Lake Elsinore City Council
November 18, 2025

REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Planning Commission From: Damaris Abraham, Community Development Director
Prepared by: Carlos Serna, Associate Planner
Date: November 4, 2025
Subject: Planning Application No. 2023-06 (Riverside Drive Apartments) – A Residential Design Review to Develop a 96-unit Multi-family Residential Apartment Complex and Related Site Improvements on a 4.95-acre Site Located at 32281 Riverside Drive
Applicant: Elevated Entitlements, LLC
Recommendation

1. Find the project is exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (Cal.

Pub. Res. Code §§21000 et seq.: “CEQA”) and the CEQA Guidelines (14 C.C.R. §§ 15000 et seq.) Section 15183 (Projects Consistent with a Community Plan or Zoning);

2. Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE

ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING FINDINGS THAT RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2023-05 IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP); and

3. Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2023-05

FOR THE BUILDING DESIGN, ON-SITE AMENITIES, AND RELATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS FOR A PROPOSED 96-UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT COMPLEX LOCATED AT 32281 RIVERSIDE DRIVE (APN: 379-315-033).

Project Location
The proposed project site is an approximately five-acre vacant property located at 32281 Riverside Drive which is along the westerly side of Riverside Drive between Eisenhower Drive and Lake Crest Drive. The property is currently zoned as Residential Mixed Use (RMU) and includes Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 379-315-033.

PA 2023-06 – Riverside Drive Apartments

Environmental Setting

EXISTING

LAND USE GENERAL PLAN ZONING
Project Site Vacant Residential Mixed Use (RMU) Residential Mixed Use (RMU) North Residential Medium Density Residential
(MDR) Medium Density Residential (R-2)
South RV Park Recreational (R) Recreational (R)
East Residential Medium Density Residential
(MDR) Medium Density Residential (R-2)
West Residential Medium Density Residential
(MDR) Medium Density Residential (R-2)
Table 1: Environmental Setting
Project Description
Planning Application No. 2023-06 is a request for a Residential Design Review (RDR No. 2023- 05) to develop a proposed 96-unit multi-family residential apartment complex on a 4.95-acre site.

The apartment complex includes 12 two-story residential buildings ranging in size from 5,680 square feet (sq. ft.) to 8,640 sq. ft. with eight units per building. The apartment unit mix includes 40 one-bedroom/one-bathroom units that are 730 sq. ft. in size and 56 two-bedroom/twobathroom units that are 1,092 sq. ft. in size. Each unit includes common living areas, in-unit laundry, and a private patio or balcony.

Proposed onsite amenities for tenants include an approximately 1,600 sq. ft. clubhouse with a leasing office, mail room, and fitness room. Other recreational amenities include a tot lot playground, pool, outdoor seating, and BBQ. The development would also provide new landscaping including 24-inch and 36-inch box trees and 200 total parking spaces, including 99 carport spaces.

Access to the development would be provided by a full-access driveway on Riverside Drive. A two-way gated entrance is proposed at the new driveway. In addition, a secondary, gated emergency access (right-in/right out driveway) would be provided on the northeast side of the site, exiting onto Riverside Drive.

Analysis
The analysis below provides a discussion of the proposed project’s consistency with the General Plan and the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), including the residential development standards and requirements. In addition, the Design Review Committee, including Staff from Planning, Building and Safety, Fire, and Engineering Departments and the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District, have reviewed the project and have included recommended conditions of approval to ensure compliance with adopted plans, policies, and regulations.

General Plan Consistency
PA 2023-06 – Riverside Drive Apartments

The project site has a General Plan Land Use Designation of Residential Mixed Use (RMU) and is located within the Lake View District. The intent of the RMU designation is to provide for a mix of residential and non-residential uses within a single proposed development area with an emphasis on high-density residential uses. Uses such as retail, service, civic, and professional office are allowed in a subordinate capacity. Residential densities shall be between 19 and 24 dwelling units (DU’s) per net acre. In addition, the main focus of the Lake View District is to integrate new and existing residential communities and supporting uses while maintaining a high quality of life, and to revitalize the area along Riverside Drive as additional growth occurs.

The project proposes to construct a 96-unit multi-family residential apartment complex on a 4.95- acre parcel at an approximate density of 19 DU’s per net acre. The new apartment complex is intended to support the growing community within this planning district which includes future residential, commercial, and school uses that would contribute to the revitalization goal along Riverside Drive. Therefore, the proposed multi-family residential development is consistent with the General Plan including the land use goals and policies.

Municipal Code Consistency
The current zoning for the project site is Residential Mixed Use (RMU). Pursuant to LEMC Section

17.86.020 (Table of land uses and glossary/definitions) of the RMU zone, apartment units are permitted land uses. However, the proposed project is subject to the RMU development standards. Staff has reviewed the proposed project plans for compliance with the RMU development standards and determined that the proposed development conforms to said development standards as shown in Table 2 below.

DEVELOPMENT

STANDARD REQUIRED PROPOSED
Predominant Use
Residential development is
required to be greater than 70 %
of the net lot area
100% Residential development
proposed on the entire 4.95-acre site
Floor Area Ratio
(FAR) 1.0 Maximum 0.45
Residential Density 19 to 24 DU’s Per Acre > 19 DU’s Per Acre Setbacks
• Street Front: 10 ft.
• Side Yard (Interior): 0 ft.
• Rear Yard: 0 ft.
• Street Front (Riverside Dr.): 10 ft.
• Side Yard (Interior): 5+ ft.
• Rear Yard: 16+ ft.

Building Height No specified maximum building
height; require varied rooflines 33 ft. Maximum
Parking Standard
• 2+ bedrooms: 2.33 spaces
(1 covered plus 1.33 open)
• One bedroom: 1.66 spaces
(1 covered plus 0.66 open)
• 2 + bedrooms x 56 units = 131
Spaces
• One bedroom x 40 units = 67
Spaces
PA 2023-06 – Riverside Drive Apartments

Open Parking = 102 Spaces
Covered Parking = 96 Spaces
Total Required = 198 Spaces
Open Parking = 101 Spaces
Covered Parking = 99 Spaces
Total Provided = 200 Spaces
Table 2: Development Standards
Design Review
The architectural design of the proposed buildings complies with the Residential Development Standards (Chapter 17.44) of the LEMC. The proposed architecture of the development features a Spanish Monterey style with white stucco siding, shaped foam trim, and simulated stone veneer.

The architecture of the building has been designed to achieve harmony and compatibility with the surrounding area. The colors and materials proposed would assist in blending the architecture into the existing landscape and are compatible with other colors and materials used on other properties near the project site. In addition, the RMU zoning requires varied roofline heights which the project would also comply with since the proposed building heights range from approximately 18 feet to 33 feet maximum.

The proposed landscaping improvements would enhance the building designs, soften the building elevations, provide shade as well as up large expanses of pavement. The proposed landscaping plan has been designed to complement the architectural style and to conform to the water efficiency standards under Chapter 19.08 of the LEMC. The project boundary would be landscaped with drought tolerant shrubs and trees that would provide shaded areas and a defined border of the project site. Trees would also be planted within the interior of the project site to break up the impervious areas and to provide shade within the parking areas.

Proposed walls and fencing consist of an eight-foot high decorative block wall located along the project’s frontage on Riverside Drive and six-foot high block walls would be provided along the remainder of the project’s boundary.

Street Improvements
Riverside Drive is classified as an Urban Arterial Highway in the General Plan, where full-width is 120 feet and curb-to-curb width is 96 feet. The applicant is required to dedicate right-of-way along Riverside Drive adjacent to the property for a total right-of-way of 60 feet from centerline to the project’s front property line. Street improvements on Riverside Drive along the project site’s frontage would include reconstruction of existing sidewalk improvements as deemed necessary by the City Engineer, construction of driveway approaches, construction of curb outlets to accommodate site drainage, utility undergrounding, utility relocations, and streetlight installations.

These required street improvements have been conditioned by the Engineering Department.

Environmental Determination
Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15183, CEQA mandates that projects which are consistent with the development density established by existing zoning, community plan, or general plan policies for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was certified shall not require additional environmental review, except as might be necessary to PA 2023-06 – Riverside Drive Apartments

examine whether there are project-specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site. This streamlines the review of such projects and reduces the need to prepare repetitive environmental studies.

The proposed project site is located in the RMU General Plan land use designation which allows residential uses between 19 and 24 DU’s per acre. The project site is approximately five-acres and is proposing over 19 DU’s per acre for a total of 96 apartment units which is consistent with the maximum allowed per the General Plan. In addition, the project complies with all applicable development standards for the RMU zone as contained in the LEMC. Therefore, the project is consistent with the General Plan and zoning. Furthermore, the City Council adopted and certified the current General Plan’s EIR (SCH No. 2005121019) on December 12, 2011 and as such, all potentially significant project specific impacts have been avoided or mitigated and project implementation would not result in any new or altered cumulative impacts beyond those addressed in the General Plan’s EIR.

MSHCP Consistency
The project is consistent with the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). The project is not located within an MSHCP Criteria Cell area and therefore is not subject to Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process (LEAP) and Joint Project Review (JPR) requirements. The project complies with all other requirements of the MSHCP.

Public Outreach
On October 16, 2025, the applicant mailed an advance notice of the development proposal to neighboring property owners within 300 feet of the project site and hosted a virtual community outreach event.

Public Notice
Notice of the hearing for this application has been published in the Press-Enterprise newspaper and mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. As of the writing of this report, no written comments concerning this application have been received by staff.

Attachments
Attachment 1 – MSHCP Resolution
Attachment 2 – RDR Resolution
Attachment 3 – Conditions of Approval
Attachment 4 – CEQA Section 15183 Consistency Analysis
Attachment 5 – GIS Package
Attachment 6 – Design Review Package
Attachment 7 – Public Notice Materials
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-__

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE

ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING FINDINGS THAT RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2023-05 IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE

COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP) Whereas, Elevated Entitlements, LLC, has filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore (City) requesting approval of Planning Application No. 2023-06 for a Residential Design Review (RDR No. 2023-05) for the design and construction of a 96-unit multi-family residential apartment complex within twelve residential buildings. The project also proposes a 1,597 sq. ft. clubhouse with onsite recreational amenities, and other related site improvements on a 4.95-acre site located in the Residential Mixed Use (RMU) zoning district. The proposed project is located at 32281 Riverside Drive and encompasses Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 379-315-033; Whereas, Section 6.0 of the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) requires that all discretionary projects within a MSHCP Criteria Cell undergo the Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process (LEAP) and the Joint Project Review (JPR) to analyze the scope of the proposed development and establish a building envelope that is consistent with the MSHCP criteria;
Whereas, Section 6.0 of the MSHCP further requires that the City adopt consistency findings demonstrating that the proposed discretionary entitlement complies with the MSHCP Criteria Cell, and the MSHCP goals and objectives;
Whereas, pursuant to Section 17.415.050 (Major Design Review) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), the Planning Commission (Commission) has the responsibility of reviewing and approving, conditionally approving, or denying design review applications; and, Whereas, on November 4, 2025, at a duly noticed Public Hearing, the Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item.

NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1: The Commission has considered the project and its consistency with the MSHCP prior to recommending that the Council adopt Findings of Consistency with the MSHCP.

Section 2: That in accordance with the MSHCP, the Commission makes the following findings for MSHCP consistency:

1. The Project is a project under the City’s MSHCP Resolution, and the City must make an MSHCP Consistency finding before approval.

The project site is not located within a MSHCP Criteria Cell. Pursuant to the City’s MSHCP Resolution, the project is required to be reviewed for MSHCP consistency, including consistency with other “Plan Wide Requirements.” These include the Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines (MSHCP, § 6.1.2), Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines (MSHCP, § 6.1.3), Additional Survey Needs and Procedures (MSHCP, § 6.3.2), Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines (MSHCP, § PC Reso. No. 2025-____

6.1.4), Vegetation Mapping (MSHCP, § 6.3.1) requirements, Fuels Management Guidelines (MSHCP, § 6.4), and payment of the MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee (MSHCP Ordinance, § 4).

2. The Project is subject to the City’s LEAP and the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority’s (RCA) Joint Project Review (JPR) processes.

As stated above, the project is not located within a Criteria Cell and therefore was not required to go through the LEAP and JPR processes.

3. The Project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines.

Section 6.1.2 of the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) focuses on Riparian/Riverine Resources Assessment Needs and Considerations. It outlines the importance of assessing riparian and riverine areas for their ecological functions and values, which are crucial for plan-listed species. Key factors to consider include hydrology, flood storage, nutrient retention, sediment trapping, and wildlife habitat.

According to the MSHCP, features are riverine if they are natural in origin, even if past natural or have been heavily modified and/or redirected. They can include features indirectly created through human-made manipulation of the landscape, including channelization of a historic riverine feature. If these features connect to nearby downstream resources on either existing or described conservation lands, they are considered riverine.

The Biological Survey prepared by BioCultural, LLC dated October 2024, did not detect aquatic features, including areas that could be or could have been considered riverine on the Project Site, which has been the subject of substantial human modification dating back to the 1930s when agricultural groves existed on the site based on a 1938 aerial photograph and the results of a literature review by BioCultural, LLC. Later, and up until the 1980s, the project site hosted a health spa.

The MSHCP defines vernal pools as “seasonal wetlands that occur in depression areas that have wetlands indicators of all three parameters (soils, vegetation and hydrology) during the wetter portion of the growing season but normally lack wetlands indicators of hydrology and/or vegetation during the drier portion of the growing season.” It goes on to explain that “Evidence concerning the persistence of an area's wetness can be obtained from its history, vegetation, soils, and drainage characteristics, uses to which it has been subjected, and weather and hydrologic records.” Vernal pools do, in fact, have a unique flora and fauna that are distinct for seasonally-wetted depressions.

The site soil is Garretson fine sandy loam, a soil type not considered hydric by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). This soil, therefore, does not support standing water or the development of pools or ponds. A review of aerial imagery shows no indication of surface water or soil saturation over multiple years and seasons. Further, the area would not be considered a “vernal pool” because indicator plant species such as woolly-marbles (Psilocarphus brevissimus), toad rush (Juncus bufonius), or watercress (Crassula aquatica) are not present.

Plant species observed in the immediate area consist of many non-native and ruderal species such as Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), short-pod mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), wall barley (Hordeum murinum), cheesebush (Malva parviflora), tumbleweed (Amaranthus albus), and PC Reso. No. 2025-____

puncture vine (Tribulus terrestris), which are considered upland or facultative upland species.

There are no ephemeral pools on the project site and, therefore, no habitat for this species.

The Project is therefore consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines set forth in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP. No further action regarding this section of the MSHCP is required.

4. The Project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines.

The project site is not located within the Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Areas as shown on Figure 6-1 of the MSHCP. The project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP.

5. The Project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures.

The MSHCP requires additional surveys for certain species if the project is located in certain locations. Pursuant to MSHCP Figure 6-2 (Criteria Area Species Survey Area), Figure 6-3 (Amphibian Species Survey Areas with Criteria Area), Figure 6-4 (Burrowing Owl Survey Areas with Criteria Area), Figure 6-5 (Mammal Species Survey Areas with Criteria Area), burrowing owl surveys are required for the subject property prior to approval of a development proposal.

The property is not within a Criteria Area Species Survey Area (CASSA), and CASSA surveys are not required. The project site is not located within a designated survey area for burrowing owl, Criteria Area Plant Species, or any other MSHCP designated taxon. Nevertheless, the proximity to past burrowing owl surveys and observations were considered and a burrowing owl was conducted.

