version of the California Building Standards Code (CBC).

The CBC is the building code for California, and Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations. As such, no impacts would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
VIII. 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 emissions of greenhouse
gases?

Sources

1. City of Hemet General Plan, adopted January 24, 2012 a. Chapter 7 – Open Space and Conservation

2. Final Environmental Impact Report City of Hemet General Plan, certified January 12, 2012 a. Section 4.3 – Air Quality

3. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) a. Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), 2016

4. California Air Resources Board (CARB) Scoping Plan, 2017

Explanation of Checklist Responses

a-b) No Impact: Global climate change has been of concern due to the rise of rapid industrialization.

Greenhouse gases (GHGs), primarily carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous (N2O) oxide, collectively reported as CO2e, are directly emitted from stationary sourc e combustion of natural gas in equipment such as water heaters, boilers, process heaters, and furnaces. GHGs are also emitted from mobile sources such as on -road vehicles and off -road construction equipment burning fuels, such as gasoline, diesel, biodiese l, propane, or natural gas (compressed or liquefied). Indirect GHG emissions result from electric power generated elsewhere (i.e., power plants) used to operate process equipment, lighting, and utilities at a facility. Also, included in GHG

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

23 quantification is electric power used to pump the water supply (e.g., aqueducts, wells, pipelines) and the disposal and decomposition of municipal waste in landfills.

The Project proposes a change of zone from O -P (Office Professional) and C -2 (General Commercial) to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential) . The proposed Project does not consist of any new development. Therefore, the Project will not directly generate greenhouse gas emissions that may have a significant impact on the environment or conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gas. Furthermore, future pr oposed development must comply with SCAQMD requirements, state, and federal regulations such as AB 32, and the City of Hemet General Plan in order to have a less than significant impact on greenhouse gas emissions. Many of the GHG reduction measures outlined in AB 32 have been adopted and implementation activities are ongoing. AB 32 requires the State to reduce statewide greenhouse gas emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030. Future development would be exempt from CEQA pursuant to SB 35 and similar legislation. Additionally, future development would not be required to conduct a traffic analysis based on VMT , unless required by the City to establish conditions of approval. As such, no impacts would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS

MATERIALS

Would the project:
a) Create a hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport,
use, or disposal of hazardous materials?

b) Create a 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 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?

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

24 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
e) For a project located within an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport
or public use airport, would the project result
in a safety hazard or excessive noise for
people residing or working in the project
area?

f) Impair implementation of an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?

g) Expose people or structures, either
directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?

Sources

1. City of Hemet General Plan, adopted January 24, 2012 a. Chapter 6 – Public Safety

2. Final Environmental Impact Report City of Hemet General Plan, certified January 12, 2012 a. Section 4.8 – Hazards and Hazardous Materials

3. California Department of Toxic Substances Control, Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List (CORTESE) EnviroStor Database, accessed November 19, 2021. EnviroStor (ca.gov)

Explanation of Checklist Responses

a-g) No Impact: The Project proposes a change of zone from O-P (Office Professional) and C-2 (General Commercial) to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential) and does not consist of any new development.

The environmental impacts of future development will be analyzed under the Hemet Municipal Code and state law. Given the proposed zoning of R-3, there would not be a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, as hazardous materials are not permitted under R-3 zoning. The change of zone would not induce 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.

The proposed R-3 zoning is not expected to emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste. Future development will be limited to residential uses with low potential to emit or transport hazardous substances . Currently, the Project site is approximately 0.48 miles northwest of the nearest school, Alessandro High School and 0.52 miles northwest of Jacob Wiens Elementary School and Union High School. According to the Cortese List, the Project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites.

The Project site is located approximately 2. 07 miles northeast of the Hemet -Ryan Airport. There are no other public or private airports within the City. One (1) parcel on the southwest corner of the Project site, totaling 0.39 acres, is located within Hemet -Ryan Airport Compatibility Zone E .

Therefore, the change of zone to R -3 would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area.

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

25 The proposed change of zone is not expected to impair the implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan identified in the City General Plan. Additionally, the proposed change of zone would not disproportionately expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires in comparison to existing residential land uses in the City. As such, no impacts would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or otherwise
substantially degrade surface or ground
water quality?

b) Decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere with groundwater management of
the basin that the project may impede
sustainable groundwater management of the
basin?

c) Substantially alter the 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 silt in a
manner which would result in erosion,
siltation, or flooding 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 storm water 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?

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

26 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
a water quality control plan or sustainable
ground water management plan?

Sources

1. City of Hemet General Plan, adopted January 24, 2012 a. Chapter 5 – Community Services and Infrastructure

2. Final Environmental Impact Report City of Hemet General Plan, certified January 12, 2012 a. Section 4.9 – Hydrology and Water Quality

3. California Water Boards, Santa Ana – R8, accessed November 19, 2021. Regional Boundaries Map | Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (ca.gov)

4. Department of Homeland Security, FEMA Flood Map Service Center, accessed November 22, 2021. FEMA Flood Map Service Center | Search By Address

Explanation of Checklist Responses

a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?

No Impact: The Project site lies within the San Jacinto River Watershed, which drains to the Santa Ana River through Lake Elsinore and Temescal Wash, and eventually drains to the Pacific Ocean in Orange County. The watershed is under the authority of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The proposed change of zone from O -P (Office Professional) and C -2 (General Commercial ) to R-3 ( Multiple Family Residential) will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality. The proposed Project does not consist of any new development and therefore will not require earth moving, construction, or operational activities. All new development projects equal to one acre or more are subject to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES).

Under the NPDES, new development in the City must comply with Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR) and the City’s Municipal Storm Serwer System Permit (MS4). Therefore, no impact would occur.

b) Decrease groundwater suppl ies or interfere with groundwater management of the basin that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?

No Impact: The change of zone does not include new development, and thus, will not have a direct impact on substantially decreasing groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge. Future grading and/or new construction must undergo the appropriate development review to determine any project impacts that may impede sustainable groundwater management of the Hemet South Basin. This includes preparation of project -specific hydrology studies and implementation of BMPs to minimize runoff and provide for infiltration of stormwater into the soil onsite. As such, no impacts would occur as a result of the proposed change of zone.

c) Substantially alter the 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:

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

27 (i) Result in substantial erosion or silt in a manner which would result in erosion, siltation, or flooding on- or off-site?
(ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site;
(iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
(iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?

No Impact: The change of zone would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of a site or area because the proposed Project does not include new development. Future development will be subject to plan review to ensure that the existing drainage pattern o f an area or site does not alter the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on - or off-site, substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on - or offsite, or 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. No impacts would occur.

d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?

No Impact: The proposed change of zone has no risk of inundation as the Project does not include new development. There is no levee located within the vicinity of the Project site. According to applicable FEMA FIRM No. 06065C 1488H, the Project site is located within Zone A, which is an area subject to inundation by the 1-percent-annual-chance flood event generally determined using approximate methodologies (FEMA 2020). The Project site is located over forty-four (44) miles northeast of the Pacific Ocean and is not within a dam inundation zone. Additionally, no steep hillsides subject to mudflow are located on or near the Project site. No impacts would occur.

e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable ground water management plan?

No Impact: The proposed change of zone would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable ground water management plan. Future development would be required to conform with the City of Hemet General Plan and Municipal Code to mitigate impacts to water quality control plans or sustainable groundwater management plans. No impacts would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established
community?

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

28 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
b) Cause a significant environmental impact
due to a conflict with any land use plan,
policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose
of avoiding or mitigating an environmental
effect?

Sources

1. City of Hemet General Plan, adopted January 24, 2012 a. Chapter 2 – Land Use

2. Final Environmental Impact Report City of Hemet General Plan, certified January 12, 2012 a. Section 4.10 – Land Use, Population, and Housing

Explanation of Checklist Responses

a) Physically divide an established community?
No Impact: The Project proposes a change of zone from O -P (Office Professional) and C -2 (General Commercial) to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential). According to the City’s General Plan, the Project site is designated as Mixed Use (MU), which allows R-3 development. The Project site is comprised of a majority of vacant land, as well as, the Workforce Development Center, a mobile home park, commercial uses, and a few single-family residences. Under the proposed Project, the Workforce Development Center will remain in place. Although several residential and commercial uses exist within the Project site, the Project does not propose any development. Furthermore, the proposed change of zone will simply allow for Multiple Family Residential uses to be built on the Project site rather than Commercial and Office uses. Therefore, no impact would occur.

b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?

No Impact: As stated above in Section XI (a), the Project proposes a change of zone from O -P (Office Professional) and C-2 (General Commercial) to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential). According to the City’s General Plan, the Project site is designated as Mixed Use (MU), which allows R -3 development. Future development will be subject to City review and approval. Therefore, future development will conform with the City’s General Plan and any policies or regulations that the City has adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect . Thus, no impact would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XII. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

29 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to
the region and the residents of the state?

b) Result in the loss of availability of a
locally-important mineral resource recovery
site delineated on the general plan, specific
plan or other land use plan?

Sources

1. City of Hemet General Plan, adopted January 24, 2012 a. Chapter 7 – Open Space and Conservation

2. Final Environmental Impact Report City of Hemet General Plan, certified January 12, 2012 a. Section 4.6 – Geology, Soils, Mineral and Paleontological Resources

Explanation of Checklist Responses

a-b) No Impact: The Project site is located within an a rea classified as an MRZ-3 (Mineral Resource Zone 3). MRZ-3 areas contain sedimentary deposits that have the potential to supply sand and gravel for concrete and crushed stone for aggregate; however, these mineral deposits are not of statewide or regional significance. Some mineral re sources found in the area, such as limestone, serpentine, sand, and gravel may have potential for local significance. However, the proposed Project does not include any new development. The Project consists of a change of zone from O-P (Office Profess ional) and C -2 (General Commercial) to R -3 (Multiple Family Residential) .

Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in the loss of availability of know mineral resources that would be of value to the region, the state, or the local community. Thus, no impact would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XIII. NOISE
Would the project:
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 general plan or
noise ordinance, or other applicable
standards?

b) Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration?

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

30 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public
use airport, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?

Sources

1. City of Hemet General Plan, adopted January 24, 2012 a. Chapter 6 – Public Safety

2. Final Environmental Impact Report City of Hemet General Plan, certified January 12, 2012 a. Section 4.11 – Noise

Explanation of Checklist Responses

a-b) 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 general plan or noise ordinance, or other applicable standards? Generation of excessive ground-borne vibration?

a-b) No Impact: The Project proposes a change of zone from O -P (Office Professional) and C -2 (General Commercial) to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential). The Project does not include any new development, and therefore, does not involve any grading or construction of new buildings and/or facilities. The proposed Project will not generate a temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of sta ndards established in the general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies , or produce exces sive ground borne noise levels. Future construction of Multiple Family Residential uses is subject to City review and approval and must comply with the City’s Noise Standards for residential properties. As such, no impacts would occur.

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?

No Impact: As previously discussed in Section IX, the Project site is located approximately 2.07 miles northeast of the Hemet-Ryan Airport. There are no other public or private airports within the City. One (1) parcel on the southwest corner of the Project site, totaling 0.39 acres, is located within Hemet-Ryan Airport Compatibility Zone E. Therefore, the change of zone from O -P (Office Professional) and C-2 (General Commercial) to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential) would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area. Thus, no impact would occur.

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

31 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly or
indirectly?

b) Displace existing people or housing,
necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?

Sources

1. City of Hemet General Plan, adopted January 24, 2012 a. Chapter 2 – Land Use
b. Chapter 11 - Housing

2. Final Environmental Impact Report City of Hemet General Plan, certified January 12, 2012 a. Section 4.10 – Land Use, Population, and Housing

Explanation of Checklist Responses

a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly?