The Burrowing Owl Survey determined that the Project site has suitable habitat for burrowing owls, including portions of walls, pipes, and standpipes that exist on site from the remains of a demolished building. While suitable habitat is present on the Project site, no burrowing owls were found on the Project site during the survey. As a result, the report recommended a preconstruction presence/absence survey for burrowing owl to be conducted within 30 days of the commencement of project-related grading or other land disturbance activities to ensure that the species has not moved onto the site since completion of the surveys. The preconstruction survey should occur within 30 days prior to ground disturbing activity. Owls located as a result of survey efforts will be relocated. If burrowing owl have colonized the project site or the offsite improvements area prior to the initiation of construction, the project proponent should immediately inform the City, RCA and the Wildlife Agencies, and coordinate on the potential need for preparation, review and approval of a Burrowing Owl Protection and Relocation Plan, prior to any ground disturbance.

Therefore, the subject project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures of the MSHCP.

6. The Project is consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines.

According to section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP, the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines are intended to address indirect effects associated with locating development in proximity to the MSHCP Conservation Area. The project site is not near a conservation area. Therefore, the Urban/Wildlife Interface Guidelines are not applicable.

PC Reso. No. 2025-____

7. The Project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements.

There are no resources located on the project sites requiring mapping as set forth in MSHCP Section 6.3.1.

8. The Project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines.

The MSHCP acknowledges that brush management to reduce fuel loads and protect urban uses and public health/safety shall occur where development is adjacent to conservation areas. The project is not located within or adjacent to MSHCP Conservation Areas.

Since the project site is not immediately adjacent to a MSHCP Conservancy Area, the proposed project does not pose a risk of causing direct or indirect effects to MSHCP Conservancy Areas. Therefore, the project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.4 of the MSHCP. The project will incorporate the BMPs outlined in Volume I, Appendix C of the MSHCP as part of the development. Therefore, the project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.4 of the MSHCP.

9. The Project will be conditioned to pay the City’s MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee.

As a condition of approval, the project will be required to pay the City’s MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee at the time of issuance of building permits.

10. The Project is consistent with the MSHCP.

The project site is not within or adjacent to any MSHCP Criteria Cell or conservation areas.

As described above, the project complies with all applicable MSHCP requirements.

Section 3: Based upon the evidence presented, both written and testimonial, and the above findings, the Commission hereby recommends that the Council find that the project is consistent with the MSHCP.

Section 4: This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.

Passed and Adopted on this 4th day of November, 2025.

John Gray, Chairman
PC Reso. No. 2025-____

Attest:
___________________________________
Damaris Abraham,
Community Development Director

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.

CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE )
I, Damaris Abraham, Community Development Director of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, hereby certify that Resolution No. 2025-__ was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, at a regular meeting held November 4, 2025, and that the same was adopted by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

Damaris Abraham,
Community Development Director
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2023-05 FOR THE BUILDING DESIGN, ON-SITE AMENITIES, AND RELATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS FOR A PROPOSED 96-UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT COMPLEX LOCATED AT 32281 RIVERSIDE DRIVE (APN: 379-315- 033)
Whereas, Elevated Entitlements, LLC, has filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore (City) requesting approval of Planning Application No. 2023-06 for a Residential Design Review (RDR No. 2023-05) for the design and construction of a 96-unit multi-family residential apartment complex within twelve residential buildings. The project also proposes a 1,597 sq. ft. clubhouse with onsite recreational amenities, and other related site improvements on a 4.95-acre site located in the Residential Mixed Use (RMU) zoning district. The proposed project is located at 32281 Riverside Drive and encompasses Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 379-315-033; Whereas, pursuant to Section 17.415.050 (Major Design Review) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), the Planning Commission (Commission) has the responsibility of reviewing and approving, conditionally approving, or denying design review applications; and, Whereas, on November 4, 2025, at a duly noticed Public Hearing, the Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1: The Commission has reviewed and analyzed the proposed project pursuant to the California Planning and Zoning Laws (Cal. Gov. Code §§ 59000 et seq.), the Lake Elsinore General Plan (GP), and the LEMC and finds and determines that the proposed project is consistent with the requirements of California Planning and Zoning Law and with the goals and policies of the GP and the LEMC.

Section 2: The Commission finds and determines that the project is exempt ffrom the California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Pub. Res. Code §§21000 et seq.: “CEQA”) and the CEQA Guidelines (14 C.C.R. §§ 15000 et seq.) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 (Project Consistent with a Community Plan or Zoning), because (a) the project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and (b) an Environmental Impact Report (EIR; SCH No. 2005121019) was certified and adopted on December 13, 2011 in conjunction with the General Plan. Furthermore, all potentially significant project-specific impacts have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to the General Plan’s EIR (SCH No. 2005121019).

Section 3: That in accordance with Section 17.415.050.G of the LEMC, the Commission makes the following findings regarding Residential Design Review No. 2023-05:

1. The project, as approved, will comply with the goals and objectives of the General Plan and the zoning district in which the project is located.

The project site is in the Residential Mixed Use (RMU) General Plan designation and is within the City’s Residential Mixed Use zone. The intent of the RMU designation is to provide PC Reso. No. 2025-____

for a mix of residential and non-residential uses within a single proposed development area with an emphasis on high-density residential uses. Uses such as retail, service, civic, and professional office are allowed in a subordinate capacity. Residential densities shall be between 19 and 24 dwelling units per net acre. The application proposes to construct a 96- unit apartment complex on a 4.95-acre site at a density of 19.6 dwelling units per acre. In addition, the project complies with all applicable RMU zone development standards contained in the LEMC. Therefore, the proposed multi-family residential development is consistent with the land use goals and policies of the General Plan and zoning.

2. The project complies with the design directives and all applicable provisions contained in the LEMC.

The project is appropriate to the site and surrounding developments. The architectural style proposed will create a distinctive street scene within the project site. Sufficient setbacks and onsite landscaping have been provided, thereby creating interest and varying vistas. In addition, safe and efficient on-site circulation would be achieved

3. Conditions and safeguards pursuant to Section 17.415.050.G.3 of the LEMC, including guarantees and evidence of compliance with conditions, have been incorporated into the approval of the project to ensure development of the property in accordance with the objectives of Section 17.415.050.

Pursuant to Section 17.415.050.E of the LEMC, the project was considered by the Planning Commission at a duly noticed Public Hearing held on November 4, 2025. The project, as reviewed and conditioned by all applicable City divisions, departments, and agencies, will provide a high-quality residential development within the surrounding community.

Section 4: Based upon the evidence presented and the above findings, the Commission hereby approves Residential Design Review No. 2023-05.

Section 5: This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.

Passed and Adopted on this 4th day of November, 2025.

John Gray, Chairman
Attest:
___________________________________
Damaris Abraham,
Community Development Director
PC Reso. No. 2025-____

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.

CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE )
I, Damaris Abraham, Community Development Director of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, hereby certify that Resolution No. 2025-__ was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, at a regular meeting held November 4, 2025 and that the same was adopted by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

Damaris Abraham,
Community Development Director
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 1 of 17

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PROJECT: PA 2023-06 | RDR-2023-05
PROJECT NAME: Riverside Drive Apartments
PROJECT LOCATION: APN: 379-315-033
APPROVAL DATE:

EFFECTIVE DATE:

EXPIRATION DATE:

GENERAL

1. Planning Application No. 2023-06 is for a Residential Design Review (RDR No. 2023-05) for the design and construction of a 96-unit multi-family residential apartment complex within 12 two-story buildings. The project also proposes a 1,597 sq. ft. clubhouse with onsite recreational amenities and other related site improvements on a 4.95-acre site in the Residential Mixed Use (RMU) zoning district. The proposed project is located at 32281 Riverside Drive and encompasses Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 379-315-033.

2. The applicant shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its Officials, Officers, Employees, Agents, and its Consultants (Indemnitees) from any claim, action, or proceeding against the Indemnitees to attack, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning approval, implementation and construction of RDR 2023-05, which action is bought within the time period provided for in California Government Code Sections 65009 and/or 66499.37, and Public Resources Code Section 21167, including the approval, extension or modification of RDR 2023-05 or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done, or made prior to the decision, or to determine the reasonableness, legality or validity of any condition attached thereto. The Applicant's indemnification is intended to include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against or incurred by Indemnitees and costs of suit, claim or litigation, including without limitation attorneys' fees, penalties and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred by Indemnitees in connection with such proceeding. The City will promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City. If the project is challenged in court, the City and the applicant shall enter into formal defense and indemnity agreement, consistent with this condition.

3. Within 30 days of project approval, the applicant shall sign and complete an "Acknowledgment of Conditions" and shall return the executed original to the Community Development Department for inclusion in the case records.

PLANNING DIVISION

4. Residential Design Review No. 2023-05 shall lapse and become void two years following the date on which the design review became effective, unless one of the following: (1) prior to the expiration of two years, a building permit related to the design review is issued and construction commenced and diligently pursued toward completion; or (2) prior to the expiration of two years, the applicant has applied for and has been granted an extension of the design review approval pursuant to subsections (1) and (2) of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) Section 17.415.050.I.1. Notwithstanding conditions to the contrary, a design Conditions of Approval-DRAFT PC:
11/4/2025
PA 2023-06/RDR 2023-05 CC:

Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 2 of 17
review granted pursuant to LEMC Section 17.415.050.I.2 shall run with the land for this twoyear period, subject to any approved extensions, and shall continue to be valid upon a change of ownership of the site, which was the subject of the design review application.

5. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall obtain and submit a “Will Serve” letter from Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District to the Director of Community Development. The “will serve” letter shall specifically indicate the specific water flow volumes for both domestic and fire protection water supply.

6. The applicant shall participate in the City of Lake Elsinore Citywide Lighting and Landscape and Street Maintenance District, as appropriate.

7. The applicant shall provide all project-related on-site and off-site improvements as required by these Conditions of Approval.

8. All Conditions of Approval shall be reproduced on page one of building plans prior to their acceptance by the Building and Safety Division, Community Development Department. All Conditions of Approval shall be met prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.

9. All materials and colors depicted on the approved plans shall be used. If the applicant wishes to modify any of the approved materials or colors depicted on the plans, the applicant shall submit a proposal setting forth the modifications for review by the Community Development Director or his designee.

10. The applicant shall comply will all applicable City codes and ordinances.

11. All future development proposals shall be reviewed by the City on a project-by-project basis. If determined necessary by the Community Development Director or designee, additional environmental analysis will be required.

12. Any proposed minor revisions to approved plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director or designee. Any proposed substantial revisions to the approved plans shall be reviewed according to the provisions of the Municipal Code in a similar manner as a new application.

13. The applicant shall satisfy all conditions of approval prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and release of utilities.

14. If any of the conditions of approval set forth herein fail to occur, or if they are, by their terms, to be implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to revoke or modify all approvals herein granted, deny or further condition issuance of all future building permits, deny revoke, or further condition all certificates of occupancy issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; record a notice of violation on the property title; institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation.

Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits/Building Permits

15. The following architectural details shall be provided:

Conditions of Approval-DRAFT PC:
11/4/2025
PA 2023-06/RDR 2023-05 CC:

Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 3 of 17
• All front fence returns shall be decorative masonry walls. Wood fences will not be allowed along the front elevation. Wood, vinyl or steel (wrought iron or aluminum) gates are allowed in order to allow access to rear yards.
• The applicant shall provide four-sided articulation. Architectural enhancements and treatments shall be provided on all residential elevations (front, rear and side) visible from streets and other public views.
• All fireplaces shall be natural gas fireplaces only. No wood burning fireplaces shall be allowed.

16. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall obtain all necessary State and Federal permits, approvals, or other entitlements, including obtaining the necessary authorizations from the regulatory agencies for proposed impacts to jurisdictional waters. Authorizations may include a Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, a Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and a Section 401 Water Quality Certification/Waste Discharge Requirement from the Regional Water Quality Control Board.

17. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall prepare a Final Wall and Fence Plan addressing the following:
• Show that a masonry or decorative block wall will be constructed along the entire tract boundary.
• Show materials, colors, and heights of rear, side and front walls/fences for proposed lots.
• Show the location of all wood, vinyl or steel (wrought iron or aluminum) gates placed within the front return walls.
• Show that side walls for corner lots shall be decorative masonry block walls. • Show that those materials provided along the front elevations (i.e. brick, stone, etc.) will wrap around the side elevation and be flush with the front return walls.

18. The Final Wall and Fence Plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Department with appropriate fees, for review and approval by the Community Development Director or designee

19. Signs are not part of this project approval. All signage shall be subject to Planning Division or Planning Commission review and approval prior to installation.

20. Provisions of the City's Noise Ordinance (LEMC Chapter 17.176) shall be satisfied during all site preparation and construction activity. The applicant shall place a weatherproof 3'x3' sign at the entrance to the project site identifying the approved days and hours of construction activity. Site preparation activity and construction shall not commence before 7:00 AM and shall cease no later than 5:00 PM, Monday through Friday. Only finish work and similar interior construction may be conducted on Saturdays and may commence no earlier than 8:00 am and shall cease no later than 4:00 p.m. Construction activity shall not take place on Sunday, or any Legal Holidays. The sign shall identify the name and phone number of the development manager to address any complaints.

21. Construction phasing shall be implemented in accordance with a Phasing Plan, subject to review and approval by the Engineering and Building Departments, which avoids construction traffic from entering occupied neighborhoods within the tract.

Conditions of Approval-DRAFT PC:
11/4/2025
PA 2023-06/RDR 2023-05 CC:

Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 4 of 17

22. A cash bond in the amount of $1,000 shall be required for any construction trailers used during construction. Bonds will be released after removal of trailers, subject to the approval of the Community Development Director or designee.

23. The applicant shall pay school fees to the Lake Elsinore Unified School District prior to issuance of each building permit.

24. The project shall connect to water and sewer and meet all requirements of the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD). The applicant shall submit water and sewer plans to the EVMWD and shall incorporate all district conditions and standards.

25. All mechanical and electrical equipment associated with the residences shall be ground mounted. All outdoor ground or wall mounted utility equipment shall be consolidated in a central location and architecturally screened behind fence returns, subject to the approval of the Community Development Director, prior to issuance of building permit.

26. Building Addresses shall be a minimum of four inches high and shall be easily visible from the public right-of-way. Cre shall be taken to select colors and materials that contract with building walls or trims.

27. For all multi-family development, laundry facilities shall be provided as required by the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code.

28. Any planting within 15 feet of ingres/egress points shall be no higher than 36 inches above grade.

29. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Construction Landscape & Irrigation drawings shall be submitted to the Community Development Department with appropriate fees, for review and approval by the Community Development Director or designee. • The applicant shall replace any street trees harmed during construction, in conformance with the City's Street Tree List, at a maximum of 30 feet apart and at least 24-inch box in size.
• Perimeter walls shall be protected by shrubs and other plantings that discourage graffiti. • The applicant shall ensure a clear line of sight at ingress/egress points by providing plantings within 15 feet of ingress/egress points whose height does not exceed two (2) feet and whose canopy does not fall below six feet.
• The landscape plan shall provide for California native drought-tolerant ground cover, shrubs, and trees. Special attention shall be given to use of Xeriscape or drought resistant plantings with combination drip irrigation system to prevent excessive watering.
• No front-yard shall be landscaped with grass turf.
• All landscape improvements shall be bonded with a ten percent (10%) Faithful Performance Bond of the approved estimated labor and materials cost for all planting.

The bond shall remain in effect for one year from Certificate of Occupancy. • All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed within an affected portion of any phase at the time a certificate of occupancy is requested for any building. • The Final landscape plan shall be consistent with any approved site and/or plot plan.

Conditions of Approval-DRAFT PC:
11/4/2025
PA 2023-06/RDR 2023-05 CC:

Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 5 of 17
• The Final landscape plan shall include planting and irrigation details. • All exposed slopes in excess of three feet in height within the subject tract and within private lots shall have a permanent irrigation system and erosion control vegetation installed, as approved by the Planning Division, prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy.
• All landscaping and irrigation shall comply with the water-efficient landscaping requirements set forth in LEMC Chapter 19.08 (Water Efficient Landscape Requirements), as adopted and any amendments thereto.

BUILDING DIVISION
General Conditions

30. Final Building and Safety Conditions. Final Building and Safety Conditions will be addressed when building construction plans are submitted to Building and Safety for review. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the California Building Code (CBC), and related codes which are enforced at the time of building plan submittal.

31. Compliance with Code. All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 2022 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes: 2022 California Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, 2022 California Energy Codes, 2022 California Green Building Standards, California Title 24 Disabled Access Regulations, and Lake Elsinore Municipal Code.

32. Disabled Access. Applicant shall provide details of all applicable disabled access provisions and building setbacks on plans to include:
a. All ground floor units to be adaptable.
b. Disabled access from the public way to the entrance of the building. c. Van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry. d. Path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement. e. Path of travel from public right-of-way to all public areas on site, such as clubhouse, trach enclosure tot lots and picnic areas.

33. Street Addressing. Applicant must obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings by requesting street addressing and submitting a site plan for commercial or multi-family residential projects or a recorded final map for single- family residential projects. It takes 10 days to issue address and notify other agencies. Please contact Jonathan Oronia at [email protected] or 951-667-4558.

34. Clearance from LEUSD. A receipt or clearance letter from the Lake Elsinore School District shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Department evidencing the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees.

35. Obtain Approvals Prior to Construction. Applicant must obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work.

36. Obtaining Separate Approvals and Permits. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standards, and any block walls will require separate approvals and permits.

37. Sewer and Water Plan Approvals. On-site sewer and water plans will require separate Conditions of Approval-DRAFT PC:
11/4/2025
PA 2023-06/RDR 2023-05 CC:

Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 6 of 17
approvals and permits. Septic systems will need to be approved from Riverside County Environmental Health Department before permit issuance.

38. House Electrical Meter. Applicant shall provide a house electrical meter to provide power for the operation of exterior lighting, irrigation pedestals and fire alarm systems for each building on the site. Developments with single user buildings shall clearly show on the plans how the operation of exterior lighting and fire alarm systems when a house meter is not specifically proposed.

At Plan Review Submittal

39. Submitting Plans and Calculations. Applicant must submit to Building and Safety four (4) complete sets of plans and two (2) sets of supporting calculations for review and approval including:
a. An electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic, and mechanical plan applicable to scope of work.
b. A Sound Transmission Control Study in accordance with the provisions of the Section

5.507, of the 2022 edition of the California Green Code. c. A precise grading plan to verify accessibility for the persons with disabilities. d. Truss calculations that have been stamped by the engineer of record of the building and the truss manufacturer engineer.

Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s)

40. Onsite Water and Sewer Plans. Onsite water and sewer plans, submitted separately from the building plans, shall be submitted to Building and Safety for review and approval.

41. Demolition Permits. A demolition permit shall be obtained if there is an existing structure to be removed as part of the project. Asbestos report and lead base paint reports are required before demo permit will be issued.

Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s)

42. Plans Require Stamp of Registered Professional. Applicant shall provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on the plans. Provide C.D. of approved plans to the Building Division.

Prior to Beginning of Construction

43. Pre-Construction Meeting. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction.

ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

GENERAL

44. All new submittals for plan check or permit shall be made using the City’s online Citizen Service Portal (CSSP).

45. All engineering plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer using the City’s standard title block.

Conditions of Approval-DRAFT PC:
11/4/2025
PA 2023-06/RDR 2023-05 CC:

Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 8 of 17

46. All required engineering reports shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and Soils Engineer, as applicable.

47. All slopes and landscaping within the public right-of-way shall be maintained by the property owner, owner’s association, firms contracted by the property owner’s association, or another maintenance entity approved by the City Council.

48. Any grading that affects “waters of the United States”, wetlands or jurisdictional streambeds, shall require approval and necessary permits from respective Federal and/or State Agencies.

49. In accordance with the City’s Franchise Agreement for waste disposal & recycling, the applicant shall be required to contract with CR&R, Inc. for removal and disposal of all waste material, debris, vegetation and other rubbish generated both during cleaning, demolition, clear and grubbing or all other phases of construction and during occupancy.

50. Applicant shall submit a detailed final hydrology and hydraulic study for review and approval for the sufficient containment and conveyance of the storm water to a safe and adequate point as approved by the City Engineer.

51. The site will accommodate all construction activity, building activity, vehicles, etc. No staging on public streets, or private property belonging to others shall be conducted without the written permission of the property owner.

52. Minimum good housekeeping and erosion and sediment control Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be implemented.

FEES

53. Applicant shall pay all applicable permit application and Engineering assessed fees, including without limitation plan check and construction inspection fees, at the prevalent rate at time of payment in full.

54. Applicant shall pay all applicable Mitigation and Development Impact Fees at the prevalent rate at time of payment in full. Fees are subject to change. Mitigation and Development Impact Fees include without limitation:
• Master Plan of Drainage Fee – Due prior to grading permit issuance. • Traffic Infrastructure Fee (TIF) – Due prior to building permit issuance. • Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) – Due prior to occupancy. • Stephen’s Kangaroo Rat Mitigation Fee (K-Rat) – Due prior to grading permit issuance.

55. Applicant shall pay in-lieu fees for the undergrounding of existing overhead utilities along the project property frontage. Project is required to submit a detailed engineer’s estimate and exhibit for the City Engineering Department review and approval prior to grading permit issuance. In-lieu fees are required to be paid prior to building permit issuance.

LAND DIVISION
Conditions of Approval-DRAFT PC:
11/4/2025
PA 2023-06/RDR 2023-05 CC:

Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 9 of 17

56. Applicant shall provide an irrevocable offer of dedication in fee for the right-of-way of Riverside Drive adjacent to the property for a total right-of-way of 60 feet from centerline to the project property line. Riverside Drive is classified as an Urban Arterial Highway in the City’s General Plan, where full-width is 120 feet and curb-to-curb width is 96 feet.

STORM WATER MANAGEMENT / POLLUTION PREVENTION / NPDES
Design

57. The project is responsible for complying with the latest Santa Ana Region National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permits as warranted based on the nature of development and/or activity.

58. A Final Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) will be required and shall be prepared in accordance with the latest Santa Ana Region 8 approved template and guidance document.

Final WQMP shall be submitted fore review and approval to the City.

59. Parking lot landscaping areas shall be designed to provide for treatment, retention or infiltration of runoff.

60. Project hardscape areas shall be designed and constructed to provide for drainage into adjacent landscape.

61. Project trash enclosure shall be covered, bermed, and designed to divert drainage from adjoining paved areas and regularly maintained.

62. If CEQA identifies resources requiring Clean Water Act Section 401 Permitting, the applicant shall obtain certification through the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board and provide a copy to the Engineering Department.

63. All storm drain inlet facilities shall be appropriately marked “Only Rain in the Storm Drain” using the City authorized marker.

64. The project site shall implement full trash capture methods/devices approved by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. This shall include installation of connector pipe screens on all onsite and offsite catch basins to which the project discharges.

Construction

65. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) (as required by the NPDES General Construction Permit) and compliance with the Green Building Code for sediment and erosion control are required for this project.

66. Prior to grading or building permit for construction or demolition and/or weed abatement activity, projects subject to coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit shall demonstrate that compliance with the permit has been obtained by providing a copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board and a copy of the notification of the issuance of a Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) Number or other Conditions of Approval-DRAFT PC:
11/4/2025
PA 2023-06/RDR 2023-05 CC:

Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 10 of 17
proof of filing to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. A copy of the SWPPP shall be kept at the project site, updated, and be available for review upon request.

67. Erosion & Sediment Control – Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permit for construction or demolition, the applicant shall submit for review and approval by the City Engineer, an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan as a separate sheet of the grading plan submittal to demonstrate compliance with the City’s NPDES Program and state water quality regulations for grading and construction activities. A copy of the plan shall be incorporated into the SWPPP, kept updated as needed to address changing circumstances of the project site, be kept at the project site, and available for review upon request.

Post-Construction

68. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of use and/or occupancy, the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with applicable NPDES permits for construction, industrial/commercial, MS4, etc. to include:
• Demonstrate that the project has complied with all non-structural BMPs described in the project’s WQMP.
• Provide signed, notarized certification from the Engineer of Work that the structural BMPs identified in the project’s WQMP are installed in conformance with approved plans and specifications and operational.
• Submit a copy of the fully executed, recorded City approved Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan and Agreement for all structural BMPs or a copy of the recorded City approved CC&R.
• The Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan and Agreement and/or CC&R’s shall: (1) describe the long-term operation and maintenance requirements for BMPs identified in the BMP Exhibit; (2) identify the entity that will be responsible for long-term operation and maintenance of the referenced BMPs; (3) describe the mechanism for funding the long-term operation and maintenance of the referenced BMPs; and (4) provide for annual certification for water quality facilities by a Registered Civil Engineer. The City format shall be used.
• Provide documentation of annexation into a CFD for funding facilities to be maintained by the City.
• Demonstrate that copies of the project’s approved WQMP (with recorded O&M Plan or CC&R’s attached) are available for each of the initial occupants. • Agree to pay for a Special Investigation from the City of Lake Elsinore for a date twelve (12) months after the issuance of a Certificate of Use and/or Occupancy for the project to verify compliance with the approved WQMP and O&M Plan. A signed/sealed certification from the Engineer of Work dated 12 months after the Certificate of Occupancy will be considered in lieu of a Special Investigation by the City.

UTILITIES

69. All arrangements for relocation of utility company facilities (power poles, vaults, etc.) out of the roadway shall be the responsibility of the applicant, property owner, and/or his agent.

Overhead utilities (34.5 kV or lower) shall be undergrounded (LEMC Section 16.64).

70. Underground water rights shall be dedicated to the City pursuant to the provisions of LEMC Section 16.52.030, and consistent with the City’s agreement with the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. Dedication shall be made on final Tract Map.

Conditions of Approval-DRAFT PC:
11/4/2025
PA 2023-06/RDR 2023-05 CC:

Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 11 of 17

71. Applicant shall apply for, obtain and submit to the City Engineering Department a letter from Southern California Edison (SCE) indicating that the construction activity will not interfere with existing SCE facilities. Non-Interference Letter (NIL) shall be provided prior to issuance of grading permit.

72. Submit a “Will Serve” letter to the City Engineering Department from the applicable water agency stating that water and sewer arrangements have been made for this project and specify the technical data for the water service at the location, such as water pressure, volume, etc. Will Serve letters shall be provided prior to issuance of grading permit.

IMPROVEMENTS

73. Project will be responsible for the following improvements:
• Reconstruction of existing sidewalk improvements adjacent the project frontage on Riverside Drive as deemed necessary by the City Engineer. • Construction of driveway approaches per California Department of Transportation and City of Lake Elsinore approved standards.
• Construct curb outlet per City or Cal Trans Standards to accommodate site drainage facilities. Project is required to move the proposed bubbler to private property at final engineering. .

74. Site distance into and out and throughout the project location shall comply with Caltrans standards. Project shall ensure facilities are installed outside of the line of sight of drivers.

75. Project shall be responsible to design and install streetlights on Riverside Drive. Streetlight system shall be designed as LS-2B system. Streetlight plans shall include but are not limited to details such as location, pole and luminaire type, and pull box design. Streetlight plans may be included as part of the Street Improvement plan set.

76. 10-year storm runoff shall be contained within the curb and the 100-year storm runoff shall be contained within the street right-of-way. When either of these criteria are exceeded, drainage facilities shall be provided.

77. All drainage facilities in this project shall be constructed to Riverside County Flood Control District Standards.

78. A final drainage study shall be provided. The study shall identify the following: identify storm water runoff from and upstream of the site; show existing and proposed off-site and on-site drainage facilities; and include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of the facilities.

The drainage system shall be designed to ensure that runoff from a 10-year storm of 6 hours and 24 hours duration under developed condition is equal or less than the runoff under existing conditions of the same storm frequency. Both 6-hour and 24-hour storm duration shall be analyzed to determine the detention requirements to accomplish the desired results.

79. All natural drainage traversing the site shall be conveyed through the site, or shall be collected and conveyed by a method approved by the City Engineer. All off-site drainage, if different from historic flow, shall be conveyed to a public facility.

Conditions of Approval-DRAFT PC:
11/4/2025
PA 2023-06/RDR 2023-05 CC:

Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 12 of 17

80. Existing capacity of affected California Department of Transportation’s drainage systems cannot be exceeded. Should 100-year runoff volumes be determined to exceed the maximum capacity of the existing State drainage facilities, construction of on-site detention basins, new drainage systems or other impact mitigation will be required.

81. All existing tributary areas, area drainage patterns and runoff volumes having an impact to adjacent SR-74 drainage facilities must be identified and analyzed in the project hydrology study.

82. Review of project drainage design will include an evaluation of runoff impacts to adjacent California Department of Transportation right of way. Where applicable, compliance with pertinent National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)/water quality standards will be required.

83. Ensure that “best management practices” (BMP’s) used to treat site runoff entering California Department of Transportation comply with all applicable National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) or State Regional Water Resources Board regulations.

84. Roof drains shall not be allowed to outlet directly through coring in the street curb. Roofs should drain to a landscaped area.

85. The site shall be planned and developed to keep surface water from entering buildings (California Green Building Standards Code 4.106.3).

86. All existing storm drain inlet facilities adjacent to the subject properties shall be retrofitted with a storm drain filter; all new storm drain inlet facilities constructed by this project shall include a storm drain filter.

87. A registered Civil Engineer shall prepare the improvement (for public and private), signing and striping, and traffic signal plans required for this project. Improvements shall be designed and constructed to City Standards and Codes (LEMC 12.04 and 16.34). Signing, Striping and Traffic signal plans shall be submitted separately from improvement plans.

Permitting/Construction

88. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained prior to any work on City right-of-way. The developer shall submit the permit application, required fees, and executed agreements, security and other required documentation prior to issuance.

89. An Encroachment Permit from the California Department of Transportation shall be obtained prior to any work within California Department of Transportation right of way. Permit shall be obtained prior to issuance of City permits.

90. As applicable, a landscape maintenance agreement with California Department of Transportation may be required. If required, provide the agreement to the City of Lake Elsinore prior to the issuance of any encroachment permit(s).

91. Project drainage impacts affecting California Department of Transportation right of way should be identified and addressed.

Conditions of Approval-DRAFT PC:
11/4/2025
PA 2023-06/RDR 2023-05 CC:

Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 13 of 17

92. All compaction reports, grade certification, monument certification (with tie notes delineated on 8 ½ X 11” Mylar) shall be submitted to the Engineering Department before final inspection of public works improvements will be scheduled and approved.