Less than Significant Impact: The Project site is loca ted in the City’s General Plan Mixed Use (MU) land use designation . Per the Hemet General Plan, Mixed Use (MU) designations are intended to create high-intensity environments for people to live, work, and shop within a compact area. Permitted land uses within Mixed Use (MU) designations include Single-Family Residential; Low Density, Multiple Family, and High D ensity Residential; Planned Community Development; and Commercial and Office uses . The proposed Project consists of a change of zone from O -P (Office Professional) and C-2 (General Commercial) to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential). Although the change of zone may induce population growth by permitting Multiple Family Residential development rather than Commercial and Office development, the R -3 zoning complies with the General Plan land use designation , which is consistent with the General Plan EIR . The Project does not propose any development at this time. The refore, Project impacts would be less than significant.

b) Displace existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

No Impact: As discussed in Section XI (a), the Project site is comprised of a majority of vacant land, as well as, the Workforce Development Center, a mobile home park, commercial uses, and a few single -family residences. Under the proposed Project, the Workforce Development Center will remain in pl ace. Although several single-family residences exist within the Project site, the Project does not propose any development. Potential impacts to an established community will be analyzed when future development is proposed. Furthermore, the proposed Project will provide a zoning designation that permits the construction of more housing rather than Commercial and Office uses. Therefore, no impact would occur.

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

32 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XV. 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
following?

(i) Fire protection?
(ii) Police protection?
(iii) Schools?
(iv) Parks?
(v) Other public services/facilities?

Sources

1. City of Hemet General Plan, adopted January 24, 2012 a. Chapter 5 – Community Services and Infrastructure

2. Final Environmental Impact Report City of Hemet General Plan, certified January 12, 2012 a. Section 4.12 – Public Services and Facilities

Explanation of Checklist Responses

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 significa nt environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the following?

Less than Significant Impact: The change of zone may contribute to an increase in Multiple Family Residential land uses, which would cause an increase in the number of residents in the Hemet Fire Department and Hemet Police D epartment service areas. As a result, additional fire and police equipment, fac ilities, and personnel may be required to provide adequate response times, acceptable public service ratios, and other performance objectives for law enforcement services. Currently, no development is proposed as part of the change of zone .

Furthermore, residential land uses may generate additional need for schools, parks, and other public services/facilities. Thus, future development will undergo City review and approval in order to ensure adequate fire and police services are provided, as well as public facilities such as schools and parks. Thus, the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

33 on government facilities.

(i) Fire protection?

Less than Significant Impact: The City is served by the Hemet Fire Department, which provides fire protection services and maintains a comprehensive inspection program that reduces the potential for accidents. Four (4) fire stations are located within the City: Fire Station No. 1 on Juanita Street, Fire Station No. 2 on Stetson Avenue, Fire Station No. 3 on Devonshire Avenue, and Fire Station No. 4 on Cawston Avenue . The Hemet Fire Department will continue to provide fire protection and emergency medical services to approved residential uses as well as the surrounding community. Thus, the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on fire protection services.

(ii) Police protection?

Less than Significant Impact: The City is served by the Hemet Police Department, which is located at 450 E. Latham Street. The Hemet Police Department will continue to provide police protection services to approved residential uses and the surrounding community. The proposed change of zone may have the potential to generate additional need for law enforcement protection and emergency medical services. Thus, future development is subject to City review and approval in order to ensure adequate services are provided. Thus, the proposed Pro ject would have a less than significant impact on police protection services.

(iii) Schools?

Less than Significant Impact: The proposed Project consists of a change of zone from O-P (Office Professional) and C -2 (General Commercial) to R-3 (Multiple Family Re sidential). Future development that is consistent with the proposed zoning of R -3 may generate students and increase demand on local schools. However, future development will be analyzed to evaluate potential impacts to s chools and educational facilities . As such, less than significant impacts are anticipated relative to the change of zone.

(iv)-(v) Parks and Other public facilities?

Less than Significant Impact: The requested change of zone is not expected to directly impact parks or other public facilities. However future development under the proposed R -3 zoning will provide private recreational facilities but may cause potential impacts to public parks and other public facilities. Therefore, future development will be evaluated at the time of submittal. As such, a less than significant impact would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XVI. RECREATION
Would the project:

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

34 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood
and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that physical deterioration of
the facility would be accelerated?

b) Does the project include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?

Sources

1. City of Hemet General Plan, adopted January 24, 2012 a. Chapter 8 – Recreation and Trails

2. Final Environmental Impact Report City of Hemet General Plan, certified January 12, 2012 a. Section 4.12 – Public Services and Facilities

Explanation of Checklist Responses

a-b) No Impact: The proposed Project consists of a change of zone from O-P (Office Professional) and C -2 (General Commercial) to R -3 (Multiple Family Residential). The Project does not propose any new development; therefore, Project implementation would not i ncrease the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other rec reational facilities . Future development of Multiple Family Residential uses would provide private recreational facilities but may increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks . However, all future development will be analyzed under plan review. The Project does not propose any recreational facilities and does not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. As such, no impacts would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XVII. TRANSPORTATION
Would the project:
a) Conflict with an applicable program plan,
ordinance or 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)

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

35 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature or incompatible
uses?

e) Result in inadequate emergency access?

Sources

1. City of Hemet General Plan, adopted January 24, 2012 a. Chapter 4 – Circulation

2. Final Environmental Impact Report City of Hemet General Plan, certified January 12, 2012 a. Section 4.13 – Traffic and Transportation

Explanation of Checklist Responses

a) Conflict with an applicable program plan, ordinance or addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?

No Impact: The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 20 08 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) provides the Southern California region with goals and measures to sustainably integrate land use and transportation. The RTP sets broad goals for the region and provides strategies to reduce issues related to congestion and mobility. The proposed change of zone aligns with the General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements, which is consistent with the goals and strategies set forth in the 2008 RTP. Furthermore, it is important to note that the Project does not involve any new development and will not have an impact with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. Future development must undergo a separate development review in order to address traffic impacts. Thus, no impacts would occur.

b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)

No Impact: The proposed Project consists of a change of zone from O-P (Office Professional) and C-2 (General Commercial) to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential). Future development is exempt from Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis as the new development would meet the exemption criteria of VMT screening. New development under the R-3 zoning would construct affordable housing and urban infill. Additionally, future development will be exempt from CEQA pursuant SB 35. As such, no impacts would occur.

c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses?

No Impact: The proposed change of zone does not include any new development and will not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment). Future development and/or construction must undergo development review and comply wi th local, state, federal, and regional standards.

As such, no impacts would occur.

d) Result in inadequate emergency access?

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

36 No Impact: The proposed change of zone does not include any construction of new facilities and will not result in inadequate emergency access. Future development must comply with the design guidelines in the City’s Municipal Code in order to ensure that adequate emergency access is provided on site. As such, no impacts would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
a) Would the project cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of a tribal
cultural resource, defined in Public
Resources Code section 21074 as either a
site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is
geographically defined in terms of the size
and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or
object with cultural value to a California
Native American tribe, and that is:

(i) Listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in Public
Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or

(ii) A resource determined by the lead
agency, in its discretion and supported
by substantial evidence, to be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision(c) of Public Resources Code
Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria
set forth in subdivision(c) of Public
Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead
agency shall consider the significance of
the resource to a California Native
American tribe.

Sources

1. City of Hemet General Plan, adopted January 24, 2012 a. Chapter 9 – Historic Resources
i. Figure 9.3 Notable Local Historic Sites

2. Final Environmental Impact Report City of Hemet General Plan, certified January 12, 2012 a. Section 4.5 – Cultural Resources
i. Exhibit 4.5-1 Cultural Resource Sensitivity

Explanation of Checklist Responses

No Impact: The proposed Project consists of a change of zone from O-P (Office Professional) and C-2 (General Commercial) to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential) . However, the Project does not

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

37 propose any new development. The Project site is located in an area of Low-Medium Cultural Sensitivity and High Paleontological Sensitivity.

The City will apply conditions of approval to address monitoring during any earth moving activities and disposition of resources and/or human remains. Furthermore, the proposed change of zone is not expected to have significant impacts to tribal cultural resources. The City provided a letter notification of the proposed change of zone to Agua Caliente, Augustine Tribe, Cabazon Tribe, Cahuilla Tribe, Los Coyotes Tribe, Morongo Tribe, Pala Band, Pechanga Tribe, Quechan Tribe, Ramona Band, Rincon Band, Santa Rosa Tribe, Soboba Tribe, and Torres -Martinez Tribe. The City received one (1) response from the Que chan Tribe deferring to other local Tribes. The proposed Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource. No impact would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment, storm water,
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could
cause adverse environmental effects?

b) Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project and reasonably foreseeable
future development during normal, dry and
multiple dry years

c) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which serves
or may serve the project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project’s projected
demand in addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?

d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or
local standards, or in excess of the capacity
of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the
attainment of solid waste reduction goals?

e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?

Sources

1. City of Hemet General Plan, adopted January 24, 2012 a. Chapter 5 – Community Services and Infrastructure

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

38 2. Final Environmental Impact Report City of Hemet General Plan, certified January 12, 2012 a. Section 4.14 – Public Utilities and Energy Efficiency

Explanation of Checklist Responses

a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, storm water, drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause adverse environmental effects?

No Impact: The proposed Project consists of a change of zone from O-P (Office Professional) and C-2 (General Commercial) to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential). Future development will be required to comply with all applicable water, stormwater, and wastewater treatment requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (Region #8) and the City of Hemet Municipal Code. The proposed Project does not include any new development; thus, the Project will not utilize any uti lities. Therefore, the Project will not result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, or storm water, drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities. No impact would occur.

b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?

No Impact: The proposed change of zone does not include any new development at this time. The Eastern Municipal Water District currently serves the parcels located within the Northern Block of the Project site (north of W. Menlo Avenue), and the Lake Hemet Municipal Water District serves the parcels located within the Southern Block of the Project site (south of W. Menlo Avenue). Due to the lack of development proposed by the Project, no water supplies are needed to support the Project. A Water Supply Service Assessment (WSA) has been prepared by EMWD for the Northern Block to confirm available water supply. A water supply analysis will be required for the Southern Block once a future development plan is submitted. Thus, no impact would occur.

c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve th e project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?

No Impact: The Project proposes a change of zone from O -P (Office Professional) and C -2 (General Commercial) to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential). Future development will be responsible for all necessary and appropriate drainage improvements, as reviewed and approved by the City.

The change of zone is not expected to result in activity which will demand wastewater treat ment services that exceed the adequate capacity of providers. Thus, no impacts would occur.

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?

No Impact: The change of zone is not expected to result in a substantial increase in solid waste generation. Any proposed development will be subject to comply with State or local standards, to meet solid waste reduction goals and avoid generating solid waste in excess of or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure. As such, no impacts would occur. e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?

No Impact The proposed change of zone will allow for Multiple Family Residential uses to be built on the Project site rather than Commercial and Office uses. This proposed use will be required to

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

39 comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Future development will be required to comply with applicable federal, state and local regulations related to solid waste. As such, no impacts would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XX. WILDFIRE
If located in or near state responsibility
areas or lands classified as very high fire
hazard severity zones, 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?

Sources

1. City of Hemet General Plan, adopted January 24, 2012 a. Chapter 6 – Public Safety

2. Final Environmental Impact Report City of Hemet General Plan, certified January 12, 2012 a. Section 4.8 – Hazards and Hazardous Materials

3. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Fire Hazard Severity Zones Map, accessed November 22, 2021. FHSZ Viewer (ca.gov)

Explanation of Checklist Responses

a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?

No Impact: The Project site is not located within a fire hazard zone; the site is identified within a Local Responsibility Area (LRA) on the latest Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) maps prepared by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). The nearest Very High

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

40 Fire Hazard Zone ( VHFHSZ) to the Project site is located approximately one (1) mile east in the Park Hill area. There are no wildland conditions in the urbanized area where the Project site is located. Additionally, the proposed Project is simply a change of zone and does not include any new development. Therefore, the Project would not impair an adopted emergency respon se plan or emergency evacuation plan and no impact would occur.

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?

No Impact: As discussed above in Section XX (a), the Project site is not located within a fire hazard zone. Additionally, the Project site is relatively flat and surrounded by residential and commercial uses. The proposed change of zone from O-P (Office Professional) and C-2 (General Commercial) to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential) does not include any new development. Therefore, the Project will not exacerbate wildfire risks, thereby exposing project occupants or visitors to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire. Thus, no impact would occur.