PRIOR TO GRADING PERMIT

93. A grading plan signed and stamped by a registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted for City review and approval for all addition and/or movement of soil (grading) on site. The plan shall include separate sheets for erosion control, haul route and traffic control. The grading submittal shall include all supporting documentation and be prepared using City standard title block, standard drawings and design manual.

94. A final Hydrology and Hydraulic report shall be reviewed and approved prior to issuance of grading permits.

95. All grading plan contours shall extend to minimum of 50 feet beyond property lines to indicate existing drainage pattern.

96. The grading plan shall show that no structures, landscaping, or equipment are located near the project entrances that could reduce sight distance.

97. Applicant shall obtain all necessary off-site easements and/or permits for off-site grading and the applicant shall accept drainage from the adjacent property owners.

98. Applicant shall mitigate and prevent any flooding and/or erosion downstream caused by development of the site and/or diversion of drainage.

99. All natural drainage traversing the site (historic flow) shall be conveyed through the site in a manner consistent with the historic flow or to one or a combination of the following: to a public facility; accepted by adjacent property owners by a letter of drainage acceptance; or conveyed to an approved drainage easement.
100. Project grading impacts affecting the California Department of Transportation right of way shall be identified and addressed with Caltrans as applicable.

Permitting/Construction
101. Applicant shall execute and submit grading and erosion control agreement, post grading security and pay permit fees as a condition of grading permit issuance. 102. Any grading that affects “waters of the United States”, wetlands or jurisdictional streambeds require approval and necessary permits from respective Federal and/or State Agencies. 103. No grading shall be performed without first having obtained a Grading Permit. A grading permit does not include the construction of retaining walls or other structures for which a Building Permit is required.
104. A preconstruction meeting with the City Engineering Inspector (Engineering Department) is required prior to commencement of any grading activity.

Conditions of Approval-DRAFT PC:
11/4/2025
PA 2023-06/RDR 2023-05 CC:

Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 14 of 17
105. Hauling in excess of 5,000 cubic yards shall be approved by the City Council (LEMC

15.72.065). Prior to commencement of grading operations, applicant shall provide to the City a map of all proposed haul routes to be used for movement of export material. All such routes shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. Haul route shall be submitted prior to issuance of a grading permit.
106. All grading shall be done under the supervision of a licensed geotechnical engineer. Slopes steeper than 2 to 1 shall be evaluated for stability and proper erosion control and approved by the City.
107. Review and approval of the project sediment and erosion control plan shall be completed.

As warranted, a copy of the current SWPPP shall be kept at the project site and be available for review upon request.
108. Approval of the project Final Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for post construction shall be received prior to issuance of a grading permit. 109. Applicant shall obtain applicable environmental clearance from the Planning Department and submit applicable clearance document to the Engineering Department. This approval shall specify that the project complies with all required environmental mitigation triggered by the proposed grading activity.
110. Prior to approval of the Final Map or issuance off a grading permit (whichever comes first), the applicant shall submit an application to the Department of Administrative Services to initiate the Community Facilities District (CFD) annexation, formation, or other mitigation process as approved by Administrative Services. Proof of application submittal shall be provided to the City Engineering Department.

PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT
111. Provide soils, geology and seismic report, including recommendations for parameters for seismic design of buildings, and walls prior to building permit. 112. All public improvement plans shall be completed and approved by the City Engineer. 113. Any dedications and easements shall be recorded with the recorded copy provided to the City prior to issuance of the building permit.

PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY / FINAL APPROVAL / PROJECT CLOSEOUT
114. All public improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the approved plans prior to issuance of occupancy.
115. Proof of acceptance of maintenance responsibility of slopes, open spaces, landscape areas, and drainage facilities shall be provided.
116. In the event of the damage to City roads from hauling or other construction-related activity, applicant shall pay full cost of restoring public roads to the baseline condition. 117. All final studies and reports, final soil report, showing compliance with recommendations, compaction reports, grade certifications, monument certification (with tie notes delineated Conditions of Approval-DRAFT PC:
11/4/2025
PA 2023-06/RDR 2023-05 CC:

Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 15 of 17
on 8 ½” X 11” Mylar) shall be submitted in .tif format on a USB flash drive or electronically to the Engineering Department before final inspection will be scheduled. 118. Applicant shall pay all outstanding applicable processing and development fees prior to occupancy and/or final approval.
119. Applicant shall submit documentation pursuant to City’s Security Release handout. 120. Applicant shall submit as-built all Engineering Department approved project plan sets. After City approval of the paper copy, the developer/owner is responsible for revising the original mylar plans. Once the original mylars have been approved, the developer shall provide the City with a digital copy of the “as-built” plans in .tif format. 121. Applicant shall provide AutoCAD and GIS Shape Files off all Street and Storm Drain plans.

All data must be in projected coordinate system: NAD 83 State Plane California Zone VI U.S. Fleet. All parts and elements of the designed system shall be represented discretely.

Include in the attribute table basic data for each feature, such as diameter and length, as applicable, and for pipes include material (PVC, RCP,etc.) and slope.

CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE FIRE MARSHAL
122. The applicant/operator shall comply with all requirements of the Riverside County Fire Department Lake Elsinore Office of the Fire Marshall. Questions should be directed to the Office of the Fire Marshall at 130 S. Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530. Phone: (951) 395-1759
123. Prior to placing any combustibles on site, provide an approved water source for firefighting purposes.
124. Prior to building permit issuance, submit plans to the water district for a water system capable of delivering fire flow as required by the California Fire code and Fire Department standards. Fire hydrants shall be spaced in accordance with the California Fire Code.

Hydrants must produce the required fire flow per the California Fire Code.\ 125. Fire flow shall be determined by the building of the single largest square footage. The required fire flow is estimated to be 1500 GPM at 20 PSI for a 2-hour duration, per the 2022 California Fire Code and 8,650 square foot building area with Type V-B construction. 126. Prior to building permit issuance, install the approved water system and contract the Fire Department for a verification inspection.
127. Fire Sprinkler Systems: all residential occupancies shall have fire sprinkler systems in accordance with the California Residential Code, California Fire Code, and local ordinances. 128. Fire apparatus access: the California Fire Code requires fire apparatus access to within 150 feet of all portions of all buildings. Where apparatus access roads exceed 150 feet in length, an approved turnaround is required. The dimensions of this access shall be a minimum of 24’ wide and shall be shown as a shaded or hashmarked area on the submitted building plans. Minimum requirements are referenced in Riverside County Fire Technical Policy 22-002.

Conditions of Approval-DRAFT PC:
11/4/2025
PA 2023-06/RDR 2023-05 CC:

Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 16 of 17
129. Multi-family residential projects require two points of access/egress. Label primary and secondary access on the plan. If secondary access cannot be provided, show independent emergency vehicle access (ingress/ egress for emergency vehicles and egress for inhabitants).
130. Roads and gates must meet Engineering Department and Fire Department standards at the time of building permit application. Electric gates must have a Knox rapid entry system and an infrared opening device. Gates must be set back up to 35 feet to allow emergency vehicles to safely stop away from traffic flow.

DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
Annex into CFD 2015-1 (Safety) Law Enforcement, Fire and Paramedic Services CFD 131. Prior to approval of the Final Map or issuance of a grading permit (whichever comes first), the applicant shall submit an application to the Department of Administrative Services to initiate the annexation process into Community Facilities District No. 2015-1 (Safety) the Law Enforcement, Fire and Paramedic Services Mello-Roos Community Facilities District to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project on public safety operations and maintenance issues in the City. The annexation process shall be completed prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for the project. Alternatively, the applicant may propose alternative financing mechanisms to fund the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project with respect to Public Safety services. Applicant shall make a non-refundable deposit of $15,000, or at the current rate in place at the time of annexation toward the cost of annexation, formation or other mitigation process, as applicable.

Annex into the City of Lake Elsinore Community Facilities District No. 2015-2 (Maintenance Services)
132. Prior to approval of the Final Map or issuance of a grading permit (whichever comes first), the applicant shall submit an application to the Department of Administrative Services to initiate the annexation process into the Community Facilities District No. 2015-2 (Maintenance Services) or current Community Facilities District in place at the time of annexation to fund the on-going operation and maintenance of the public right-of-way landscaped areas and neighborhood parks to be maintained by the City and for street lights in the public right-of-way for which the City will pay for electricity and a maintenance fee to Southern California Edison, including parkways, street maintenance, open space and public storm drains constructed within the development and federal NPDES requirements to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project. The annexation process shall be completed prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for the project. Alternatively, the applicant may propose alternative financing mechanisms to fund the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project with respect to Maintenance Services. Applicant shall make a nonrefundable deposit of $15,000 or at the current rate in place at the time of annexation toward the cost of annexation, formation or other mitigation process, as applicable.

Conditions of Approval-DRAFT PC:
11/4/2025
PA 2023-06/RDR 2023-05 CC:

Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 16 of 17
I hereby state that I acknowledge receipt of the approved Conditions of Approval for the above named project and do hereby agree to accept and abide by all Conditions of Approval as approved by the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore on _________. I also acknowledge that all Conditions shall be met as indicated.

Date:

Applicant’s Signature:

Print Name:

Address:

Phone Number:

RIVERSIDE DRIVE APARTMENTS

PROJECT
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis
Prepared for City of Lake Elsinore
130 S Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530

Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
3801 University Ave, Suite 300
Riverside, California 92501
Date October 2025
This page intentionally left blank.

Table of Contents
Riverside Drive Apartments Project i
CEQA Section 15183 Analysis
Table of Contents

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1

1.1 California Environmental Quality Act .............................................................................................. 1

1.2 Previous Environmental Analysis of the Project .............................................................................. 4

1.2.1 City of Lake Elsinore General Plan ............................................................................................. 4

1.2.2 City of Lake Elsinore General Plan 2021-2029 Housing Element ............................................ 10

1.3 Findings .......................................................................................................................................... 10

2. Description of the Proposed Project .................................................................................................... 13

2.1 Project Location ............................................................................................................................. 13

2.2 Project Characteristics ................................................................................................................... 13

2.2.1 Land Use Designation and Zoning ........................................................................................... 13

2.2.2 Site Development .................................................................................................................... 14

2.3 Construction and Grading Assumptions ........................................................................................ 15

2.4 Discretionary Approvals ................................................................................................................. 15

3. Environmental Evaluation .................................................................................................................... 45

3.1 Aesthetics ....................................................................................................................................... 45

3.2 Air Quality ...................................................................................................................................... 49

3.3 Biological Resources ...................................................................................................................... 52

3.4 Cultural Resources and Paleontological Resources ....................................................................... 59

3.5 Energy ............................................................................................................................................ 65

3.6 Geology and Soils ........................................................................................................................... 67

3.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................................................................ 71

3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ................................................................................................. 73

3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality ........................................................................................................ 79

3.10 Land Use and Planning ................................................................................................................... 83

3.11 Mineral Resources ......................................................................................................................... 85

3.12 Noise .............................................................................................................................................. 87

3.13 Parks and Recreation ..................................................................................................................... 91

3.14 Population and Housing ................................................................................................................. 93

3.15 Public Services ................................................................................................................................ 95 Table of Contents
Riverside Drive Apartments Project ii
CEQA Section 15183 Analysis

3.16 Transportation and Circulation ...................................................................................................... 97

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems ....................................................................................................... 101

3.18 Mandatory Findings of Significance ............................................................................................. 104

4. References .......................................................................................................................................... 107 List of Figures
Figure 1: Regional Location Map ................................................................................................................ 17 Figure 2: Project Vicinity Map ..................................................................................................................... 19 Figure 3: Conceptual Site Plan .................................................................................................................... 21 Figure 4: Conceptual Floor Plans ................................................................................................................ 23 Figure 5: Preliminary Grading Plan ............................................................................................................. 25 Figure 6: Conceptual Utility ........................................................................................................................ 37 Figure 7: Conceptual Landscape Plan ......................................................................................................... 41 Figure 8: Conceptual Wall/Fence and Entry Design Plan ............................................................................ 43 List of Tables
Table 1. Project Building Types and Quantities .......................................................................................... 14 Table 3.3-1: Special Status Species Occurrence .......................................................................................... 54 Appendices
Appendix A: AQ and GHG Assessment
Appendix B1: Biological Survey
Appendix B2: Burrowing Owl Survey
Appendix C1: Cultural Resources Assessment
Appendix C2: Paleontological Resources Assessment
Appendix D: Energy Review
Appendix E: Geologic and Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Appendix F1: Phase I: Environmental Site Assessment
Appendix F2: Phase II: Subsurface Investigation Report
Table of Contents
Riverside Drive Apartments Project iii
CEQA Section 15183 Analysis
Appendix F3: Additional Investigation Report
Appendix F4: Vapor Intrusion Memorandum
Appendix G: Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan
Appendix H: Noise Impact Analysis
Appendix I: Vehicle Miles Traveled Screening Analysis Memo

Table of Contents
Riverside Drive Apartments Project iv
CEQA Section 15183 Analysis
This page intentionally left blank.

Section 1.0
Introduction
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 1
CEQA Section 15183 Analysis

1. INTRODUCTION
WJK Development, the applicant, is proposing a 96-unit multi-family housing development on approximately 4.95 acres of vacant land in the City of Lake Elsinore, Riverside County, California. The Project site currently consists of remnant vegetation which would be removed during construction.

According to the Lake Elsinore General Plan (Lake Elsinore GP), the Project site is located within the Lake View District Planning District with a land use designation and zoning of Residential Mixed Use of the Lake Elsinore GP planning area.1
This report provides an analysis of the Riverside Drive Apartments Project (Project), with respect to the Project’s consistency with the Lake Elsinore General Plan Update Final Recirculated Program Environmental Impact Report (Lake Elsinore GP EIR) and the site-specific environmental impacts or cumulative impacts that may result from the Project implementation.

1.1 California Environmental Quality Act
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (California Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 1000 et seq. (Section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations [CCR] Section 15000 et seq.) Section 15183 allows for a streamlined environmental review process for projects that are consistent with the densities established by existing zoning, community plan or general plan policies for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was certified. Under CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, a subsequent project is relieved from further environmental review if it meets the criteria of Section 15183(c): all significant impacts were either addressed in a prior EIR or can be substantially mitigated by the imposition of uniformly applied development policies or standards.

Pursuant to the provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Lake Elsinore (City) is the Lead Agency charged with the responsibility of deciding whether to approve the Riverside Drive Apartments Project.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, Projects Consistent with a Community Plan or Zoning, states:
(a) CEQA mandates that projects which are consistent with the development density established by existing zoning, community plan, or general plan policies for which an EIR was certified shall not require additional environmental review, except as might be necessary to examine whether there are project-specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site. This streamlines the review of such projects and reduces the need to prepare repetitive environmental studies. 1 City of Lake Elsinore. 2013. City of Lake Elsinore General Plan Chapter 9.0 Lake View District Plan, page LV-3. Available at: https://www.lakeelsinore.org/DocumentCenter/View/2233/90-Lake-View-District-PDF (accessed January 2025).

Section 1.0
Introduction
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 2
CEQA Section 15183 Analysis
(b) In approving a project meeting the requirements of this section, a public agency shall limit its examination of environmental effects to those which the agency determines, in an initial study or other analysis:
(1) Are peculiar to the project or the parcel on which the project would be located,
(2) Were not analyzed as significant effects in a prior EIR on the zoning action, general plan, or community plan, with which the project is consistent, (3) Are potentially significant off-site impacts and cumulative impacts which were not discussed in the prior EIR prepared for the general plan, community plan or zoning action, or
(4) Are previously identified significant effects which, as a result of substantial new information which was not known at the time the EIR was certified, are determined to have a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the prior EIR.
(c) If an impact is not peculiar to the parcel or to the project, has been addressed as a significant effect in the prior EIR, or can be substantially mitigated by the imposition of uniformly applied development policies or standards, as contemplated by subdivision (e) below, then an additional EIR need not be prepared for the project solely on the basis of that impact. (d) This section shall apply only to projects which meet the following conditions:
(1) The project is consistent with:
(A) A community plan adopted as part of a general plan, (B) A zoning action which zoned or designated the parcel on which the project would be located to accommodate a particular density of development, or
(C) A general plan of a local agency, and
(2) An EIR was certified by the lead agency for the zoning action, the community plan, or the general plan.
(e) This section shall limit the analysis of only those significant environmental effects for which:
(1) Each public agency with authority to mitigate any of the significant effects on the environment identified in the planning or zoning action undertakes or requires others to undertake mitigation measures specified in the EIR which the lead agency found to be feasible, and
Section 1.0
Introduction
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 3
CEQA Section 15183 Analysis
(2) The lead agency makes a finding at a public hearing as to whether the feasible mitigation measures will be undertaken.
(f) An effect of a project on the environment shall not be considered peculiar to the project or the parcel for the purposes of this section if uniformly applied development policies or standards have been previously adopted by the city or county with a finding that the development policies or standards will substantially mitigate that environmental effect when applied to future projects, unless substantial new information shows that the policies or standards will not substantially mitigate the environmental effect. The finding shall be based on substantial evidence which need not include an EIR. Such development policies or standards need not apply throughout the entire city or county, but can apply only within the zoning district in which the project is located, or within the area subject to the community plan on which the lead agency is relying. Moreover, such policies or standards need not be part of the general plan or any community plan, but can be found within another pertinent planning document such as a zoning ordinance. Where a city or county, in previously adopting uniformly applied development policies or standards for imposition on future projects, failed to make a finding as to whether such policies or standards would substantially mitigate the effects of future projects, the decision--making body of the city or county, prior to approving such a future project pursuant to this section, may hold a public hearing for the purpose of considering whether, as applied to the project, such standards or policies would substantially mitigate the effects of the project. Such a public hearing need only be held if the city or county decides to apply the standards or policies as permitted in this section.
(g) Examples of uniformly applied development policies or standards include, but are not limited to:
(1) Parking ordinances.
(2) Public access requirements.
(3) Grading ordinances.
(4) Hillside development ordinances.
(5) Flood plain ordinances.
(6) Habitat protection or conservation ordinances.
(7) View protection ordinances.
(8) Requirements for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, as set forth in adopted land use plans, policies, or regulations.

Section 1.0
Introduction
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 4
CEQA Section 15183 Analysis
(h) An environmental effect shall not be considered peculiar to the project or parcel solely because no uniformly applied development policy or standard is applicable to it.
(i) Where the prior EIR relied upon by the lead agency was prepared for a general plan or community plan that meets the requirements of this section, any rezoning action consistent with the general plan or community plan shall be treated as a project subject to this section.
(1) “Community plan” is defined as a part of the general plan of a city or county which applies to a defined geographic portion of the total area included in the general plan, includes or references each of the mandatory elements specified in Section 65302 of the Government Code, and contains specific development policies and implementation measures which will apply those policies to each involved parcel.
(2) For purposes of this section, “consistent” means that the density of the proposed project is the same or less than the standard expressed for the involved parcel in the general plan, community plan or zoning action for which an EIR has been certified, and that the project complies with the density--related standards contained in that plan or zoning. Where the zoning ordinance refers to the general plan or community plan for its density standard, the project shall be consistent with the applicable plan. (j) This section does not affect any requirement to analyze potentially significant offsite or cumulative impacts if those impacts were not adequately discussed in the prior EIR. If a significant offsite or cumulative impact was adequately discussed in the prior EIR, then this section may be used as a basis for excluding further analysis of that offsite or cumulative impact.

1.2 Previous Environmental Analysis of the Project

1.2.1 City of Lake Elsinore General Plan
The Lake Elsinore GP was approved in 2011. The Lake Elsinore GP encompasses approximately 46,564 total acres, including its sphere of influence, and is located in the southwest portion of Riverside County.

The purpose of the Lake Elsinore GP is to provide guidance for the City’s long-term development. The Lake Elsinore GP includes goals and policies that provide the framework for the City’s vision.

A CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 exemption requires a project be consistent with the development density established by either existing zoning, community plan or general plan policies for which an EIR was certified. The Lake Elsinore GP designated the Project site as Residential Mixed Use within the Lake View District. The Project would include the development of residential buildings and associated site improvements.

Section 1.0
Introduction
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 5
CEQA Section 15183 Analysis
The following summarizes the findings of the Lake Elsinore GP EIR associated with the adoption and longterm implementation of the Lake Elsinore GP.

The Lake Elsinore GP EIR found the following environmental effects to have no impact or be less than significant:
 Aesthetics: Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway.  Aesthetics: Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings.
 Aesthetics: Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.
 Biological Resources: Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan; Natural Community Conservation Plan; or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.
 Geology and Soils: Result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil.  Geology and Soils: Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for disposal wastewater.  Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment.
 Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.
 Hazards and Hazardous Materials: 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 environment.  Hazards and Hazardous Materials: Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.  Hydrology and Water Quality: Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or a dam.  Hydrology and Water Quality: Result in inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow.  Land Use and Planning: Physically divide and established community.  Land Use and Planning: 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.  Land Use and Planning: Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract.

Section 1.0
Introduction
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 6
CEQA Section 15183 Analysis
 Land Use and Planning: Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use.  Mineral Resources: 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.
 Mineral Resources: Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan.  Population and Housing: Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure).
 Population and Housing: Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.
 Population and Housing: Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.
 Transportation and Circulation: Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks.  Transportation and Circulation: Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or a dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment).  Transportation and Circulation: Result in inadequate emergency access.  Utilities and Service Systems: 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 project demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments.  Utilities and Service Systems: Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board.
 Utilities and Service Systems: Require or result in the construction of new wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects.
 Utilities and Service Systems: Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed.  Utilities and Services Systems: Require or result in the construction of new water treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects.
 Utilities and Service Systems: Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs.
 Utilities and Service Systems: Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste.

Section 1.0
Introduction
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 7
CEQA Section 15183 Analysis
 Utilities and Service Systems: Require or result in the construction of new electrical, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects.

The Lake Elsinore GP EIR found the following environmental effects to be less than significant with the incorporation of mitigation:
 Aesthetics: Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista.  Air Quality: Result in odors adversely affecting a substantial number of people.  Biological Resources: Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
 Biological Resources: Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.  Biological Resources: Have a substantial effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.  Biological Resources: Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.
 Biological Resources: Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinances.
 Cultural and Paleontological Resources: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in California Code of Regulations, Section 15064.5.  Cultural and Paleontological Resources: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an important archaeological resource as defined in California Code of Regulations, Section 15064.5.
 Cultural and Paleontological Resources: Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature.
 Cultural and Paleontological Resources: Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries.
 Geology and Soils: Expose People or structures to potential substantial adverse effects including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
a. Rupture of a known earthquake fault,
b. Strong seismic ground shaking,
Section 1.0
Introduction
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 8
CEQA Section 15183 Analysis
c. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction or landslides  Geology and Soils: Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B and the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risk to life or property.  Geology and Soils: Be located on a geologic unit or soil is unstable of 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.
 Geology and Soils: Is located on expansive soil, as deferred in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating a substantial risk to life or property.  Hazards and Hazardous Materials: Create a significant hazard to the public of the environment through the routine transport, use, disposal, or accidental release of hazardous materials.  Hazards and Hazardous Materials: Create a significant hazard to the public of the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.
 Hazards and Hazardous Materials: Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school.
 Hazards and Hazardous Materials: 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 private use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area.  Hazards and Hazardous Materials: For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area.  Hazards and Hazardous Materials: Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands.
 Hydrology and Water Quality: Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements.
 Hydrology and Water Quality: Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted.
 Hydrology and Water Quality: Create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff.

Section 1.0
Introduction
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 9
CEQA Section 15183 Analysis
 Hydrology and Water Quality: Require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects.
 Hydrology and Water Quality: Otherwise substantially degrade water quality.  Hydrology and Water Quality: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
o Result in a substantial erosions or siltation on- or off-site; o Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site;
o Impede or redirect flood flows.
 Land Use and Planning: Conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect
 Land Use and Planning: Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan.
 Noise: Result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project.
 Noise: 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 expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.  Noise: For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
 Parks and Recreation: Cause an increase in the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated.
 Parks and Recreation: Require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical impact on the environment.
 Public Services: 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 police protection, fire protection, schools, libraries and animal control.

Section 1.0
Introduction
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 10
CEQA Section 15183 Analysis
The Lake Elsinore GP EIR found the following to be significant unavoidable impacts:
 Air Quality: Conflict or obstruction of implementation of the applicable air quality plan.  Air Quality: Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation
 Air Quality: result in considerably cumulative net increase in a criteria pollutant for which the project is in nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors).  Noise: Result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise level in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.  Noise: Result in substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project.
 Noise: Result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels.
 Transportation and Circulation: Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and nonmotorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways, and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit.  Transportation and Circulation: Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including but not limited to, level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways.

1.2.2 City of Lake Elsinore General Plan 2021-2029 Housing Element State law requires the preparation of a Housing Element as part of a jurisdiction's General Plan (Government Code Section 65302(c)). It is the primary planning guide for local jurisdictions to identify and prioritize the housing needs of the city and determine ways to best meet these needs while balancing community objectives and resources. As a part of the mandate, a jurisdiction must demonstrate in the Housing Element that the land inventory is adequate to accommodate that jurisdiction’s share of the region’s projected growth. The City’s Housing Element includes goals and policies to meet the housing needs of the community. The Housing Element identifies the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) target for the 2021 to 2029 cycle is 6,681 units which is inclusive of Extremely/Very Low Income, Low-Income, Moderate-Income, and Above Moderate-Income housing.

1.3 Findings
As demonstrated in the analysis herein, the Riverside Drive Apartments Project, is consistent with the findings of the Lake Elsinore GP, for which an EIR was prepared and certified. According to the City’s Zoning Section 1.0
Introduction
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 11
CEQA Section 15183 Analysis
Code, the Residential Mixed Use density requirements are 19-24 dwelling units (DUs) per acre. As the Project site would include a total of 96 DUs on a 4.95-acre site (approximately 19.4 DU/acre), the Project is consistent with the land use designations and development densities and intensities assigned to the Project site in the Lake Elsinore GP. Cumulative and off-site impacts associated with Project development, as proposed, were fully addressed in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR (SCH No. 2005121019). Since the Project is consistent with the Lake Elsinore GP Residential Mixed Use Land Use Designation and Zoning identified, Project implementation would not result in any new or altered cumulative impacts or off-site impacts beyond those addressed in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR.

The analysis demonstrates and/or validates that there are no site-specific or cumulative impacts associated with the Project that have not already been fully addressed in a previous environmental document or cannot be substantially mitigated through the application of uniformly applied standards and policies that would be applied to the Project. The Project requirements identified in the environmental analysis include measures that must be implemented by the Project to ensure that any site-specific impacts are mitigated. All Project requirements identified in the analysis shall be made a condition of Project approval and shall be implemented within the timeframes identified. Therefore, no additional environmental analysis is required under CEQA associated with the approval of the Project.

Section 1.0
Introduction
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 12
CEQA Section 15183 Analysis
This page intentionally left blank.

Section 2.0
Project Description
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 13 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis

2. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT

2.1 Project Location
The Project site is located at the northwest corner of the Eisenhower Drive and Riverside Drive intersection in the City of Lake Elsinore, Riverside County, California. The Project site consists of approximately 4.95 acres located on one Riverside County Assessor Parcel 379-315-033. The Project site is shown in a regional and local context in Figure 1 and Figure 2, respectively. The Project site has a Lake Elsinore GP land use designation of Residential Mixed Use and is located in the Lake View District Planning District.

The approximately 4.95-acre Project site is predominately vacant, but has been previously heavily disturbed and semi-developed. General topography of the Project site consists of relatively flat land as elevation ranges from approximately 1,272 feet (ft) at mean sea level (amsl) to 1,276 ft amsl. The Project site is accessible from Riverside Drive, immediately to the southeast of the Project site.

The Project site is located within an urbanized portion of the City and is generally bordered by the following uses:

North Leach Canyon Channel; Residential land uses
East Riverside Drive; Coyote Cove Lakeside Campgrounds
South Eisenhower Drive; Residential land uses
West Monroe Street; Residential land uses

2.2 Project Characteristics

2.2.1 Land Use Designation and Zoning
As previously discussed, the Project site has a Lake Elsinore GP land use designation and zoning of Residential Mixed Use. The Lake Elsinore GP includes 17 residential, commercial, mixed use, industrial and other land use designations to depict the types of land uses that will be allowed in each General Plan area.

According to the Lake Elsinore GP, the Residential Mixed Use land designation provides for a mix of residential and non-residential uses within a single proposed development area within an emphasis on high density residential. As such, the proposed multifamily residential development would be permitted within the Residential Mixed Use land use designation.

The Residential Mixed Use zoning district intends to provide a development opportunity to combine both residential and neighborhood retail and service uses. Permitted uses within the Residential Mixed Use Section 2.0
Project Description
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 14 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis zoning include but are not limited to, community centers, food establishments, multi-family residential, townhomes, libraries, medical offices, parks and recreation centers, and retail.2 Additionally, the City utilizes Planning Districts to define unique neighborhoods within the General Plan area. The Project is within the Lake View District Planning District of the Lake Elsinore GP. The main focus of the Lake View District is to integrate new and existing residential communities and supporting uses while maintaining a high quality of life and to revitalize the area along Riverside Drive as additional growth occurs.

2.2.2 Site Development
The proposed residential development would be constructed on approximately 4.95 acres of vacant and previously disturbed land in an urbanized area on one assessor parcel. The Project site currently features construction debris as well as landscaped and concrete floor areas. Some vegetation exists within the Project site, which would be removed during Project construction. The Project proposes 12 residential buildings of two different types, Building Type A and Building Type B. As shown in Table 1. Project Building Types and Quantities, the Project proposes a total of 96 dwelling units (DU), totaling approximately 88,880 square feet (sf). Building Type A would include 8 DU each approximately 710 sf and Building Type B would include 8 DU each approximately 1,080 sf. The Project also proposes one non-residential building, a 1,597 sf clubhouse, for community recreational use. Figure 3, Figure 4, Figure 5, and Figure 8 depict the overall proposed site plan, floor plans, and conceptual wall/fence, grading, and entry design plans respectively.

Table 1. Project Building Types and Quantities
Building Type Dwelling Units (DU) Square Footage (sf) Quantity Proposed A 8 DU 28,400 sf 5 buildings
B 8 DU 60,480 sf 7 buildings
Total 961 DU 88,880 sf 12 buildings
1Calculated by multiplying the number of proposed buildings by the number of dwelling units proposed for each building type: (8*5) + (8*7) = 96 DU.