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?

No Impact: The proposed change of zone does not require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. As such, there would be no impacts.

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?

No Impact: The Project site is not located within or near a State Responsibility Area or Very High Fire Hazard Zone ( VHFHSZ) that would expose people or development to significant risks from post-fire instability or drainage changes. The topography of the Project site and surrounding area is relatively flat, and the surrounding area contains urbanized development. The proposed change of zone does not include grading and/or construction of new structures, and thus, would not 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. No impacts would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF

SIGNIFICANCE

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

41 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to
substantially degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat
of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below 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 projects,
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?

Explanation of Checklist Responses

a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below 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?

No Impact: As previously discussed, the proposed Project consists of a change of zone from O-P (Office Professional) and C -2 (General Commercial) to R -3 (Multiple Family Residential) . The proposed Project does not include any new development. Therefore, the Project does not have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below 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. Any future development plans will be evaluated at the time of submittal. As such, there are no impacts associated with Project implementation.

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 projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

42 No Impact: The proposed change of zone does not include any new development at this time .

Therefore, the proposed Project would not have impacts that are cumulatively considerable meaning that there are no incremental effects when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future project. As such, no impacts would occur.

c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?

No Impact: The proposed change of zone will allow for Multiple Family Residential uses to be built on the Project site rather than Commercial and Office uses . However, the proposed Project does not include any new development. Therefore, the Project does not pose an environmental effect which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. As such, there are no impacts.

13.D

City of Hemet - Planning Department
CZ 21-004 – STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE

43 REFERENCES

California Air Resources Board (CARB) . CARB Scoping Plan. 2017. California's 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan
California Department of Conservation (CDC) . California Important Farmland Finder (CIFF) . 2016.

Accessed November 3, 2021. DLRP Important Farmland Finder (ca.gov) California Department of Fish and Wildlife. BIOS Habitat Connectivity Viewer. Accessed November 3, 2021.

BIOS viewer 5.96.99 (ca.gov)
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection . Fire Hazard Severity Zones Map. Accessed November 22, 2021. FHSZ Viewer (ca.gov)
California Department of Toxic Substances Control . Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List (CORTESE) EnviroStor Database. Accessed November 19, 2021. EnviroStor (ca.gov) California Department of Transportation. List of Eligible and Officially Designated State Scenic Highways. 2019. California State Scenic Highway System Map (arcgis.com) California Water Boards Santa Ana – R8. Accessed November 19, 2021. Regional Boundaries Map | Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (ca.gov)
City of Hemet General Plan. Adopted January 24, 2012. General Plan 2030 | Hemet, CA - Official Website (hemetca.gov)
City of Hemet General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report . Certified January 12, 2012 . Final Environmental Impact Report | Hemet, CA - Official Website (hemetca.gov) City of Hemet. Scenic Highway Setback Manual Design Criteria . Adopted August 1990. Scenic-Highway- Setback-Manual (hemetca.gov)
County of Riverside. Environmental Programs. Transportation & Land Management Agency . Accessed November 22, 2021. WR-MSHCP (rctlma.org)
Department of Homeland Security. FEMA Flood Map Service Center. Accessed November 22, 2021. FEMA Flood Map Service Center | Search By Address
National Parks Service. National Register Database and Research GIS App. Accessed November 3, 2021.

National Register of Historic Places (nps.gov)
Riverside Conservation Authority. MSHCP Information Map. Accessed November 3, 2021. RCA MSHCP Information Map (arcgis.com)
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) . 2016. final2016aqmp.pdf (aqmd.gov)

13.D

ATTACHMENT F

RESPONSE TO COMMENTS

In accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City of Hemet (“City”) prepared an Initial Study/Negative Declaration for the State Street Corridor Change of Zone . The IS/ND was circulated for a 30-day public review period beginning December 13, 2021 and ending January 13, 2022, and State review period beginning December 15, 2021 and ending January 18, 2022. Copies of the document were made available to public agencies, organizations, and individuals for their review and comment.

The City received the following comment letter during the public review period:

Comments #1 – Lake Hemet Municipal Water District (Email dated December 27, 2021)

This memo responds to the public comment on the IS/ND as the comment relates to the potential environmental impacts of the project under CEQA.

STATE STREET CORRIDOR CHANGE OF ZONE (SCH #2021120350)

13.D

Comment #1 – Lake Hemet Municipal Water District (Email dated December 27, 2021) From: Mike Gow
To: Sabrina Snowball
Cc: David Leonard; Frank Coyle; Jason Venable
Subject: RE: City of Hemet State Street Corridor Zone Change NOI and IS/ND Date: Monday, December 27, 2021 11:42:03 AM
Thank you, Sabrina. The zone change will likely increase the overall water demand with the increase in density. If approved, we will need to mitigate that and with the requirements in LHMWD Ordinance 176.

Best regards,
Mike Gow LHMWD
951.658.3241 x.238
Response to Comment #1: Lake Hemet Municipal Water District (LHMWD) provided a comment on the Initial Study/Negative Declaration (IS/ND) regarding a potential increase in overall water demand due to the increased density that would be facilitated by the change of zone. The comment was received via email on December 27, 2021. The commenter also referenced requirements under Ordinance No. 176. The LHMWD adopted Ordinance No. 176 (Attachment A) on August 20, 2015, which declares a water shortage emergency. Under Ordinance No. 176, LHMWD shall deny any applications for new or additional service connections that are received after August 20, 2015. Ordinance No. 176 allows for several exemptions which are provided on page 3 of Attachment A, which include four or fewer single family homes, commercial and industrial projects, or projects that can import their own water. The LHWMD Board may also make a finding that a project will meet the requirements of this Ordinance upon application to the Board.

As stated on page 38 of the IS/ND , the proposed change of zone does not include any proposed development. Thus, since development is not proposed, potential impacts cannot be analyzed at this time.

In addition, the IS/ND states that a water supply analysis will be required for the Southern Block, once a future development plan is submitted. At that time, a developer may apply to the LHWMD Board to seek a finding that a project will meet the requirements of Ordinance No. 176. The City has worked with LHMWD on previous development projects and will continue to coordinate with the LHMWD on future applicable projects located within the Project boundary to ensure that potential impacts to water demand are less than significant.

13.D

ATTACHMENT A: Ordinance No. 176

13.D

13.D

13.D

13.D

13.D

13.D

Hemet City Council
State Street Corridor Zone Change 21-004
February 22, 2022

13.D

Housing Element Update
Strategic Plan Integration: Quality of Life
To ensure that Hemet is safe, clean, attractive and comfortable for all who live, work, and visit.

The proposed action aligns with Council adopted objective: Enhance the visual appearance of the community to make it attractive and reduce blight. Zoning Code Section 90-42 of the Hemet Municipal Code implements the following goals of the Strategic Plan:

1. To improve the city's image by preserving and enhancing the community's aesthetic beauty and natural assets and by building upon the rich and diverse cultural heritage of the community by converting blighted vacant land into multi-family residential housing.

2. To manage the city's growth by protecting and preserving the environment and maximizing the use of public infrastructure by concentrating housing and development where public facilities and infrastructure are available or maybe upgraded without disturbing sensitive habitats and natural features.

13.D

Applicant: City of Hemet
Property Owners: 33 parcels, most owned by Riverside County Housing Authority Project Location: West side of State St. between Hemet Vistas Apartments and W.

Oakland Ave.

APN: 443-050-002, -003, -004, -006, -007, -012, -013, -016, -017, -018, -020, -021, -022, -023, -024 -025 -026, -027, -028, -029, -030, -031 -033, -039, -040. 439-281-035. 439-060- 009, -010, -011, -014, -015, -024.

Project Information

13.D

• SB2 Planning Grant implementation effort to streamline housing approvals and accelerate housing production.

Makes effected properties eligible for residential development under an ODDS SB 35 administrative process.

Background

13.D

Housing Element Update
Project Description
A city-initiated proposal to amend the existing zoning designations as shown on the City’s Official Zoning Map from Office Profession for parcels north of Menlo Ave. to R-3 Multiple Family Residential; and from C-2 General Commercial to R-3 Multiple Family Residential for parcels north of W. Oakland Ave. The proposed zoning is consistent with the Mixed Use (MU) General Plan designation.

The Planning Commission recommends That the Town and Country Mobile home Park be removed from the Zone Change (APN 443-050-001) that reduces the overall acreage from

26.93 acres to 25.06. This reduction does not effect the viability of future development.

13.D

Housing Element Update
Planning Commission Modification

13.D

The North block consists of 7.76 vacant acres located north of Menlo Ave and is owned by Palm Communities. Palm Communities is poised to submit plans to build 152 workforce housing units upon adoption of this zone change. The project would be processed as an AB35 development for administrative approval.

Update
Project Analysis: North Block

13.D

The South block consists of 16.79 acres
located south of Menlo Ave and north of W .

Oakland Ave. Although the Riverside County
Housing Authority owns the majority of
parcels, the zone change includes four single
family residences. No development plans are
contemplated within the south block at this
time.

Project Analysis: South Block

13.D

Housing Element Update
Aerial Photo

13.D

Housing Element Update
Existing and Proposed General Plan Designations

13.D

Housing Element Update
Existing Zoning / Proposed Zoning

13.D

Housing Element Update
CEQA
The proposed zone change is considered a ‘Project’ under the California Environmental Quality Act.

The City contracted with CASC Consulting to prepare an Initial Study.

The study concluded that there is no evidence that significant effects on the environment will occur as a result of Change of Zone 21-004.

A Notice of Intent to adopt a Negative Declaration has been prepared and has been circulated through the State Clearinghouse, (SCH No. 2021120350).

Lake Hemet MWD commented in response to the circulate Initial Study.

13.D

Housing Element Update
Public Notification

1. Letters sent to effected property owners on December 9, 2021.

2. Advertised in the Press Enterprise (10 day hearing notice)

3. Notices sent to property owners within 500 feet.

4. Tribal Notices sent out per AB 52. Only the Quechen Tribe of Yuma, AZ responded that they would defer to more local Tribes.

13.D

Recommended Action
It is respectfully recommended that the City Council:

1. Open a public hearing and take testimony, if any; and

2. Waive full reading, read by title only, and introduce an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, Approving Change of Zone 21-004 Amending the Hemet City Zoning Map to Change the Zone District designations for thirty- three (33) parcels totaling 25.06 acres to change the Office Professional (OP) and General Commercial (C-2) zones to the Multiple Family (R-3) Zone. (State Street Corridor)1. Open a publichearing and take testimony, if any; and

1. Open a public hearing and take testimony, if any; and :

It is respectfully recommended that the City Council:

1. Open a public hearing and take testimony, if any; and

2. Waive full reading, read by title only, and introduce an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, Approving Change of Zone 21-004 Amending the Hemet City Zoning Map to Change the Zone District designations for thirty-three (33) parcels totaling 25.06 acres to change the Office Professional (OP) and General Commercial (C-2) zones to the Multiple Family (R-3) Zone. (State Street Corridor)

1. Open a public hearing and take testimony, if any; and

2. Waive full reading, read by title only, and introduce an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, Approving Change of Zone 21-004 Amending the Hemet City Zoning Map to Change the Zone District designations for thirty-three (33) parcels totaling 25.06 acres to change the Office Professional (OP) and General Commercial (C-2) zones to the Multiple Family (R-3) Zone. (State Street Corridor) It is respectfully recommended that the City Council:

1. Open a public hearing and take testimony, if any; and

2. Waive full reading, read by title only, and introduce an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, A pproving Change of Zone 21 -004 Amending the Hemet City Zoning Map to Change the Zone District designations for thirty -three (33) parcels totaling 25.06 acres to change the Office Professional (OP) and General Commercial (C-2) zones to the Multiple Family (R -3) Zone. (State Street Corridor) It is respectfully recommended that the City Council:

1. Open a public hearing and take testimony, if any; and

2. Waive full reading, read by title only, and introduce an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, Approving Change of Zone 21-004 Amending the Hemet City Zoning Map to Change the Zone District designations for thirty-three (33) parcels totaling 25.06 acres to change the Office Professional (OP) and General Commercial (C-2) zones to the Multiple Family (R-3) Zone. (State Street Corridor) Open a public hearing and take testimony, if any; and

2. Waive full reading, read by title only, and introduce an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, Approving Change of Zone 21-004 Amending the Hemet City Zoning Map to Change the Zone District designations for thirty-three (33) parcels totaling 25.06 acres to change the Office Professional (OP) and General Commercial (C-2) zones to the Multiple Family (R-3) Zone. (State Street Corridor) It is respectfully recommended that the City Council:

1. Open a public hearing and take testimony, if any; and

2. Waive full reading, read by title only, and introduce an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, Approving Change of Zone 21-004 Amending the Hemet City Zoning Map to Change the Zone District designations for thirty-three (33) parcels totaling 25.06 acres to change the Office Professional (OP) and General Commercial (C-2) zones to the Multiple Family (R-3) Zone. (State Street Corridor).