Site Access and Parking
There are two proposed driveways which would provide access to the Project site from Riverside Drive.

The main driveway would be located between Building 1 and Building 2, and another gated emergency access driveway is proposed on the eastern boundary of the Project site, as shown in Figure 3. The Project would provide a total of 200 parking stalls, 99 of which are carports and 101 are standard outdoor parking stalls.
2 City of Lake Elsinore. 2024. The Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Chapter 17.86 RMU Residential Mixed Use District. Available at:
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/LakeElsinore/#!/LakeElsinore17/LakeElsinore1786.html#17.86 (accessed January 2025).

Section 2.0
Project Description
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 15 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis Landscaping and Lighting
Landscaping would be provided along the border of the Project site, within the outdoor common spaces, and along all Project pathways and roadways. Refer to Figure 7 for a depiction of the Project’ proposed conceptual landscape plan. The proposed landscaping would comply with the Lake Elsinore General Plan Aesthetics Goals, Policies, and Implementation Programs as outlined in General Plan Chapter 4 Resources Protection and would comply with the City’s Water Efficient Landscape Requirements as outlined in the City’s Development Code.3
Outdoor lighting would comply with City’s Building Security Provisions for Residential uses as outlined in the Chapter 15.28, as well as Green Building Standards Code as outlined in Chapter 15.42 of the City’s Municipal Code. Further, the City is located within the 45-mile secondary impacts radius of the Palomar Lighting Impact Analysis area. Lighting would be used to provide adequate lighting for safety and security concerns. The Project would include outdoor lighting on the building, within the pool and deck areas, and within outdoor common spaces. Outdoor lighting would be directed downward and shielded to reduce spillage onto adjacent properties.

Infrastructure and Utilities
Implementation of the Project would use existing connections to water and sewer lines, gas lines, and electrical lines. These utilities would connect to existing utility infrastructure in adjacent roadways, with the final sizing and design of on-site facilities to occur during final building design and plan check. Water and wastewater services to the Project site are provided by the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District.

Southern California Edison (SoCal Edison) supplies electricity and SoCal Gas provides natural gas services to the Project site. Figure 6 includes a conceptual design of the utility plan proposed for the Project.

Post-development drainage conditions would include storm drains that direct on-site runoff to appropriate outfalls, including a proposed storm drain catch basin. With the appropriate grading, runoff would be directed away from the proposed residential building.

2.3 Construction and Grading Assumptions
Project construction is expected to occur over 80 weeks and would occur in one phase.

2.4 Discretionary Approvals
 Residential Design Review (RDR) for construction of the new Apartment Complex;  Adoption of the CEQA Section 15183 Consistency Analysis; and Permits necessary including but not limited to grading permits, building permits, etc. to construct the proposed Project.
3 City of Lake Elsinore. 2024. The Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Chapter 19.08 Water Efficient Landscape Requirements. Available at:
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/LakeElsinore/#!/LakeElsinore19/LakeElsinore1908.html#19.08 (accessed January 2025).

Section 2.0
Project Description
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 16 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis This page intentionally left blank.

Not to scale
FIGURE1: Regional Location Map
Riverside Drive Apartments Project, City of Lake Elsinore Source: ESRI World Navigation Map, 2024; Riverside County Assessor / RCIT, 2024.

Project Location
Section 2.0
Project Description
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 18 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis This page intentionally left blank.

Not to scale
FIGURE 2: Project Vicinity Map
Riverside Drive Apartments Project, City of Lake Elsinore Sources: ESRI Hybrid Reference Layer, 2024; Nearmap Aerial Imagery, 2024; Riverside County Assessor / RCIT, 2024.

Section 2.0
Project Description
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 20 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis This page intentionally left blank.

Not to scale
FIGURE3: Conceptual Site Plan
Riverside Drive Apartments Project, City of Lake Elsinore Source: Blue Engineering, 2024. E2
E4

LEACH CANYON CHANNEL
5‘ 5‘
20‘
T
5’
8 iSD
11 1 6"so
1 PROP. WALKWAYf
(TYP.) I
( I I COMMON OPEN V
8 POOL 288] 88]
V -EELEE. -PROP. ADA

COMPLIANT RAMP
L 1
O .r
T
I —
5‘ 73.67' 73.67'
*
1 I Lomar T
2 ).9
MAIL
/LEASE
2 STORY
BLDG 5
TYPE B1
2 STORY
BLDG 4
TYPE B2
—
1i

73.67'
2 STORY
BLDG 12
TYPE B1

73.67'
2 STORY
BLDG 11
TYPE B2
J
PROP. CARPORT-
/ COVER (TYP.),
-PROP. CARPORTCOVER (TYP.)
-PROP. CARPORTCOVER (TYP.)
n -PROP. CARPORT—
COVER (TYP.)

EISENHOWER DRIVE
— G
-
Kimley»Horn
&"
-EX. R/W I
SPROP. R/W 1 1 12 N I
PROP. MONUMENT 24 20 72.67’
20’20’

72.67 s 8
L 50 IDs. e34 [ 8 r 0 hi 29’ 52.5’
2 T ■ mf
EE 8
8 2
&& 2 O
n
S 6
I 5'.
-A2-&
68‘28‘
2 8
d
n
COVER (TYP.)
~
-PROP. CARPORT- .......) I -PROP. CB LIANT RAMP PROP. ADA A •el
-DRIVE AISLEW CROSSING
JF -PROP. ADA 0 COMPLIANT RAMP COVER (TYP.) COVER (TYP.) o. -PROP. ADA -PROP. CARPORT- -PROP. CARPORT- I-I-I-I' 2 s' S'
' “mg 8 °3 I t p Pow I Ia I M/d(o T 8823 1
g ---- -—_8 8 _
ined 2oR 19 Ro289 % 3 w 1 d li C O‘ / & 2 52.5‘ 53.5‘
7 7
s i s ss I i
i
ss
I
i
§
I
ss
s
s
EEE
ss
s
Et
ss
{
zz
ssis
--
PROP. ADA
__CROSSING
3 EE
a
8 —PROP. CARPORTCOVER (TYP.)
88H20 <
&
TI f I -PROP. CARPORTCOVER (TYP.)
13 -PROP. ADA

COMPLIANT RAMP
2 3
8,
' / COMPLIANT RAMP1 ,
o®i
882r;
i
81 -
-PROP. CARPORTCOVER (TYP.)
5 :
-PROP. ADA

COMPLIANT RAMP
3 Elt
E
. CARPORT- 1 pRop. VER (TYP.) • COMPL I I" 4s, 12 । ' —--- ——----V PPAD 380 =
1 3 .
-

SD--------DRIVE AISLE
if

MONROE STREET
7 7
/-
s —\—

RIVERSIDE DRIVE
\ //
Section 2.0
Project Description
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 22 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis This page intentionally left blank.

Not to scale
FIGURE 4A:Conceptual FloorPlans
Riverside Drive Apartments Project, City of Lake Elsinore Source: MichaelMcHale,Architect,2024. PLAN 1 & PLAN 2
FLOOR PLANS 1ST FLOOR PLAN
5'-0" x 12'-0" BALCONY
11'-0" x 11'-10" BDRM 1
14'-8" x 12'-0" GREAT RM
BAR
5'-0" x 12'-0" BALCONY
11'-0" x 11'-10" BDRM 1
14'-8" x 12'-0" GREAT RM

BAR UTILITY
11'-0" x 11'-10" BDRM 1
14'-8" x 12'-0" GREAT RM
W/DW.H.

BAR
12'-0" x 5'-0" BALCONY
9'-0" x 12'-6" KITCHEN
15'-6" x 14'-10" GREAT RM
BATH 1
BATH 2
10'-10" x 12'-0" BDRM 2
COAT

LINEN ENTRY
PANTRY
LINEN
LINEN
11'-4" x 14'-0" BDRM 1
W/DW.H.
9'-0" x 12'-6" KITCHEN
15'-6" x 14'-10" GREAT RM
BATH 1
BATH 2
10'-10" x 12'-0" BDRM 2
COAT

LINEN ENTRY
PANTRY
LINEN
LINEN
11'-4" x 14'-0" BDRM 1
BAR PLAN 1
2ND FLOOR PLAN
PLAN 1
1ST FLOOR PLAN
PLAN 2
2ND FLOOR PLAN
PLAN 2 31'-7 1/2" 6'-2" 25'-5 1/2" 6'-6"
26'-8" 2'-5"
10'-4" 16'-4" 31'-2" 6'-2" 25'-0" 6'-6"
26'-8" 2'-5"
10'-4" 16'-4"
36'-9" 2'-0" 33'-3" 5'-3" 28'-0"
12'-4 1/2" 24'-4 1/2" 36'-9" 2'-0" 33'-3" 5'-3" 28'-0" 6'-6" 12'-4 1/2" 24'-4 1/2" 6'-6"
BATH 1
BATH 1

KITCHEN
ENTRY
PANTRY
LINEN
LINEN
LINEN
LINEN

PANTRY W/D
11'-0" x 12'-0" COAT
COAT
PATIO
PATIO

UTILITY
KITCHEN 11'-0" x 12'-0"

BAR W/D

DWELLING UNITS SUMMARY
PLAN NO. SQ. FTG. BDRMS BATHS 1 730 S.F. 1 1 2 1,092 S.F. 2 2 Section 2.0
Project Description
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 24 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis This page intentionally left blank.

Not to scale
FIGURE 4B:Conceptual FloorPlans
Riverside Drive Apartments Project, City of Lake Elsinore Source: MichaelMcHale,Architect,2024. BLDG. TYPE A1
2 STORY

FLOOR PLANS,

ROOF PLAN &

EXTERIOR
ELEVATIONS 1ST FLOOR PLAN
BUILDING A1
2ND FLOOR PLAN
BUILDING A1

ROOF PLAN
BUILDING A1
58'-4" 2'-5" 53'-6" 2'-5" 26'-8" 2" 26'-8" 75'-6" 6'-6" 62'-6" 6'-6" 31'-2" 2" 31'-2" 58'-4" 2'-5" 53'-6" 2'-5" 26'-8" 2" 26'-8" 75'-6" 6'-6" 62'-6" 6'-6" 31'-2" 2" 31'-2" PLAN 1 PLAN 1R
PLAN 1R PLAN 1

UTILITY CLOSET
PLAN 1 PLAN 1R
PLAN 1R PLAN 1

UTILITY CLOSET

COVERED
PATIO

COVERED

BALCONY BUILDING SUMMARY
1ST FLOOR: DWELLING UNITS: 2,920 S.F. COVERED PATIOS: 380 S.F. STAIRS: 182 S.F. UTILITY: 68 S.F. 2ND FLOOR: DWELLING UNITS: 2,920 S.F. BALCONIES: 380 S.F. LANDINGS: 137 S.F. TOTAL: DWELLING UNITS: 5,840 S.F. COVERED PATIOS: 380 S.F. BALCONIES: 380 S.F. UTILITY: 68 S.F. TOTAL NO. D.U. 8 D.U.

DWELLING UNITS SUMMARY
PLAN NO. SQ. FTG. QUANTITY BDRMS BATHS 1 730 S.F. 8 D.U. 1 1 2 1,092 S.F. 0 D.U. 2 2

FRONT & REAR EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
BUILDING A1

SIDES EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
BUILDING A1
12 4
FLAT CONCRETE ROOF TILES 2X6 RE/S FASCIA/BARGE
SHAPED FOAM TRIM @ WINDOWS & DOORS W.I. RAILING

FOAM TRIM
SIM. STONE VENEER

EXTERIOR PLASTER
FOAM TRIM 9'-1" 9'-1" 7'-6" 7'-6" 3'-0" T.O.SLAB
T.O.TRIM
T.O.PLATE
T.O.SHTG.

T.O.WDO. T.O.PLATE
T.O.WDO 3'-6" T.O.GUARD
FLAT CONCRETE ROOF TILES 2X6 RE/S FASCIA/BARGE

EXTERIOR PLASTER

EXTERIOR PLASTER
FOAM TRIM 9'-1" 9'-1" 7'-6" 7'-6" 3'-0" T.O.SLAB
T.O.TRIM
T.O.PLATE
T.O.SHTG.

T.O.WDO. T.O.PLATE
T.O.WDO 3'-6" T.O.GUARD
SHAPED FOAM TRIM @ WINDOWS & DOORS W.I. RAILING

FOAM TRIM

SHUTTERS

SIMULATED STONE VENEER

FOAM TRIM
12"X12" REVEAL W/ FOAM TRIM ELSINORE APARTMENTS RIDGE 4:12 4:12RIDGE RIDGE 4:12 4:12
4:12
4:12 VALLEY VALLEY VALLEY VALLEY 4:12 HIP HIP
4:12 HIP HIP 4:12
4:12
ROOF OUTLINE BUILDING OUTLINE CONCRETE 'S' TILE · ROOF MATERIAL: CONCRETE "S" TILE · ROOF PITCH: 4:12 · ROOF OVERHANG: FASCIA: 12" BARGE : 12" 28'-10" BLDG HEIGHT

UP UP LANDING

UP UP LANDING

COVERED
PATIO

COVERED
PATIO

COVERED
PATIO

LANDING

LANDING

UP UP LANDING

LANDING
UP UP

COVERED

BALCONY

COVERED

BALCONY COVEREDBALCONY
12 4

FIX FIX
Section 2.0
Project Description
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 26 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis This page intentionally left blank.

Not to scale
FIGURE 4C:Conceptual FloorPlans
Riverside Drive Apartments Project, City of Lake Elsinore Source: MichaelMcHale,Architect,2024. BLDG. TYPE A2
2 STORY

FLOOR PLANS,

ROOF PLAN &

EXTERIOR

ELEVATIONS
12 4
12 4 1ST FLOOR PLAN
BUILDING A2
2ND FLOOR PLAN
BUILDING A2

ROOF PLAN
BUILDING A2
58'-4" 2'-5" 53'-6" 2'-5" 26'-8" 2" 26'-8" 75'-6" 6'-6" 62'-6" 6'-6" 31'-2" 2" 31'-2" 58'-4" 2'-5" 53'-6" 2'-5" 26'-8" 2" 26'-8" 75'-6" 6'-6" 62'-6" 6'-6" 31'-2" 2" 31'-2" PLAN 1 PLAN 1R
PLAN 1R PLAN 1

UTILITY CLOSET
PLAN 1 PLAN 1R
PLAN 1R PLAN 1

UTILITY CLOSET

BUILDING SUMMARY
1ST FLOOR: DWELLING UNITS: 2,920 S.F. COVERED PATIOS: 380 S.F. STAIRS: 182 S.F. UTILITY: 68 S.F. 2ND FLOOR: DWELLING UNITS: 2,920 S.F. BALCONIES: 380 S.F. LANDINGS: 137 S.F. TOTAL: DWELLING UNITS: 5,840 S.F. COVERED PATIOS: 380 S.F. BALCONIES: 380 S.F. UTILITY: 68 S.F. TOTAL NO. D.U. 8 D.U.

DWELLING UNITS SUMMARY
PLAN NO. SQ. FTG. QUANTITY BDRMS BATHS 1 730 S.F. 8 D.U. 1 1 2 1,092 S.F. 0 D.U. 2 2 9'-1" 9'-1" 7'-6" 7'-6" 3'-0" T.O.SLAB T.O.TRIM
T.O.PLATE
T.O.SHTG.

T.O.WDO. T.O.PLATE
T.O.WDO 3'-6" T.O.GUARD 9'-1" 9'-1" 7'-6" 7'-6" 3'-0" T.O.SLAB T.O.TRIM
T.O.PLATE
T.O.SHTG.

T.O.WDO. T.O.PLATE
T.O.WDO 3'-6" T.O.GUARD 4'-0" T.O.TRIM 8'-0" T.O.SGD 8'-0" T.O.SGD CONCRETE 'S' ROOF TILES 2X6 RE/S FASCIA/BARGE W.I. RAILING

FOAM TRIM
2X6 SHAPED FOAM TRIM @

DOORS & WINDOWS EXTERIOR PLASTER

FOAM TRIM
LOUVERED DOORS CONCRETE STOOP SIMULATED STONE VENEER 48" 11'-0" FLAT CONCRETE ROOF TILES 2X6 RE/S FASCIA/BARGE W.I. RAILING

FOAM TRIM

EXTERIOR PLASTER

FOAM TRIM

SIMULATED STONE VENEER

FOAM TRIM FRONT & REAR EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
BUILDING A2

SIDES EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
BUILDING A2
ELSINORE APARTMENTS RIDGE 4:12 4:12RIDGE RIDGE 4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12 VALLEY VALLEY VALLEY VALLEY 4:12 HIP HIP
4:12 HIP HIP 4:12
4:12
ROOF OUTLINE BUILDING OUTLINE CONCRETE 'S' TILE · ROOF MATERIAL: CONCRETE 'S' TILE · ROOF PITCH: 4:12 · ROOF OVERHANG: FASCIA: 12" BARGE : 12" 18"X24" REVEAL W/ FOAM TRIM

SHAPED FOAM POTSHELF CORBELS
SHAPED FOAM POTSHELF CORBELS 28'-10" BLDG HEIGHT

UP UP LANDING

UP UP LANDING

LANDING

LANDING

UP UP LANDING

LANDING
UP UP

COVERED
PATIO

COVERED
PATIO

COVERED
PATIO

COVERED
PATIO

COVERED

BALCONY COVEREDBALCONY

COVERED

BALCONY COVEREDBALCONY
12 4

FIX FIX
Section 2.0
Project Description
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 28 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis This page intentionally left blank.

Not to scale
FIGURE 4D:Conceptual FloorPlans
Riverside Drive Apartments Project, City of Lake Elsinore Source: MichaelMcHale,Architect,2024.

BUILDING SUMMARY
1ST FLOOR: DWELLING UNITS: 4,368 S.F. COVERED PATIOS: 400 S.F. STAIRS: 142 S.F. UTILITY: 68 S.F. 2ND FLOOR: DWELLING UNITS: 4,368 S.F. BALCONIES: 400 S.F. LANDINGS: 135 S.F. TOTAL: DWELLING UNITS: 8,736 S.F. COVERED PATIOS: 400 S.F. BALCONIES: 400 S.F. UTILITY: 68 S.F. TOTAL NO. D.U. 8 D.U.

DWELLING UNITS SUMMARY
PLAN NO. SQ. FTG. QUANTITY BDRMS BATHS 1 730 S.F. 0 D.U. 1 1 2 1,092 S.F. 8 D.U. 2 2 BLDG. TYPE B1
2 STORY

FLOOR PLANS,

ROOF PLAN &

EXTERIOR

ELEVATIONS
1ST FLOOR PLAN
BUILDING B1
2ND FLOOR PLAN
BUILDING B1

ROOF PLAN
BUILDING A1
77'-8" 2'-0" 73'-8" 2'-0" 36'-9" 2" 36'-9" 79'-8" 6'-6" 66'-8" 6'-6" 33'-3" 2" 33'-3"77'-8" 2'-0" 73'-8" 2'-0" 36'-9" 2" 36'-9" 79'-8" 6'-6" 66'-8" 6'-6" 33'-3" 2" 33'-3" PLAN 2 PLAN 2R
PLAN 2R PLAN 2

UTILITY CLOSET
UTILITY CLOSET RIDGE 4:12
RIDGE RIDGE 4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12 4:12 4:12 VALLEY VALLEY VALLEY VALLEY 12 4
12 4 9'-1" 9'-1" 7'-6" 7'-6" 3'-0" T.O.SLAB
T.O.TRIM
T.O.PLATE
T.O.SHTG.

T.O.WDO. T.O.PLATE
T.O.WDO 3'-6" T.O.GUARD4'-0" T.O.TRIM 8'-0" T.O.SGD 8'-0" T.O.SGD 9'-1" 9'-1" 7'-6" 7'-6" 3'-0" T.O.SLAB T.O.TRIM
T.O.PLATE
T.O.SHTG.

T.O.WDO. T.O.PLATE
T.O.WDO 3'-6" T.O.GUARD 48" 11'-0"
FLAT CONCRETE ROOF TILES 2X6 RE/S FASCIA/BARGE

SHUTTERS
SHAPED FOAM TRIM @ WINDOWS & DOORS W.I. RAILING

FOAM TRIM

EXTERIOR PLASTER

FOAM TRIM
SHUTTERS EXTERIOR PLASTER 12" SQ. REVEAL W/ SIMULATED STONE VENEER

FOAM TRIM
FLAT CONCRETE ROOF TILES 2X6 RE/S FASCIA/BARGE W.I. RAILING

FOAM TRIM
2X6 SHAPED FOAM TRIM @

DOORS & WINDOWS EXTERIOR PLASTER

FOAM TRIM

LOUVERED DOORS CONCRETE STOOP SIMULATED STONE VENEER

ROOF OUTLINE BUILDING OUTLINE

FLAT CONCRETE TILE

ELSINORE APARTMENTS

SIDES EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
BUILDING B1

FRONT & REAR EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
BUILDING B1 · ROOF MATERIAL: FLAT CONCRETE TILE · ROOF PITCH: 4:12 · ROOF OVERHANG: FASCIA: 12" BARGE : 12" HIP HIP HIP HIP 4:12
4:12 33'-2" BLDG HEIGHT

COVERED
PATIO

COVERED

BALCONY COVERED
PATIO

COVERED
PATIO

COVERED
PATIO

COVERED

BALCONY

COVERED

BALCONY COVEREDBALCONY
DN

LANDING DN

LANDING
DN

DN LANDING

LANDING

UP UP LANDING

UP UP LANDING
TRIM
FIX
TRIM
FIX
Section 2.0
Project Description
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 30 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis This page intentionally left blank.

Not to scale
FIGURE 4E:Conceptual FloorPlans
Riverside Drive Apartments Project, City of Lake Elsinore Source: MichaelMcHale,Architect,2024.

BUILDING SUMMARY
1ST FLOOR: DWELLING UNITS: 4,368 S.F. COVERED PATIOS: 240 S.F. STAIRS: 142 S.F. UTILITY: 68 S.F. 2ND FLOOR: DWELLING UNITS: 4368 S.F. BALCONIES: 240 S.F. LANDINGS: 135 S.F. TOTAL: DWELLING UNITS: 8,736 S.F. COVERED PATIOS: 240 S.F. BALCONIES: 240 S.F.. UTILITY: 68 S.F. TOTAL NO. D.U. 8 D.U.

DWELLING UNITS SUMMARY
PLAN NO. SQ. FTG. QUANTITY BDRMS BATHS 1 730 S.F. 0 D.U. 1 1 2 1,092 S.F. 8 D.U. 2 2 BLDG. TYPE B2
2 STORY

FLOOR PLANS,

ROOF PLAN &

EXTERIOR

ELEVATIONS
1ST FLOOR PLAN
BUILDING B2
2ND FLOOR PLAN
BUILDING B2

ROOF PLAN
BUILDING B2
77'-8" 2'-0" 73'-8" 2'-0" 36'-9" 2" 36'-9" 79'-8" 6'-6" 66'-8" 6'-6" 33'-3" 2" 33'-3"77'-8" 2'-0" 73'-8" 2'-0" 36'-9" 2" 36'-9" 79'-8" 6'-6" 66'-8" 6'-6" 33'-3" 2" 33'-3" PLAN 2 PLAN 2R
PLAN 2R PLAN 2

UTILITY CLOSET

UTILITY CLOSET

COVERED
PATIO

COVERED
BALCONY RIDGE 4:12
RIDGE RIDGE 4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12 4:12 4:12 VALLEY VALLEY VALLEY VALLEY HIP HIP HIP HIP

SIDES EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
BUILDING B2

FRONT & REAR EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
BUILDING B2
12 4
12 4
2X6 RE/S FASCIA/BARGE W.I. RAILING

FOAM TRIM
2X6 SHAPED FOAM TRIM @

DOORS & WINDOWS EXTERIOR PLASTER

LOUVERED DOORS CONCRETE STOOP SIMULATED STONE VENEER

FOAM TRIM
LOW PROFILE "S" CONCRETE ROOF TILES 2X6 RE/S FASCIA/BARGE SHAPED FOAM TRIM @ WINDOWS & DOORS W.I. RAILING

FOAM TRIM

EXTERIOR PLASTER

EXTERIOR PLASTER

FOAM TRIM

FOAM POTSHELF W/ CORBELS

FOAM POTSHELF W/ CORBELS
18"X24" REVEAL W/ SIMULATED STONE VENEER
FOAM TRIM 9'-1" 9'-1" 7'-6" 7'-6" 3'-0" T.O.SLAB
T.O.TRIM
T.O.PLATE
T.O.SHTG.

T.O.WDO. T.O.PLATE
T.O.WDO 3'-6" T.O.GUARD 48" 11'-6"
12"X18" REVEAL W/ FOAM TRIM
FOAM TRIM 9'-1" 9'-1" 7'-6" 7'-6" 3'-0" T.O.SLAB
T.O.TRIM
T.O.PLATE
T.O.SHTG.

T.O.WDO. T.O.PLATE
T.O.WDO 3'-6" T.O.GUARD 4'-0" T.O.TRIM 8'-0" T.O.SGD 8'-0" T.O.SGD LOW PROFILE "S" CONCRETE ROOF TILES
ROOF OUTLINE BUILDING OUTLINE CONCRETE "S" TILE
ELSINORE APARTMENTS · ROOF MATERIAL: CONCRETE "S" TILE · ROOF PITCH: 4:12 · ROOF OVERHANG: FASCIA: 12" BARGE : 12" 4:12 4:12 33'-2" BLDG HEIGHT

COVERED
PATIO

COVERED
PATIO

COVERED
PATIO
DN

LANDING DN

LANDING
DN

DN LANDING

LANDING

UP UP LANDING

UP UP LANDING

COVERED

BALCONY

COVERED

BALCONY COVEREDBALCONY

FIX FIX
Section 2.0
Project Description
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 32 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis This page intentionally left blank.

Not to scale
FIGURE 4F:Conceptual FloorPlans
Riverside Drive Apartments Project, City of Lake Elsinore Source: MichaelMcHale,Architect,2024. CLUBHOUSE

FLOOR PLAN
& ROOF PLAN ELSINORE APARTMENTS
ROOF PLAN · ROOF MATERIAL: CONCRETE "S" TILE · ROOF PITCH: 4:12 · ROOF OVERHANG: FASCIA: 12" BARGE : 12" RIDGE RIDGE RIDGE RIDGE HIPHIP HIP HIP HIP HIP HIP VALLEY VALLEY VALLEY VALLEY HIP 4:12 4:12 4:12
4:12 4:12 4:12 4:12
4:12
4:12 4:12
LOW PROFILE "S" CONCRETE TILE GUTTER & DOWNSPOUT
ROOF OUTLINE BUILDING OUTLINE D.S.

D.S.

D.S.

D.S.
50'-11 1/2"
50'-11 1/2" 30'-0" 20'-11 1/2"
16'-0" 14'-0" 16'-0" 4'-11 1/2" 50'-6 1/2" 11'-6 1/2" 4'-0" 5'-0" 30'-0" 14'-1" 50'-6" 32'-5" 4'-0" LANAI 10' CEILING FITNESS
10' CEILING RECEPTION 10' CEILING

LEASING
10' CEILING MAIL ROOM 10' CEILING COVERED ENTRY
10' CEILING

UNISEX UNISEX

UTILITY
WORK
ROOM 10' CEILING
D.F. COFFEE ASST. BAR
CLUBHOUSE: 1,460 S.F.

MAIL ROOM: 182 S.F.

LANAI: 490 S.F.

FLOOR PLAN
Section 2.0
Project Description
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 34 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis This page intentionally left blank.

Not to scale
FIGURE 5A: Preliminary Grading Plan
Riverside Drive Apartments Project, City of Lake Elsinore Source: Blue Engineering, 2024. TEL CATV

CATV TEL TEL CATV TEL CATV

CATV TEL

CATV TEL TEL CATV
N37°32'54"E
NO

PARKING NO

PARKING
VAN
ACCESSIBLE E53' E64' E7 12'
Section 2.0
Project Description
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 36 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis This page intentionally left blank.

Not to scale
FIGURE 5B: Preliminary Grading Plan
Riverside Drive Apartments Project, City of Lake Elsinore Source: Blue Engineering, 2024.

CATV TEL

CATV TEL TEL CATV

CATV TEL

CATV TEL
NO

PARKING
VAN

ACCESSIBLE

EVCS EVCS ACCESSIBLE VAN
NO

PARKING ACCESSIBLE VAN NO PARKING
3' E5
3' E5
4' E6 E66'
4' E6
12' E7
Section 2.0
Project Description
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 38 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis This page intentionally left blank.

Not to scale
FIGURE6: Conceptual Utility Plan
Riverside Drive Apartments Project, City of Lake Elsinore Source: Blue Engineering, 2024. E2
E4 NO PARKING VAN ACCESSIBLE EVCS EVCS NO PARKING NO PARKING ACCESSIBLE VAN ACCESSIBLE VAN NO PARKING

ACCESSIBLE VAN NO

PARKING

CATV TEL TEL CATV TEL CATV TEL CATV

CATV TEL

CATV TEL TEL CATV

CATV TEL TEL CATV TEL CATV

TEL CATV TEL CATV
Section 2.0
Project Description
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 40 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis This page intentionally left blank.

Not to scale
FIGURE7: Conceptual Landscape Plan
Riverside Drive Apartments Project, City of Lake Elsinore Source: c scape creative, 2024.