13.D

Discussion & Follow Up

13.D

City of Hemet
City Council Meeting

STAFF REPORT

Meeting: City Council Meeting - Feb 22 2022
Department: Community Development
Submitted by: Christopher Lopez, City Manager
H. P. Kang, Community Development Director, Monique Alaniz-Flejter, Principal Planner;

☐ Receive and File ☐ Consent Calendar ☐ Business Item ☒ Public Hearing

TITLE:

An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, Specific Plan Amendment No. 22 - 001 Amending the Downtown Specific Plan (SP 16-001) on 360+ Acres located Between Gilbert Street on the West, Oakland Avenue on the North, Santa Fe Street on the East and Acacia Avenue on the South (APN Various)

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

It is respectfully recommended that the City Council:

1. Open a public hearing and take testimony, if any; and

2. Waive full reading, read by title only, and introduce an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, Specific Plan Amendment 22 -001 Amending the Downtown Specific Plan (Sp 16-001) on 360+ Acres Located Between Gilbert Street on the West, Oakland Avenue on the North, Santa Fe Street on the East and Acacia Avenue on the South (APN Various).

BACKGROUND:

The City has received several inquiries on possible development proposals and also received feedback regarding limitations on developing some parcels in the Hemet Downtown Specific Plan areas. As a result of these limitations, some of these parcels have remained vacant or underutilized.

This proposal would provide flexibility to the Hemet Downtown Specific Plan which would allow opportunities for various commercial developments that are currently not permitted or are only limited to Florida Avenue. The City Council has directed staff to provide options for parcels in the downtown and to add commercial uses in various areas of the downtown specific plan.

The alternative of not adopting the amendment will be limiting the use of certain parcels and areas.

With the amendment, the Hemet Downtown Specific Plan would be more consistent as the highest and best land use for the area.

13.E

On February 1, 2022, the P lanning Commission adopted a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt an Ordinance to approve the Specific Plan Amendment No. 22 -001 to the Downtown Specific Plan (SP 16-001) with the subtraction of Acacia Avenue as part of the amendment.

At the meeting, the Planning Commission subtracted the Acacia Avenue with the goal of keeping the neighborhood more residentially friendly by limiting retail to Florida Avenue and Santa Fe Street.

ANALYSIS:

The 360 acre (58 block) Downtown Hemet Specific Plan area is generally located in the central portion of the City between Gilbert Street on the west, and Santa Fe Street on the east, Oakland Avenue on the north, and Acacia Avenue on the south (Figure 1 -1). The Specific Plan area contains the historic commercial core of the City, which was established in the early 1900’s, and also includes the City’s Civic Center, Public Library, historic Hemet Stock Farm, Hemet Museum, Santa Fe Educational Center, and historic residential neighborhoods. For the purposes of project setting and location relative to this amendment, the project areas shall be generally described as Project Area A, B, and C as illustrated below.

13.E

13.E

Project Area A - Retail Sales Store 20,000 Square Feet or Less

Currently, retails sales store, 20,000 square feet or less, not including vehicle parts sales are permitted in the Office Professional-Mixed Use Zone. However, retail sales stores are limited to parcels fronting on Florida Avenue only. An amendment is prop osed to also include properties zoned Office Professional-Mixed Use to include parcels that front on Santa Fe Street. This would affect four (4) parcels within the OP -MU zone properties. This amendment will increase commercial retail opportunities where current restrictions exist.

The OP-MU Zone is intended to allow for medium density residential uses and compatible office uses in a mixed use environment. The OP-MU Zone includes several medical offices that support the nearby Hemet Valley Medical Center a s well as several professional offices, including office buildings and home-to-office conversions. In the area around Weston Park, well -designed multi -family residential uses and professional offices are encouraged (either as stand-alone or mixed use buildings) to increase activity around the park and complement the retailing environment in the Downtown Village. In the Kimball Street neighborhood, height limits are lower and the intent is to support primarily single family residences and home -to-office conversions within the neighborhood. This provides the developer or property owner with more leverage and options for their property, as well as an opportunity to expand the services needed to the support the area. Therefore, staff believes the proposed amendment aligns with goals for the Downtown Specific Plan.

Project Area A on Santa Fe Street

13.E

Project Area B- Downtown Village (Drive-Thru Restaurant)

The proposed amendment also includes adding a restaurant with a drive -through in the Downtown Village Zone permitted subject to Conditional Use Permit. The DV Zone is the historic core of Downtown Hemet and is intended to preserve and enhance the economic stability of the retail commercial core. Standards established for this zone support retail, restaurant and entertainment uses in a “main street” environment, while also promoting infill mixed use development. It is important to maintain the pedestrian na ture of the Downtown Village Zone by encouraging retail uses that attract passersby or frequent customer visits to locate in first floor commercial spaces that have display windows facing a public sidewalk. The regulations for this zone support the goals and design principles of the General Plan, and are intended to promote retail uses in a mixed use environment in order to maintain the vitality of the heart of the City. Many of the properties in the Downtown Village are underutilized and have remained vacant and undeveloped. In recent years, restaurants with drive-thru are in high demand. Allowing for a restaurant with drive -thru with a Conditional Use Permit allows

13.E

property owners an opportunity to revitalize underdeveloped properties, increase usability, which would thereby create the catalyst for a vibrant Downtown environment.

Project Area C- Rezone from I (Industrial) to Downtown Commercial

A zone change is proposed for property currently zoned Institutional (I) a 0.51 Acre property located on the east side of Gilbert Avenue, north of Kimball Avenue (APN 443 -271-006). The triangular-shaped property is surrounded by a sub -station to the north, railroad tracks to the south, and vacant commercially zoned property to the west.

The DC Zone provides areas in the Downtown for a broad range of general commercial uses, including retail, office, and service uses, designed to meet the shopping and service needs of the local residential and business communities. This zone is intended to support and enha nce the existing general commercial uses along portions of Florida Avenue and State Street, as well as promote infill commercial development. The subject property has been utilized as a diesel fueling station, which is inconsistent with the Institutional (I) zoning designation of the site. The current zoning of the property does not align with the general plan land use designation of Community Commercial. A rezone from Institutional (I) to Downtown Commercial (DC) more closely aligns with the intended uses with the Downtown Specific Plan, and would bring the zoning into consistency with the general plan land use designation of Community Commercial.

13.E

Alternative:

If the City Council decides not to move forward on the Specific Plan Amendment No. 22-001, the Project Areas identified above will remain as is and will not have the same opportunity as other commercially zoned areas which will limit the highest and best use of the land.

The current status of the Hemet Downtown Specific Plan does not provide the opportunity for certain commercial development on Project Areas or certain commercial components. The Project Area "A" is already zoned OP-MU (Office Professional - Mixed Use) which allows for commercial but because it is not on Florida Avenue, it limits the highest and best use of the parcel. The Project Area "B" will not have the opportunity to attract businesses that potentially incorporate a drive -thru component of the business such as a drive -thru pharmacy or drug store. The Project Area "C" will only be used as an Institutional use and not available for any commercial uses.

Proposed Findings:

The Specific Plan Amendment shall not be approved or amended unless the following findings are made:

(1)The specific plan or amendment systematically implements and is consistent with the general plan.

13.E

Finding: Project Area A: Adding an additional four properties to allow for retail buildings less than 20,000 square feet would not be limited to retail, but could also house a mix of retail, professional office, and support home-office-conversions. This provides the developer or property more leverage and options for their property, and the services needed to support the area. Therefore, staff believes the proposed amendment aligns with goals for the Downtown Specific Plan.

Finding: Project Area B. The subject property is located within the Community Commercial land use designation, which is intended to provide for retail, markets, commercial services, restaurants, lodging, commercial recreation, professional offices, and financial institutions. Many of the properties in the Downtown Village are underutilized and have remained vacant and undeveloped. In recent years, restaurants with drive -thrus are in high demand. Allowing for a restaurant with a drive -thru with a Conditional Use Permit allows property owners an opportunity to revitalize underdeveloped properties, increase usability, which would thereby create the catalyst for a vibrant Downtown environment.

Finding: Project Area C. The current zoning of the property does not align with the general plan land use designation of Community Commercial. A rezone from Institutional (I) to Downtown Commercial (DC) more closely aligns with the intended uses with the Downtown Specific Plan, and would bring the zoning into consistency with the general plan land use designation of Community Commercial.

Finding: The proposed Specific Plan Amendment as a whole is consistent with the following General Plan Land Use Goals, Policies, and Objectives.

LU-1.8 Balance Land Uses with Services. Accommodate and locate the types, densities, and appropriate mix of land uses that can be adequately supported by the associated transportation network, utility infrastructure, and public services such as schools, parks, and emergency services.

Goal LU-2 Smart Growth Principles. Provide for new and infill development in compliance with Smart Growth Principles and in accordance with infrastructure and public service capacities.

Goal LU -3 Compatible Land Development. Avoid land -use conflicts and provide for compatible development.

Goal LU-4 Revitalize and enhance older deteriorating neighborhoods and business districts.

LU-4.1 Building Rehabilitat ion. Encourage building rehabilitation and maintenance, façade improvements and landscaping improvements, to revitalize Hemet’s older neighborhoods and districts.

Goal LU-6 Commercial Centers. Establish a comprehensive range of attractive and economically viable commercial centers throughout the City that meet the needs of the community.

LU-7.1 Vibrant Land Use Mix. Encourage the revitalization and development of retail, office, restaurant, entertainment, cultural, civic, and housing uses within the Downtown District that creates a pedestrian style living environment and sense of place.

Goal LU-8 Florida-Devonshire-Acacia Corridors. Revitalize and enhance the land uses and appearance of the Florida-Devonshire-Acacia Corridors to create an integrated mix of commercial, office, hospitality, and residential uses

13.E

(2) The Specific Plan or Ame ndment provides for the development of a comprehensively planned project that is superior to developments otherwise allowed under the conventional zoning classifications.

Finding: Property Site A. The OP-MU Zone is intended to allow for medium -density residential uses and compatible office uses in a mixed -use environment. The OP -MU Zone includes several medical offices that support the nearby Hemet Valley Medical Center as well as several professional offices, including office buildings and home -to-office conversions. In the area around Weston Park, well - designed multi-family residential uses and professional offices are encouraged (either as stand -alone or mixed-use buildings) to increase activity around the park and complement the retailing environment in the Downtown Village. In the Kimball Street neighborhood, height limits are lower and the intent is to support primarily single -family residences and home -to-office conversions within the neighborhood.

This provides the developer or property owner with m ore leverage and options for their property, as well as an opportunity to expand the services needed to support the area. Therefore, staff believes the proposed amendment aligns with goals for the Downtown Specific Plan.

Finding: Property Site B. The DV Zone is the historic core of Downtown Hemet and is intended to preserve and enhance the economic stability of the retail commercial core. Standards established for this zone support retail, restaurant, and entertainment use in a “main street” environment, while also promoting infill mixed -use development. It is important to maintain the pedestrian nature of the Downtown Village Zone by encouraging retail uses that attract passersby or frequent customer visits to locate in first -floor commercial spaces that have display windows facing a public sidewalk. The regulations for this zone support the goals and design principles of the General Plan, and are intended to promote retail uses in a mixed -use environment in order to maintain the vitality of the heart of t he City. Many of the properties in the Downtown Village are underutilized and have remained vacant and undeveloped. In recent years, restaurants with drive-thrus are in high demand. Allowing for a restaurant with a drive -thru with a Conditional Use Permit allows property owners an opportunity to revitalize underdeveloped properties, increase usability, which would thereby create the catalyst for a vibrant Downtown environment.

Finding Property Site C. The DC Zone provides areas in the Downtown for a broad range of general commercial uses, including retail, office, and service uses, designed to meet the shopping and service needs of the local residential and business communities. This zone is intended to support and enhance the existing general commercial uses along portions of Florida Avenue and State Street, as well as promote infill commercial development. The subject property has been utilized as a diesel fueling station, which is inconsistent with the Institutional (I) zoning designation of the site. The current zoning of the property does not align with the general plan land use designation of Community Commercial. A rezone from Institutional (I) to Downtown Commercial (DC) more closely aligns with the intended uses with the Downtown Specific Plan, and would bring the zoning into consistency with the general plan land use designation of Community Commercial.

(3) The specific plan or amendment provides for the construction, im provement, or extension of transportation facilities, public utilities, and public services required by the long -term needs of the project and/or other area residents, and complements the orderly development of the city beyond the project's boundaries.

Finding: The proposed specific plan amendment involves a text change to the current document and does not involve any physical improvements.

(4)The specific plan or amendment provides for the appropriate orientation and relationship between land use within and adjacent to the project.

13.E

Finding: The proposed specific plan amendment provides for greater zoning flexibility for property owners and developers who wish to develop commercial uses within the Downtown Specific Plan Area, and will align with the existing Land Use Designations established within the Specific Plan, specifically for Mixed-Use and Commercial Zones. The specific plan amendment is a text amendment only and does not involve specific siting of a property, but rather provides an opportunity to explore additional properties for commercial in the future.

CEQA Review:

CEQA. The City Council adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program by Resolution No. 17 -006 on May 9, 2017, for Specific Plan No. 16 -001. There has been no legal challenge brought against the project or the environmental determination. Staff has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program previously approved for the project in light of the submittal of Speci fic Plan Amendment No. 22 -001 for SP 16 -001. The Community Development Director has concluded that Specific Plan Amendment No. 22 -001 is in substantial conformance with the analysis and findings conducted for the previous Final Environmental Impact Report, and the amendment does not present any changes or additional impacts that were not previously addressed, pursuant to Section 15762 of the CEQA Guidelines.

STRATEGIC PLAN INTEGRATION:

GOAL TWO: ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY
To ensure that Hemet is a hub, with access to quality jobs, shopping options, and a varied and sustained tax base.

Objective 1: Develop business practices that welcome new development by streamlining processes.

The proposed action aligns with Council adopted objective: Develop bu siness practices that welcome new development by streamlining processes. This project would aid in ensuring that Hemet is a hub, with access to quality jobs, shopping options, and a varied and sustained tax base. The project will also involve the review and processing of Building Plan Checks and Field Inspections for new construction.

The success indicator would be an increase in commercial development and inspections conducted.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact.

ATTACHMENT(S):

Attachment 1: CC Ord Bill SPA 22-001 Downtown Specific Plan Amendment (SP 16-001) Attachment 2: PC Resolution_SPA22-001 (Downtown Specific Plan Amendment) Attachment 3: General Plan Land Use Map
Attachment 4: Zoning Map Existing (Downtown)
Attachment 5: Aerial Map (Project Area A)
Attachment 6: Aerial Map (Project Area B)
Attachment 7: Aerial Map (Project Area C)
Attachment 8: Zoning Map Proposed Zoning (Project Area C) SPA 22-001 Downtown Specific Plan Amendment_ Pesentation 22 Feb 2022

13.E

City Council Ordinance Bill No. 22-
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT (SP 22-001) - DOWNTOWN HEMET SPECIFIC PLAN

1 2
3 4CITY OF HEMET
5Hemet, California
6 7ORDINANCE BILL NO. 22-
8 9AN ORDINANCE OF CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
10HEMET, CALIFORNIA, SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 22-
11001 AMENDING THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN (SP
1216-001) ON 360+ ACRES LOCATED BETWEEN GILBERT
13STREET ON THE WEST, OAKLAND AVENUE ON THE
14NORTH, SANTA FE STREET ON THE EAST AND ACACIA
15AVENUE ON THE SOUTH (APN Various)
16 17WHEREAS, the City initiated an amendment Specific Plan Amendment No. 22- 18001:
19 20Applicant: City of Hemet
21Lot Area: 360.0+/- Acres
22Location: Between Gilbert Street on the west, Oakland Avenue 23on the north, Santa Fe Street on the east, and Acacia 24Avenue on the south.
25APN: Various
26 27WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 90-989 of the Hemet Municipal Code and 28Government Code sections 65854 and 65855, the Planning Commission has the 29authority to review and make recommendations to the City Council regarding 30amendments to the City’s zoning ordinances; and
31 32WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has the authority under Chapter III.6 33(Implementation) of the Hemet General Plan to review and make a recommendation to 34the City Council on Specific Plan Amendment No. 22-001; and 35 36WHEREAS, A City initiated amendment Specific Plan Amendment No. 22-001 is 37proposed in accordance with requirements of Section 90-989 of the Hemet Municipal 38Code; and
39 40WHEREAS, February 1, 2022 the Planning Commission was presented with a 41draft of this Ordinance and, after conducting a duly noticed public hearing, voted to 42recommend that the City Council approve Ordinance; and 43 44
45

13.E

City Council Ordinance Bill No. 22-
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT (SP 22-001) - DOWNTOWN HEMET SPECIFIC PLAN

1WHEREAS, on the February 22, 2022, the City Council considered the 2Ordinance, the Planning Commission’s findings, and the record of information regarding 3Specific Plan Amendment No. 22-001 to SP 16-001 of the Downtown Specific Plan as a 4duly noticed public hearing, at which time interested persons has an opportunity to 5provide testimony on this matter.
6 7NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Hemet does Resolve, 8Determine, Find and Order as follows:
9 10SECTION 1: ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
11 121. CEQA: The City Council adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation 13Monitoring Program by Resolution No. 17-006 on May 9, 2017 for Specific Plan 14No. 16-001. There has been no legal challenge brought against the project or 15the environmental determination. Staff has reviewed the Mitigated Negative 16Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program previously approved for the 17project in light of the submittal of Specific Plan Amendment No. 22-001 for SP 1816-001. The Community Development Director has concluded that Specific Plan 19Amendment No. 22-001 is in substantial conformance with the analysis and 20findings conducted for the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation 21Monitoring Program, and the amendment does not present any changes or 22additional impacts that were not previously addressed, pursuant to Section 2315162 of the CEQA Guidelines
24 25
26SECTION 2: SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT FINDINGS
27 281. That the Specific Plan or Amendment systematically implements and is 29consistent with the latest adopted General Plan:
30 31Finding: Site Area A: Adding an additional eight properties to allow for retail 32buildings less than 20,000 square-feet would not be limited to retail, but could 33also house a mix of retail, professional office and support home-office- 34conversions. This provides the developer or property more leverage and options 35for their property, and the services needed to the support the area. Therefore, 36staff believes the proposed amendment aligns with goals for the Downtown 37Specific Plan.
38 39Finding: Site Area B. The subject property is located within the Community 40Commercial land use designation, which is intended to provide for retail, markets, 41commercial services, restaurants, lodging, commercial recreation, professional 42offices and financial institutions. Many of the properties in the Downtown Village 43are underutilized and have remained vacant and undeveloped. In recent years, 44restaurants with drive-thru are in high demand. Allowing for a restaurant with 45drive-thru with a Conditional Use Permit allows property owners an opportunity to

13.E

City Council Ordinance Bill No. 22-
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT (SP 22-001) - DOWNTOWN HEMET SPECIFIC PLAN

1revitalize underdeveloped properties, increase usability, which would thereby 2create the catalyst for a vibrant Downtown environment. 3 4Finding: Site Area C. The current zoning the property does not align with the 5general plan land use designation of Community Commercial. A rezone from 6Institutional (I) to Downtown Commercial (DC) more closely aligns with the 7intended uses with the Downtown Specific Plan, and would bring the zoning into 8consistency with the general plan land use designation of Community 9Commercial.
10 11Finding: The proposed Specific Plan Amendment as a whole is consistent with 12the following General Plan Land Use Goals, Policies and Objectives. 13 14•LU-1.8 Balance Land Uses with Services. Accommodate and locate the 15types, densities, and appropriate mix of land uses that can be 16adequately supported by the associated transportation network, utility 17infrastructure and public services such as schools, parks and 18emergency services.
19 20•Goal LU-2 Smart Growth Principles. Provide for new and infill 21development in compliance with Smart Growth Principles and in 22accordance with infrastructure and public service capacities. 23 24•Goal LU-3 Compatible Land Development. Avoid land use conflicts and 25provide for compatible development.
26 27•Goal LU-4 Revitalize and enhance older deteriorating neighborhoods 28and business districts.
29 30•LU-4.1Building Rehabilitation. Encourage building rehabilitation and 31maintenance, façade improvements and landscaping improvements, to 32revitalize Hemet’s older neighborhoods and districts. 33 34•Goal LU-6 Commercial Centers. Establish a comprehensive range of 35attractive and economically viable commercial centers throughout the 36City that meet the needs of the community.
37 38•LU-7.1 Vibrant Land Use Mix. Encourage the revitalization and 39development of retail, office, restaurant, entertainment, cultural, civic, 40and housing uses within the Downtown District that create a pedestrian 41style living environment and sense of place.
42

13.E

City Council Ordinance Bill No. 22-
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT (SP 22-001) - DOWNTOWN HEMET SPECIFIC PLAN

1•Goal LU-8 Florida-Devonshire-Acacia Corridors. Revitalize and 2enhance the land uses and appearance of the Florida-Devonshire- 3Acacia Corridors to create an integrated mix of commercial, office, 4hospitality and residential uses
5 6

72. The Specific Plan Amendment provides for the development of a 8comprehensively planned project that is superior to development 9otherwise allowed under the conventional zoning classifications. 10 11Finding: Area A . The OP-MU Zone is intended to allow for medium density 12residential uses and compatible office uses in a mixed-use environment. The OP- 13MU Zone includes several medical offices that support the nearby Hemet Valley 14Medical Center as well as several professional offices, including office buildings 15and home-to-office conversions. In the area around Weston Park, well-designed 16multi-family residential uses and professional offices are encouraged (either as 17stand-alone or mixed-use buildings) to increase activity around the park and 18complement the retailing environment in the Downtown Village. In the Kimball 19Street neighborhood, height limits are lower and the intent is to support primarily 20single-family residences and home-to-office conversions within the 21neighborhood. Adding an additional eight properties to allow for retail buildings 22less than 20,000 square-feet would not be limited to retail, but could also include 23a mix of retail, professional office and support home-office-conversions. This 24provides the developer or property owner with more leverage and options for 25their property, as well as an opportunity to expand the services needed to the 26support the area. Therefore, staff believes the proposed amendment aligns with 27goals for the Downtown Specific Plan.
28 29Finding: Area B. The DV Zone is the historic core of Downtown Hemet and is 30intended to preserve and enhance the economic stability of the retail commercial 31core. Standards established for this zone support retail, restaurant and 32entertainment uses in a “main street” environment, while also promoting infill 33mixed use development. It is important to maintain the pedestrian nature of the 34Downtown Village Zone by encouraging retail uses that attract passersby or 35frequent customer visits to locate in first floor commercial spaces that have 36display windows facing a public sidewalk. The regulations for this zone support 37the goals and design principles of the General Plan, and are intended to promote 38retail uses in a mixed-use environment in order to maintain the vitality of the 39heart of the City. Many of the properties in the Downtown Village are 40underutilized and have remained vacant and undeveloped. In recent years, 41restaurants with drive-thru are in high demand. Allowing for a restaurant with 42drive-thru with a Conditional Use Permit allows property owners an opportunity to 43revitalize underdeveloped properties, increase usability, which would thereby 44create the catalyst for a vibrant Downtown environment. 45

13.E

City Council Ordinance Bill No. 22-
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT (SP 22-001) - DOWNTOWN HEMET SPECIFIC PLAN

1Finding: Area C. The DC Zone provides areas in the Downtown for a broad range 2of general commercial uses, including retail, office, and service uses, designed to 3meet the shopping and service needs of the local residential and business 4communities. This zone is intended to support and enhance the existing general 5commercial uses along portions of Florida Avenue and State Street, as well as 6promote infill commercial development. The subject property has been utilized as 7a diesel fueling station, which is inconsistent with the Institutional (I) zoning 8designation of the site. The current zoning of the property does not align with the 9general plan land use designation of Community Commercial. A rezone from 10Institutional (I) to Downtown Commercial (DC) more closely aligns with the 11intended uses with the Downtown Specific Plan, and would bring the zoning into 12consistency with the general plan land use designation of Community 13Commercial.
14 153. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment provides for the construction, 16improvement, or extension of transportation facilities, public utilities and 17public services required by the long-term needs of the project and/or other 18area residents, and complements the orderly development of the city 19beyond the project boundaries.
20 21Finding: The proposed specific plan amendment involves a text change to the 22current document and does not involve any physical improvements. 23 244. The specific plan amendment provides for the appropriate orientation and 25relationship between land use within and adjacent to the project. 26 27Finding: The proposed specific plan amendment provides for greater zoning 28flexibility for property owners and developers who wish to development 29commercial uses within the Downtown Specific Plan Area, and will align with the 30existing Land Use Designations established within the Specific Plan, specifically 31for Mixed Use and Commercial Zones. The specific plan amendment is a text 32amendment only and does not involve specific siting of a property, but rather 33provides opportunity to explore additional properties for commercial in the future 34 35NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HEMET DOES HEREBY 36ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
37 38
39 40
41

13.E

City Council Ordinance Bill No. 22-
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT (SP 22-001) - DOWNTOWN HEMET SPECIFIC PLAN

1SECTION 3: AMENDMENT TO THE SPECIFIC PLAN CHAPTER 4-MIXED USE & 2COMMERCIAL ZONES TABLE 4-1 NOTE 8.
3 4
5 6
7 8

13.E

City Council Ordinance Bill No. 22-
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT (SP 22-001) - DOWNTOWN HEMET SPECIFIC PLAN

1SECTION 4: AMENDMENT TO THE SPECIFIC PLAN CHAPTER 4-MIXED USE & 2COMMERCIAL ZONES PERMITTED LAND USES MATRIX, ESTABLISHING A 3RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE-THRU, SUBJECT TO A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IN 4THE DOWNTOWN VILLAGE (DV) ZONE.
5 6
7

13.E

City Council Ordinance Bill No. 22-
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT (SP 22-001) - DOWNTOWN HEMET SPECIFIC PLAN

1Downtown Village Zone
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11

13.E

City Council Ordinance Bill No. 22-
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT (SP 22-001) - DOWNTOWN HEMET SPECIFIC PLAN

1 2SECTION 4: AMENDMENT TO THE SPECIFIC PLAN CHAPTER 3-SPECIFIC PLAN 3ZONING AND ADMINISTRATION, SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING MAP FROM 4INSTITUTIONAL (I) TO DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL (DC) FOR PROERTY 5LOCATED AT 148 S GILBERT STREET (APN 443-271-006) AS FOLLOWS:
6 7

13.E

City Council Ordinance Bill No. 22-
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT (SP 22-001) - DOWNTOWN HEMET SPECIFIC PLAN

1 2SECTION 5: SEVERABILITY.
3If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of 4this Ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of 5any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the 6remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would 7have adopted this Ordinance, and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, 8clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, 9subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be declared 10invalid or unconstitutional.
11SECTION 6: EFFECTIVE DATE.
12This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days from its passage by the City 13Council of the City of Hemet.
14SECTION 7: PUBLICATION.
15The City Clerk is authorized and directed to cause this Ordinance to be published 16within fifteen (15) days after its passage in a newspaper of general circulation and 17circulated within the City in accordance with Government Code Section 36933(a) or, to 18cause this Ordinance to be published in the manner required by law using the 19alternative summary and pasting procedure authorized under Government Code 20Section 39633(c).
21INTRODUCED at the regular meeting of Hemet City Council on the ____ day of ____, 222021.
23APPROVED AND ADOPTED this ____ day of ____, 2022.
24_________________________
25Malcolm Lilienthal, Mayor
26ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
27_________________________ _________________________
28John P. Maier, City Clerk Steven P. Graham, City Attorney

13.E

City Council Ordinance Bill No. 22-
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT (SP 22-001) - DOWNTOWN HEMET SPECIFIC PLAN

1State of California )
2County of Riverside )
3City of Hemet )
4 5I, John P. Maier, City Clerk of the City of Hemet, do hereby certify that the 6foregoing Ordinance was introduced and first read on the day of 2022, and 7had its second reading at the regular meeting of the Hemet City Council on the day 8of , 2022, and was passed by the following vote:
9 10AYES:
11NOES:
12ABSTAIN:
13ABSENT:
14 15_________________________________
16John P. Maier, City Clerk
17

13.E

©CX>\lO)U1-h(aOI\>—\
CITYOFHEMETHemet,CaliforniaPLANNINGCOMMISSIONRESOLUTIONNO.PC2022-007 WHEREAS,pursuanttoSection90-989oftheHemetMunicipalCodeandGovernmentCodesections65854and65855,thePlanningCommissionhastheauthoritytoreviewandmakerecommendationstotheCityCouncilregardingamendmentstotheCity’szoningordinances;andWHEREAS,thePlanningCommissionhastheauthorityunderChapter|ll.6(Implementation)oftheHemetGeneralPlantoreviewandmakearecommendationtotheCityCouncilonSpecificPlanAmendmentNo.22-001;andWHEREAS,ACityinitiatedamendmentSpeci?cPlanAmendmentNo.22-001isproposedinaccordancewithrequirementsofSection90-989oftheHemetMunicipalCode;andWHEREAS,onJanuary20,2022theCitygavepublicnoticebypublishingnoticeinthePressEnterpriseoftheholdingofapublichearingatwhichtheamendmenttotheMcSweenyFarmsSpecificPlanwouldbeconsidered;andWHEREAS,onFebruary1,2022thePlanningCommissionheldthenoticedpublichearingatwhichinterestedpersonshadanopportunitytotestifyinsupportof,oroppositionto,theproposedamendmenttotheDowntownSpecificPlan16-001andatwhichtimethePlanningCommissionconsideredtheproposedamendmenttotheDowntownSpeci?cPlan16-001;and PlanningCommissionResolutionNo.PC2022-007DowntownSpecificPlan16-001,SPANo.22-001Page1of6 ARESOLUTIONOFTHEPLANNINGCOMMISSIONOFTHECITYOFHEMET,CALIFORNIA,RECOMMENDINGAPPROV ALTOTHECITYCOUNCILOFSPECIFICPLANAMENDMENTNO.22-001— DOWNTOWNSPECIFICPLAN(SP16001),LOCATEDBETWEENGILBERTSTREETONTHEWEST,OAKLANDA VENUEONTHENORTH,SANTAFESTREETONTHEEASTANDACACIAA VENUEONTHESOUTH(APNV ARIOUS).

13.E

HemetMunicipalCode
Finding:PropemSiteA&B:
(OCD\ICDU‘l-h<.aOI\)
WHEREAS,theCityhasanalyzedthisproposedprojectandhasdeterminedthatitisexemptfromfurtherreviewundertheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct(“CEQA”)pursuanttoSection15162oftheCEQAGuidelinesbecausetheproposedprojectisconsistentwithaMitigatedNegativeDeclarationandMitigationMonitoringProgramfortheDowntownSpecificPlanNo.16-001andadoptedonMay9,2017andNOW,THEREFORE,thePlanningCommissionoftheCityofHemetdoesResolve,Determine,FindandOrderasfollows:

SECTION1:ENVIRONMENTALFINDINGSThePlanningCommission,inlightofthewholerecordbeforeit,includingbutnotlimitedto,theCity’sLocalCEQAGuidelinesandThresholdsofSigni?cance,thedirectionofthePlanningCommissionatitsmeetingonFebruary1,2022anddocumentsincorporatedthereinbyreference,andanyotherevidence(withinthemeaningofPublicResourcesCodeSections21080(e)and21082.2)withintherecordorprovidedatthepublichearingofthismatter,hereby?ndsanddeterminesasfollows:1.CEQA:TheCityCounciladoptedaMitigatedNegativeDeclarationandMitigationMonitoringProgrambyResolutionNo.17-006onMay9,2017forSpeci?cPlanNo.16-001.Therehasbeennolegalchallengebroughtagainsttheprojectortheenvironmentaldetermination.StaffhasreviewedtheMitigatedNegativeDeclarationandMitigationMonitoringProgrampreviouslyapprovedfortheprojectinlightofthesubmittalofSpeci?cPlanAmendmentNo.22-001forSP16-001.TheCommunityDevelopmentDirectorhasconcludedthatSpeci?cPlanAmendmentNo.22-001isinsubstantialconformancewiththeanalysisand?ndingsconductedforthepreviousFinalEnvironmentalImpactReport,andtheamendmentdoesnotpresentanychangesoradditionalimpactsthatwerenotpreviouslyaddressed,pursuanttoSection15762oftheCEQAGuidelines.SECTION2:ZONINGORDINANCEAMENDMENTFINDINGSPursuantto Section90-989,thePlanningCommissionmakesthefollowing?ndingswithrespecttothiszoningordinanceamendment:1.Thezoningordinanceamendment(Speci?cPlanAmendment)isinconformancewiththelatestadoptedgeneralplanfortheCity.Addinganadditionaleightpropertiestoallowforretailbuildingslessthan20,000square-feetwouldnotbelimitedtoretail,butcouldalsohouseamixofretail,professionalof?ceandsupporthome-office-conversions.Thisprovidesthedeveloperorpropertymoreleverageandoptionsfortheirproperty,andtheservicesneededtothesupportthearea.Therefore,staffbelievestheproposedamendmentalignswithgoalsfortheDowntownSpeci?cPlan.PlanningCommissionResolutionNo.PC2022-007DowntownSpecificPlan16-001,SPANo.22-001Page2of6Page 23 of 59

13.E

Finding:ProgergySiteC.
(DGD\lO30'I-§OOl\)—¥
ThesubjectpropertyislocatedwithintheCommunityCommerciallandusedesignation,whichisintendedtoprovideforretail,markets,commercialservices,restaurants,lodging,commercialrecreation,professionalofficesand?nancialinstitutions.ManyofthepropertiesintheDowntownVillageareunderutilizedandhaveremainedvacantandundeveloped.Inrecentyears,restaurantswithdrive-thruareinhighdemand.Allowingforarestaurantwithdrive-thruwithaConditionalUsePermitallowspropertyownersanopportunitytorevitalizeunderdevelopedproperties,increaseusability,whichwouldtherebycreatethecatalystforavibrantDowntownenvironment.Finding:PropertySiteD.ThecurrentzoningthepropertydoesnotalignwiththegeneralplanlandusedesignationofCommunityCommercial.ArezonefromInstitutional(I)toDowntownCommercial(DC)morecloselyalignswiththeintendeduseswiththeDowntownSpeci?cPlan,andwouldbringthezoningintoconsistencywiththegeneralplanlandusedesignationofCommunityCommercial.Finding:TheproposedSpeci?cPlanAmendmentasawholeisconsistentwiththefollowingGeneralPlanLandUseGoals,PoliciesandObjectives.LU-1.8BalanceLandUseswithServices.Accommodateandlocatethetypes,densities,andappropriatemixoflandusesthatcanbeadequatelysupportedbytheassociatedtransportationnetwork,utilityinfrastructureandpublicservicessuchasschools,parksandemergencyservices.oGoalLU-2SmartGrowthPrinciples.Providefornewandin?lldevelopmentincompliancewithSmartGrowthPrinciplesandinaccordancewithinfrastructureandpublicservicecapacities. 0GoalLU-3CompatibleLandDevelopment.Avoidlandusecon?ictsandprovideforcompatibledevelopment. 0GoalLU-4Revitalizeandenhanceolderdeterioratingneighborhoodsandbusinessdistricts.LU-4.1BuildingRehabilitation.Encouragebuildingrehabilitationandmaintenance,facadeimprovementsandlandscapingimprovements,torevitalizeHemet’solderneighborhoodsanddistricts.GoalLU-6CommercialCenters.EstablishacomprehensiverangeofattractiveandeconomicallyviablecommercialcentersthroughouttheCitythatmeettheneedsofthecommunity.PlanningCommissionResolutionNo.PC2022-007DowntownSpecificPlan16-O01,SPANo.22-001Page3of6Page 24 of 59

13.E

Finding:ProgergySiteC.
oLU—7.1VibrantLandUseMix.Encouragetherevitalizationanddevelopmentofretail,of?ce,restaurant,entertainment,cultural,civic,andhousinguseswithintheDowntownDistrictthatcreateapedestrianstylelivingenvironmentandsenseofplace.GoalLU-8Florida—Devonshire-AcaciaCorridors.RevitalizeandenhancethelandusesandappearanceoftheFlorida—Devonshire-AcaciaCorridorstocreateanintegratedmixofcommercial,of?ce,hospitalityandresidentialuses

2.TheSpeci?cPlanorAmendmentprovidesforthedevelopmentofacomprehensivelyplannedprojectthatissuperiortodevelopmentotherwiseallowedundertheconventionalzoningclassifications.Finding:PropertvSiteAandB.TheOP-MUZoneisintendedtoallowformediumdensityresidentialusesandcompatibleof?ceusesinamixed-useenvironment.TheOP-MUZoneincludesseveralmedicalof?cesthatsupportthenearbyHemetValleyMedicalCenteraswellasseveralprofessionalof?ces,includingofficebuildingsandhome—to-of?ceconversions.intheareaaroundWestonPark,well-designedmulti-familyresidentialusesandprofessionalofficesareencouraged(eitherasstand-aloneormixed-usebuildings)toincreaseactivityaroundtheparkandcomplementtheretailingenvironmentintheDowntownVillage.IntheKimballStreetneighborhood,heightlimitsarelowerandtheintentistosupportprimarilysingle-familyresidencesandhome-to-of?ceconversionswithintheneighborhood.Addinganadditionaleightpropertiestoallowforretailbuildingslessthan20,000square—feetwouldnotbelimitedtoretail,butcouldalsoincludeamixofretail,professionalofficeandsupporthome-office-conversions.Thisprovidesthedeveloperorpropertyownerwithmoreleverageandoptionsfortheirproperty,aswellasanopportunitytoexpandtheservicesneededtothesupportthearea.Therefore,staffbelievestheproposedamendmentalignswithgoalsfortheDowntownSpeci?cPlan.TheDVZoneisthehistoriccoreofDowntownHemetandisintendedtopreserveandenhancetheeconomicstabilityoftheretailcommercialcore.Standardsestablishedforthiszonesupportretail,restaurantandentertainmentusesina“mainstreet”environment,whilealsopromotinginfillmixedusedevelopment.ItisimportanttomaintainthepedestriannatureoftheDowntownVillageZonebyencouragingretailusesthatattractpassersbyorfrequentcustomervisitstolocatein?rst?oorcommercialspacesthathavedisplaywindowsfacingapublicsidewalk.TheregulationsforthiszonesupportthegoalsanddesignprinciplesoftheGeneralPlan,andareintendedtopromoteretailusesinamixed-useenvironmentinordertomaintainthevitalityoftheheartoftheCity.ManyofthepropertiesintheDowntownVillagearePlanningCommissionResolutionNo.PC2022-007DowntownSpecificPlan16-001,SPANo.22-001Page4of6

13.E

tilitie
CO®\IO3U'l-hOOI\7
underutilizedandhaveremainedvacantandundeveloped.Inrecentyears,restaurantswithdrive-thruareinhighdemand.Allowingforarestaurantwithdrive-thruwithaConditionalUsePermitallowspropertyownersanopportunitytorevitalizeunderdevelopedproperties,increaseusability,whichwouldtherebycreatethecatalystforavibrantDowntownenvironment.FindingProbertvSiteD.TheDCZoneprovidesareasintheDowntownforabroadrangeofgeneralcommercialuses,includingretail,of?ce,andserviceuses,designedtomeettheshoppingandserviceneedsofthelocalresidentialandbusinesscommunities.ThiszoneisintendedtosupportandenhancetheexistinggeneralcommercialusesalongportionsofFloridaAvenueandStateStreet,aswellaspromotein?llcommercialdevelopment.Thesubjectpropertyhasbeenutilizedasadieselfuelingstation,whichisinconsistentwiththeInstitutional(I)zoningdesignationofthesite.ThecurrentzoningofthepropertydoesnotalignwiththegeneralplanlandusedesignationofCommunityCommercial.ArezonefromInstitutional(I)toDowntownCommercial(DC)morecloselyalignswiththeintendeduseswiththeDowntownSpecificPlan,andwouldbringthezoningintoconsistencywiththegeneralplanlandusedesignationofCommunityCommercial.3.TheproposedSpeci?cPlanorAmendmentprovidesfortheconstruction,improvement,orextensionoftransportationfacilities,publicusandpublicservicesrequiredbythelong-termneedsoftheprojectand/orotherarearesidents,andcomplementstheorderlydevelopmentofthecitybeyondtheprojectboundaries.Finding:Theproposedspeci?cplanamendmentinvolvesatextchangetothecurrentdocumentanddoesnotinvolveanyphysicalimprovements.4.Thespeci?cplanamendmentprovidesfortheappropriateorientationandrelationshipbetweenlandusewithinandadjacenttotheproject.Finding:Theproposedspeci?cplanamendmentprovidesforgreaterzoningflexibilityforpropertyownersanddeveloperswhowishtodevelopmentcommercialuseswithintheDowntownSpecificPlanArea,andwillalignwiththeexistingLandUseDesignationsestablishedwithintheSpeci?cPlan,speci?callyforMixedUseandCommercialZones.Thespeci?cplanamendmentisatextamendmentonlyanddoesnotinvolvespeci?csitingofaproperty,butratherprovidesopportunitytoexploreadditionalpropertiesforcommercialinthefuture.

SECTION3:PLANNINGCOMMISSIONACTIONSThePlanningCommissionherebytakesthefollowingactions PlanningCommissionResolutionNo.PC2022-007DowntownSpecificPlan16-001,SPANo.22-001Page5of6

13.E

ernan
‘U:

COG)\lO3U'l-§OJl\)-—\

1.ThePlanningCommissionapprovesResolutionrecommendingthattheCityCounciladopttheproposedSpeci?cPlanAmendmentNo.22-001asshowninExhibitA.

PASSED,APPROVEDANDADOPTEDthis1stdayofFebruary,2022,bythefollowingvote:AYES:ChairWuerth,ViceChairVanArsdale,CommissionerBeamesderfer,CommissionerLemkeNOES:NoneABSTAIN:NoneABSENT:None airt ningCommissionATTEST
PlanningCommissionResolutionNo.PC2022-007DowntownSpecificPlan16-001,SPANo.22-001Page6of6 ConnéHdez,RecordSecretaryHemetPlanningCommission

13.E

SPA 22-001
Downtown Specific Plan Amendment
General Plan Map

13.E

SPA 22-001
Downtown Specific Plan
Amendment
Zoning Map
Existing Zoning

13.E

SPA 22-001
Specific Plan Amendment Aerial Map
Project Area A
Adding-Retail Sales as a permitted use for Office Professional - Mixed Use Zoned property on Santa Fe Street.

13.E

SPA 22-001
Downtown Specific Plan Aerial Map
Project Area B
Proposal to add Restaurant uses with drive-through in
Downtown Village (DV) Zone subject to a CUP.

13.E

SPA 22-001
Downtown Specific Plan Aerial Map
Project Area C
Rezone from Institutional (I) to Downtown
Commercial (DC)

13.E

SPA 22-001
Downtown Specific Plan
Amendment
Zoning Map
Proposed Zoning Property Site D
Institutional (I) to Downtown Commercial (DC)
Subject Site D

13.E

Hemet City Council
Specific Plan Amendment (SPA) 22-001 - Downtown Specific Plan February 22, 2022

13.E

Strategic Plan Integration

Economic Development

1.Develop business practices that welcome new development by streamlining processes.

The proposed action aligns with Council adopted objective: Develop business practices that welcome new development by streamlining processes. This project would aid in ensuring that Hemet is a hub, with access to quality jobs, shopping options, and a varied and sustained tax base.

The project will also involve the review and processing of Building Plan Checks and Field Inspections for new construction. The success indicator would be an increase in commercial development and inspections conducted.

13.E

Applicant: City of Hemet
Location: Downtown Specific Plan Area (DSPA)
Description: City initiated amendment (SPA 22-001) to the Downtown Specific Plan (SP 16-001)
Project Information

13.E

Project Description

1. Retail Sales Permitted on Office Professional-Mixed
Use (OP-MU) zoned parcels that front on Santa Fe
Street.

2. Restaurant with Drive-Thru in the Downtown Village
(DV) zone, subject to a CUP.

3. Zone Change from Institutional (I) to Downtown
Commercial (DC) APN 443-271-006

13.E

Downtown Specific Plan -Aerial Map
Oakland Avenue
Gilbert Street
Santa Fe Street
Acacia Avenue
N

13.E

General Plan Land Use Map

13.E

Downtown Specific Plan Zoning Map

13.E

Project Area A

13.E

Project Area B
Restaurant, drive-thru
Adding: Restaurant
with drive-through in
the Downtown Village
(DV) zone permitted,
subject to a Conditional
Use Permit

13.E

Project Area B
Restaurant, drive-thru
Adding: Restaurant
with drive-through in
the Downtown Village
(DV) zone permitted,
subject to a Conditional
Use Permit

13.E

Project Area C

13.E

Project Area C- Zone Change
• Institutional (I) to Downtown Commercial (DC)

13.E

CEQA
• The project is exempt from provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
• CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
• Consistent with Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring Program approved May 9, 2017.

13.E

Public Notification
• On February 10, 2022 the City gave public notice
by advertising in the Press-Enterprise prior to the
holding of the public hearing at which the project
would be considered by the City Council.
• To date, staff received one (1) letter in support of
the rezone from Institutional to Downtown
Commercial from the SoCo Group, Inc., the
owners of the property located at 148 S. Gilbert
Avenue.

13.E

Recommended Action
It is respectfully recommended that the City Council:

1. Open a public hearing and take testimony, if any;
and

2. Waive full reading, read by title only, and
introduce an Ordinance of the City Council of the
City of Hemet, California, Approving Specific Plan
Amendment No. 22-001 to the Downtown Specific
Plan (SP 16-001), located between Gilbert Street on
the West, Oakland Avenue on the North, Santa Fe
Street on the East and Acacia Avenue on the South
(APN Various).

13.E

Discussion & Follow Up

13.E

Findings

13.E

Findings

13.E

Findings

13.E

Findings

13.E

Findings

13.E

Findings

13.E

Findings

13.E

Text Amendments

13.E

Text Amendments

13.E

Text Amendments

13.E

City of Hemet
City Council Meeting

STAFF REPORT

Meeting: City Council Meeting - Feb 22 2022
Department: Finance
Submitted by: Christopher Lopez, City Manager
Lorena Rocha, Finance Director;

☒ Receive and File ☐ Consent Calendar ☒ Business Item ☐ Public Hearing

TITLE:

FY2020/2021 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

It is respectfully recommended that the City Council:

Receive and File the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report for the Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2021.

BACKGROUND:

The City is required to issue independent audited financial statements on an annual b asis. Following the close of each fiscal year, the City's external auditors conduct an audit of the City's financial records and assist in the compilation of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. The objective of general- purpose external financial rep orting is accountability. The goal of a financial statement audit is to provide users with a reasonable assurance from an independent source that the information presented in the statements is reliable.

ANALYSIS:

The City’s financial statements have bee n audited by Van Lant and Fankhanel, LLP (VLF) a firm of certified public accountants. The goal of the independent audit was to provide reasonable assurance that the financial statements of the City for the fiscal year that ended June 30, 2021, are free of material misstatement. The independent audit involved examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements; assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evalu ating the overall financial statement presentation. The independent auditor concluded, based upon the audit, that there was a reasonable basis for rendering an unqualified opinion that the City’s financial statements for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2021 were fairly presented in conformity with GAAP. The independent auditor’s report is presented as the first component of the financial section of this report.

14.A

The report presents historical and comparative information that can be useful to City staff, Elected Officials, and external users, such as debt rating agencies, businesses, other public agencies, and the City's residents.

The City's annual report includes the following major sections and information:

Introductory Section
• Letter of Transmittal - prepared by management and used to communicate information on areas that may have an impact on the City's finances now and in the future. This includes economic factors as well as budget and management factors.

Financial Section (the main body of the annual report for current year information) • Independent Auditor’s Report – the City’s report card on the content of the annual report • Management’s Discussion and Analysis (MD&A) – provides an analytical overview of the City’s financial status
Basic Financial Statements – show finances at a point in time (assets - liabilities) and throughout the year (revenues - expenditures), budget to actual revenues and expenditures, and cash flows • Citywide Statements – overview of financial information • Fund Financial Statements – a detailed look at funds, showing Balance Sheet and Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance
• Notes to the Financial Statements (Notes) – a narrative explanation that accompanies the Basic Financial Statements
Required Supplementary and Supplementary Information Sections • Budget to Actual Comparisons – for the General Fund and other select major funds • Pension Information – 7 years of pension funding information • OPEB Information – 4 years of OPEB funding information • A breakout of individual funds – for funds that were presented in a cumulative manner in the Financial Section
Statistical Section (current and historical information – up to 10 years) • Financial Trends
• Revenue Capacity Information
• Debt Capacity Information
• Demographic and Economic Information
• Operating Information

DISCUSSION:

Changes to ACFR
For Fiscal Year 2020/2021 the City adopted new accounting guidance, GASB 84, Fiduciary Activities.

This Statement establishes criteria for identifying fiduciary activities of all state and local governments.

The focus of the criteria generally is on (1) whether a government is controlling the assets of the fiduciary activity and (2) the beneficiaries with whom a fiduciary relationship exists.

This Statement describes four fiduciary funds that should be reported, if applicable: (1) pension (and other employment benefit) trust funds, (2) investment trust funds, (3) private -purpose trust funds, and (4) custodial funds. Custodial funds gener ally should report fiduciary activities that are not held in a trust or equivalent arrangement that meets specific criteria.

The second change made to the report is in the Statement of Net Position. In the Annual Financial Report for FY2019-20, the Unrestricted Net Position of the Governmental Activities broke out Measure

14.A

U balance (pg 19). However, VLF Auditors identified this and felt it was not presented properly. Also, during GFOA's review of the City's Annual Report, it was brought to the City's at tention that this was not a proper presentation of Unrestricted Fund Balance. Although the Measure U fund balance is now comingled with the Unrestricted Net Position under Governmental Activities (pg 15), a breakdown of the Measure U Fund Balance is available for review under Note 10 of the Financial Statements (pg 59).

General Fund Balance
The most notable measure of a City's financial health is the General Fund Balance. As presented in the Basic Financial Statements, the City's General Fund has a balance of $39.6 million as of June 30, 2021. This balance is comprised of a number of categories, as follows:
• $25,939,039 non-spendable, restricted, or committed resources. These include:
o $12,831 - prepaid postage and other inventory
o $651,629 - Measure U Prepaid Fire Engine
o $1,498,954 - PEG Fees
o $15,542,634 - Measure U fund balance
o $8,232,991 - 20% Emergency Reserve
• $1,945,392 in assigned funds for continuing appropriations • $11,710,920 in unassigned fund balance (an increase of $8,594,685 over last year) The unassigned fund balance (excluding Measure U) increased $8,594,685 over FY2019/20.

The unassigned fund balance for Measure U increased by $2,793,613 (excluding the prepaid item).

With the financial stewardship of the Hemet City Council that prioritized sound fiscal policies, the City of Hemet finished the year strong with higher than expected revenues and held expenditures within budget despite the challenges presented by the Covid-19 Pandemic.

Audit Findings
During the audit process, VLF also issues a Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards.

VLF identified one Finding as described below:

Condition:

While performing audit procedures, we identified and proposed several material adjusting entries to the City’s accounting records. Furthermore, Statements on Auditing Standards No. 115, ”Communicating Internal Control Related Matters Identified in an Audit” states that “indicators of material weaknesses in internal control include: identification by the auditor of a material misstatement of the financial statements under audit in circumstances that indicate the misstatement would not have been detected by the entity’s internal control.”

Criteria:

The City’s management is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal controls over financial reporting to help ensure that appropriate goals and objectives are met. This responsibility includes the selection and application of accounting principles, ensuring that financial information is reliable and properly recorded, and evaluating and monitoring ongoing activities.

Potential Effect of Condition:

14.A

Internal controls not established to identify material misstatements to the financial statements and ultimately could result in material misstatement to the financial statements.

Recommendation:

Therefore, in order to maintain the integrity of the accoun ting and financial reporting system, and to ensure timely reporting, we recommend that all balance sheet accounts and other selected accounts be analyzed on a monthly, quarterly or other periodic basis as appropriate. We suggest a schedule of accounting functions to be performed monthly, quarterly, etc., be prepared with the provision for signing off by date and initials when the procedure is complete.

Views of Responsible Officials:

The City understands the critical importance of internal controls. Withi n the Finance Policies there are several internal controls in place to minimize errors and oversights. Due to unforeseeable staffing challenges that were presented to the Finance Department during this fiscal year, appropriate personnel were unavailable for key review processes prior to the formal audit process.

The Accounting Manager and Principal Accountant are among the professional staff that are able to prepare and review the year-end financial transactions and financial statement notes. It is procedure to have the Principal Accountant monitor, maintain and record Capital Assets and Infrastructure while the Accounting Manager reviews them for content and accuracy.

The Accounting Manager prepares the majority of the year-end entries and has the Principal Accountant review them for content and accuracy prior to posting and submission to the Finance Director for final review. In the event that the Accounting Manager or Principal Accountant are not present, the Accountant will assist in the review process.

Through this year’s audit process and for future years to come, staff has created several schedules and tracking mechanisms that will assist in ensuring the capture and accurate recording of the financial transactions. This will include monthly review and evaluation of general ledger accounts, tracking Capital Assets and working with all other departments to educate and adhere to timely submissions of invoices.

These practices are being implemented to reduce the likelihood of this finding in the future.

STRATEGIC PLAN INTEGRATION:

GOAL THREE: COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
To connect and participate in a constant dialogue between members of the community, City staff, and elected officials to promote togetherness and positivity.

Objective 2: Increase transparency for the public.

GOAL FIVE: ORGANIZATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS
To identify the work needed inside the City organization to effectively provide services to the community and ensure financial stability.

Objective 1: Operate in a financially sustainable manner.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact to report. The cost of preparing the annual report and the independent audit was included as part of the annual budget.

14.A

ATTACHMENT(S):

Attachment 1: Hemet ACFR FY 2021 - 2 page view [secured]

14.A

ANNUAL

COMPREHENSIVE

FINANCIAL REPORT

Fiscal Year Ending
June 30, 2021

CITY OF HEMET

CALIFORNIA

Karlee Meyer – Mayor
Malcolm Lilienthal – Mayor Pro-Tem
Vacant – Councilmember
Russ Brown – Councilmember
Linda Krupa – Councilmember

PREPARED BY: CITY OF HEMET FINANCE DEPARTMENT

14.A

CITY OF HEMET, CALIFORNIA

ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL REPORT

Year Ended June 30, 2021

14.A

City of Hemet
Annual Comprehensive Financial Report
Year Ended June 30, 2021

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
I. INTRODUCTORY SECTION
Letter of transmittal i
O r ganizational Chart v
List of Principal Officials vi
GFOA ACFR Certificate of Achievemen t vii

II. FINANCIAL SECTION

Independent Audito r’s Report 1

Mana
gement’s Discussion & Analysis 4

Basic Financial Statements:

G o v e r n m e nt-wide Financial Statements
Statement of Net Position 15
Statement of Activities 16

Fund Financial Statements
Balance Sheet - Governmental Funds 18
Reconciliation of the Balance Sheet of Governmental Funds to the Statement of Net Position 20 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Chan
ges in Fund Balances - Governmental Funds 21
Reconciliation of the Statemen t of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds to t he Statement of Activities

23 Proprietar y Funds
Statement of Net Position 24
Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Chan ges in Net Position 25 Statement of Cash Flows 26
Statement of Fiduciar
y Net Position 27
Statement of Chan ges in Fiduciary Net Position 28

Notes to Financial Statements 29

Required Supplementar
y Information:

Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Chan ges in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual:

General Fund 62
Sewer and Storm Drain 63
Schedule of Chan ges in the Net Pension Liability – Miscellaneous Plan 64 Schedule of Chan ges in the Net Pension Liability – Safety Plan 66 Schedule of Contributions – Agent-Multiple Employer Pension Plans 68 Schedule of Chan ges in the Net OPEB Liability 69
Notes to Required Supplementar y Information 70

Supplementary Information:

Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Chan
ges in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual:

B r i d ges/Streets/Traffic Signals Capital Projects Fund 71 Non-Ma jor Governmental Funds: 72
Combinin g Balance Sheet 7 5
Combinin g Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances 81

14.A

City of Hemet
Annual Comprehensive Financial Report
Year Ended June 30, 2021

TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued
PAGE
Supplementary Information - Continued:

Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Chan ges in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual:

Public Safet y Towing 87
G a s T a x 88
Measure A 89
Air Pollution Reduction 90
L i ghting/Landscaping Maintenance 91
Post Prop 218 Li ghting 9 2
Post Prop 218 Landscape 93
Public Works CFD 94
Asset Seizure 95
Public Safet y Grants 96
Public Safet y CFD 97
COPS/AB 3229 98
Local Law Enforcement Block Gran t 99
Communit y Development Block Grant 100
General Plan 101
H O M E P r ogram 102
CalHome Gran t 103
2001 - 2008 HOME Pro gram 104
N e i ghborhood Stabilization Program Grant 105
Housin g Authority 106
Indian Gamin g Grants 107
Public Meetin g Facilities 108
General Facilities 109
Flood Control 110
Law Enforcement Facilities 111
Fire Facilities 112
Park Developmen t 113
V a l l e y Wide DVL Park 114
L i b r a r y Facilities 115
Equipment Replacemen t 116
General Capital 117
LaSalle Librar y Endowment Permanent Fund 118
Internal Service Funds 119
Combinin g Statement of Net Position 120
Combinin g Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Net Position 122 Combinin g Statement of Cashflows 124
Custodial Funds: 126
Combinin g Statement of Fiduciary Net Position 127
Combinin g Statement of Changes in Fiduciary Net Position 128

III. STATISTICAL SECTION 129
Net Position b y Component 130
Chan ge in Net Position 132
Fund Balance of Governmental Funds 136
Chan ges in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds 138
Own Source Revenues 140
Assessed Value and Estimated Actual Value of Taxable Property 141 Propert y Tax Rates – Direct and Overlapping Governments 142 Principal Propert y Taxpayers 144
Propert y Tax Levies and Collections 145
Ratios of Outstandin g Debt by Type 146
Ratios of General Bonded Debt Outstandin g 147

14.A

City of Hemet
Annual Comprehensive Financial Report
Year Ended June 30, 2021

TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued
PAGE
III. STATISTICAL SECTION - Continued
Direct and Overlappin g Governmental Activities Debt 148 L e gal Debt Margin Information 149
P l e d ged Revenue Coverage 151
D e m o graphic and Economic Statistics 152
Principal Emplo yers 153
Full-time and Par t-time City Employees 154
Operatin g Indicators 156
Capital Asset Statistics 158
Water, Refuse, and Sewer Rates 159
Water Sold b y Type of Customer 160

14.A