LIMIT OF WORK
LIMIT OF WORK LIMIT OF WORK LIMIT OF WORK PL PL PL PL 5' 10' MIN. 4'-6" 5' 5'-3" 10' 10' 30' O.C. TYP.
30' O.C. TYP.
30'
10' MIN.
35' 6' 30' O.C. TYP. NO PARKING VAN
NO

PARKING
VAN

ACCESSIBLE ACCESSIBLE EVCS EVCS NO PARKING NO PARKING NO PARKING VAN ACCESSIBLE VAN ACCESSIBLE VAN ACCESSIBLE 30'

POOL / SPA AREA

BARBECUE PICNIC AREA AT POOL AREA

FIRE PIT

SITE FURNITURE
ENHANCED PAVERS RIVERSIDE DRIVE APARTMENTS SCALE: 1" = 20' - 0" RIVERSIDE DRIVE

EXISTING

RESIDENTIAL AREA

EXISTING

RESIDENTIAL AREA

EXISTING DRAINAGE CHANNEL
LEGEND

1. PLANTING AREA

2. NATURAL GRAY CONCRETE PAVING

3. ENHANCED ACCENT PAVING W/ CONCRETE BANDING

4. LARGE CANOPY TREE (24" BOX MIN.) 5. SMALL ACCENT TREE (24" BOX MIN.) 6. POCKET PICNIC AREAS W/ D.G. PAVING, PICNIC TABLE, AND FREESTANDING GRILL

7. LARGE ACCENT TREES (36" BOX MIN.) 8. PROPERTY LINE

9. ASPHALT DRIVEWAY / PARKING STALLS

10. PATIO SPACE (1ST FLOOR ONLY) W/ 42"HT. MASONRY WALL SURROUNDINGS

11. TRASH ENCLOSURE LOCATIONS PER ARCHITECT'S PLANS

12. TUBULAR STEEL FENCING, 6'HT. 13. SECONDARY EMERGENCY STEEL GATES W/ A KNOX RAPID ENTER SYSTEM

14. BACKGROUND TREES (24" BOX) 15. VERTICAL FOUNDATION TREES (15 GAL. MIN.) 16. PARKING STALLS W/ CARPORT PER ARCHITECT'S PLANS

17. OPEN LAWN AREA OR DECOMPOSED GRANITE

18. ACCENT ONSITE PALM TREES

19. LEDGE STONE CALL BOX LOCATION

20. STONE PROJECT ID SIGNAGE WALL LOCATION

21. BENCH SEATING AND TRASH RECEPTACLE

22. TABLE SET / LOUNGE CHAIRS

23. COLORED CONCRETE POOL DECK, 2 COLORS, CHECKERBOARD PATTERNED

24. BARBECUE COUNTER W/ SHADE TRELLIS

25. LOW STONE SEAT WALLS

26. GATED ENTRY AREA - TUBULAR STEEL TELESCOPIC

SLIDING GATES W/ FULL HEIGHT LEDGE STONE WALL AND
PILASTERS. GATES SHALL HAVE A KNOX RAPID ENTER
SYSTEM AND AN INFRARED GATE OPENER. 27. RIVERSIDE DRIVE STREET TREES

28. POOL ENTRY GATE W/ WOOD OR STEEL OVERHEAD

29. POOL AREA STEEL FENCING

30. SWIMMING POOL

31. SPA - 12' DIA. 32. GAS FIRE PIT, ROUND

33. MASONRY BUILT-IN SEATING

34. PROPERTY SPLIT-FACE CMU BLOCK WALL

35. RIVERSIDE DRIVE PROPERTY BLOCK WALL, 8'HT. 36. STONE PILASTER, 8'-8"HT. 37. STONE PILASTER, 6'-8"HT. 38. CITY PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY LANDSCAPE AREAS - ALL

LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION TO BE INSTALLED PER CITY
STANDARD DRAWING DETAILS. 39. SPLIT-FACE CMU BLOCK PILASTER BUILDING 11 BUILDING 12 BUILDING 9 BUILDING 2
BUILDING 10 BUILDING 8 BUILDING 7 BUILDING 6 BUILDING 5 BUILDING 4 BUILDING 1
BUILDING 3

CLUBHOUSE
12 16 7
17 1 2
11 9 6
17 158
14 34 2
205
18 2
26 19
26 12
13 8 9 11
34 16
15 5
17 21
25 31 28
33 32 23 30 28
24 22
29 18 1
10 PROJECT ID WALL 3

OPEN LAWN AREA
29 1
14 27
36 35
14 4
10 10 7 2 6 6 RIGHT OF WAY 36
35 36 35
38 38
39 39
39 Section 2.0
Project Description
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 42 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis This page intentionally left blank.

Not to scale
FIGURE8: Conceptual Wall/FenceandEntryDesign Plan
Riverside Drive Apartments Project, City of Lake Elsinore Source: c scape creative, 2024.

RIVERSIDE DRIVE APARTMENTS 6' 8' - RIVERSIDE DRIVE ONLY LEGEND

1. 8x4x16 PRECISION CMU BLOCK WALL CAP

2. 6x8x16 SPLIT-FACE CMU BLOCK

3. FINISH GRADE

ELEVATION VIEW
SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" NOTE: · REFER TO STRUCTURAL ENGINEER'S DETAILS & CALCULATIONS FOR ALL CONNECTIONS, FOOTING, AND REINFORCING INFORMATION. 2 1 3 SECTION VIEW
SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 6'-8" 2" 43 8" MIN. 21 LEGEND

1. CONCRETE FOOTING

2. FINISH GRADE

3. 4" PRECISION CMU

BLOCK CAP

4. 16x8x16 SPLIT-FACE CMU BLOCK
NOTE: · REFER TO STRUCTURAL ENGINEER'S DETAILS & CALCULATIONS FOR ALL CONNECTIONS, FOOTING, AND REINFORCING INFORMATION. 1. P.I.P. CONCRETE CAP - REFER TO

FINISH SCHEDULE

2. STONE VENEER - REFER TO FINISH

SCHEDULE

3. CONCRETE CURB

4. FINISH SURFACE, ENHANCED

DRIVEWAY PAVING

5. CALL BOX: PROVIDED BY OWNER. VERIFY CUTOUT DIMENSIONS AND

INSTALL PER MANUFACTURER'S

SPECIFICATIONS LEGEND
NOTE: · REFER TO STRUCTURAL ENGINEER'S DETAILS
& CALCULATIONS FOR ALL CONNECTIONS, FOOTING, AND REINFORCING INFORMATION. · GATE CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SHOP DRAWING ELECTRICAL FOR DIRECTORY KIOSK 2'-10" EQ. EQ. 7" 3"

ELEVATION VIEW
SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0"
±3' 112" TYP. 15 4 3 2 ±4'-10"

SECTION VIEW
SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0"

1. P.I.P. CONCRETE CAP

2. STONE VENEER, TO MATCH

CLUBHOUSE

3. 16x8x16 CMU COLUMN

BLOCK CONSTRUCTION

4. FINISH GRADE

5. CONCRETE FOOTING

6. COMPACTED SUBGRADE 1 112" TYP. 3" 7' - ENTRY AREA 8'-8"- RIVERSIDE DR. (REFER TO PLAN) 4 5 6 23 16"SQ. 8" MIN.

LEGEND
NOTE: · REFER TO STRUCTURAL ENGINEER'S DETAILS & CALCULATIONS FOR ALL CONNECTIONS, FOOTING, AND REINFORCING INFORMATION.
±22"SQ. SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" ELEVATION VIEW

SECTION VIEW
SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0"
8' O.C. 412"O.C. MAX. 2"MAX. CLEAR 6' 2"MAX. CLEAR 3" MIN. 1% 21349 6 785 231496 LEGEND

1. 2"SQ. TUBULAR STEEL POST

2. 112"SQ. TUBULAR STEEL TOP RAIL

3. 5 8"SQ. TUBULAR STEEL PICKETS @ 4 12" MAXIMUM O.C. 4. 112"SQ. TUBULAR STEEL BOTTOM RAIL

5. COMPACTED SUBGRADE

6. FINISH GRADE

7. SINK POST INTO FOOTING

8. CONCRETE FOOTING

9. 6"W. CONCRETE CURB AT GRADE, CONTINUOUS, FOR POOL ENCLOSURE FENCE ONLY NOTES: · REFER TO STRUCTURAL ENGINEER'S DETAILS
& CALCULATIONS FOR ALL CONNECTIONS, FOOTING, AND REINFORCING INFORMATION. · ALL WELDS TO BE CONTINUOUS AND GROUND SMOOTH. · ALL EXPOSED SURFACES SHALL RECEIVE
TWO (2) COATS MOISTURE-PROOF PRIMER
AND TWO (2) FINISH COATS - REFER TO FINISH
SCHEDULE FOR COLOR. · ALL CONNECTORS, FASTENERS AND OTHER HARDWARE TO BE HOT DIPPED GALVANIZED. · PICKETS AND INTERMEDIATE RAILINGS SHALL BE PROVIDED SUCH THAT A 4-INCH

DIAMETER SPHERE CANNOT PASS THROUGH

ANY OPENING STONE PILASTER SPLIT FACE CMU BLOCK WALL TUBULAR STEEL FENCING STONE CALLBOX

ENTRY AREA AT RIVERSIDE DRIVE

VEHICULAR / PEDESTRIAN ENTRY GATE
8'-8" HT. 8' HT. 7' HT.

PROJECT ID WALL CONCEPT IMAGES
(REFERENCE ONLY)
SIGNAGE LETTERING DESIGN IS CONCEPTUAL AND IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE. 6'-8" HT. SPLIT FACE CMU BLOCK PILASTER 6' HT.

Section 2.0
Project Description
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 44 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis This page intentionally left blank.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 45 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis

3. ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
This section evaluates the potential environmental effects of the Project using the environmental checklist topics/questions from the State CEQA Guidelines as amended.

3.1 Aesthetics
Environmental Impact Issues
Prior EIR Impact
Determination
Significant
peculiar impact
with uniform
measures
incorporated?
Potentially
significant
impact not
identified in
prior EIR?
New significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
No new
information
indicating a
substantial
increase in
impact severity?
The Lake Elsinore GP would result in a significant impact to aesthetics if it would:

Criterion 1: Have a substantial
adverse effect on a scenic vista?
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 2: Substantially
damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to
trees, and rock outcroppings and
historic buildings within a scenic
highway?
Less Than
Significant
Criterion 3: Substantially
degrade the existing visual
character or quality of public
views of the site and its
surroundings.

Less Than
Significant
Criterion 4: Create a new source
of substantial light and glare
which would adversely affect
day or nighttime views in the
area?
Less Than
Significant
Discussion
City’s aesthetic setting is characterized by urbanized development within varied topographical features and interspersed with undeveloped natural areas. The trees and bushes that surround the lake and nearby mountains and hillsides provide a natural screen from small areas of development. Some structures related to residential, commercial, and light industrial land uses surround the lake. Additionally, the Santa Ana mountains on the southwest shore are visible as a backdrop from the lake, with rolling hills visible along the northeastern borders, and a valley that expands from the north to the south. The varied topography of the surrounding area provides several views of the lake from many public and private vantage points. Scenic resources within and surrounding the City include the lake, portions of the Cleveland National Forest, rugged hillside land, distant mountains and ridgelines, rocky outcroppings, streams, vacant land with native vegetation, and parkland.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 46 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis Based on the topography of the City, most views of the lake are from a high elevation and are not easily obscured by development. According to the Lake Elsinore GP, the undeveloped land surrounding the lake that is designated for residential uses would significantly alter visual character from the standpoint of a viewer looking toward the lake. However, the Lake Elsinore GP has implemented goals that would provide and maintain a natural and built environment that is visually pleasing to City residents and visitors, which would preserve the character of the lake itself. Specifically, the policies outlined in Goals 10 and 11 of the Lake Elsinore GP specifically discourage development that blocks or substantially alters public views of Lake Elsinore and local ridgelines, protect views of the lake, require new development and redevelopment to incorporate public views of the lake, and require design guidelines and landscaping to maintain the existing visual character of the lake. The Lake Elsinore GP determined that with implementation of these goals and policies of the Lake Elsinore GP, potential impacts on the visual quality of views of the area surrounding the lake would be reduced to a less than significant level.

Additionally, the Lake Elsinore Draft EIR determined that the Lake View District would help to preserve the visual quality of the district through specific design standards.

The California Department of Transportation (CalTrans) currently identifies both Interstate 15 (I-15) and State Route 74 (SR-74) as eligible for listing as state scenic highways, but they are not officially designated as such.4 While no designated scenic highways are located within view of the Project site, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that with implementation of the Lake Elsinore GP policies 9.1-9.6, 10.1-10.6, 11.1-11.3, and 12.1-12.3, potential impacts on the visual quality of views from I-15 and SR-74 would be less than significant.

The Project site does not contain significant visual landform features such as rock outcroppings or mountains. The existing non-native and invasive trees on site will be removed and replaced with new native and non-invasive trees and plants that will enhance the existing visual character of the Project site; refer to Figure 7 for conceptual landscape design. The Project site consists of vacant and previously disturbed land.

The Project site is generally flat and bordered by existing development including, multi-family residential uses, single-family residential, and campground and recreation uses. The proposed development would be visible from existing development adjacent to and near the Project site.

The two-story multi-family residential development would be constructed on a vacant site surrounded by existing residential development and would provide additional residential housing units once completed.

The Project would include the use of building materials and colors that are compatible with surrounding land uses. Landscaping would be provided bordering the Project site. As such, Project implementation would not significantly alter the existing visual character of the Project site. 4 CalTrans. 2018. https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057116f1aacaa. Accessed September 2024.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 47 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis Light-sensitive uses identified within the Lake Elsinore GP area include residents of multi-family apartments and single-family residences surrounding the entirety of the Project site. Sensitive receptors in these areas would potentially be subject to lighting impacts resulting from new sources of decorative lighting, parking lot lighting, or outdoor security lighting associated with new development. New sources of light associated with the Project would include outdoor lighting, which would be angled downward to prevent light spillage onto adjacent land uses. Additionally, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that with the implementation of Lake Elsinore GP Policy 12.2, which prevents development that entails excessive light and glare visible from private and public viewpoints, potential impacts from light and glare associated with new development would be less than significant.

The Project’s lighting specifications would be reviewed by the City during the building permit review process. The building permit review would ensure that the proposed lighting meets City building code requirements regarding types of outdoor illumination and light fixture shielding to prevent building spillover.

With compliance to applicable Lake Elsinore GP Policies and City Building Code requirements, the Project would have a less than significant impacts to aesthetic resources within the City. As such, the Project would be consistent with the findings of the Lake Elsinore GP EIR.

Project Mitigation Measures
No Project-specific mitigation measures are required.

Lake Elsinore General Plan Applicable Policies
Policy 10.1 For new developments and redevelopments, encourage the maintenance and incorporation of existing mature trees and other substantial vegetation on the site, whether naturally-occurring, or planted into the landscape design.

Policy 10.3 Where appropriate, encourage the new planting of native and/or non-invasive ornamental plants to enhance the scenic setting of public and private lands.

Policy 10.6 Coordinate with agencies to screen, landscape, and otherwise obscure or integrate public utility facilities, including electric power substations, domestic water and irrigation wells, switching, and control facilities.

Policy 11.3 Encourage new development and redevelopment to incorporate views of Lake Elsinore from roadways and other public spaces that provide residents and tourists with scenic vistas to the water, marinas, and lakeshore activities.

Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR Applicable Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 48 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis Conclusion
No new impacts relative to adverse aesthetic impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR would occur. With regard to PRC Section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the Project would not result in any new impacts, or increase previously identified impact’s severity, with respect to aesthetic resources.

Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Lake Elsinore GP EIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 49 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis

3.2 Air Quality
Environmental Impact Issues
Prior EIR Impact
Determination
Significant
peculiar impact
with uniform
measures
incorporated?
Potentially
significant
impact not
identified in
prior EIR?
New significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
No new
information
indicating a
substantial
increase in
impact severity?
The Lake Elsinore GP would result in a significant impact to air quality if it would:

Criterion 1: Conflict with or
obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan.

Significant and
Unavoidable
Criterion 2: Violate any air
quality standard or contribute
significantly to an existing or
projected air quality violation.

Significant and
Unavoidable
Criterion 3: Result in a
cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant
that the region is nonattainment
under an applicable federal or
State ambient air quality
standard (including releasing
emissions that exceed
quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors).

Significant and
Unavoidable
Criterion 4: Expose sensitive
receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations.

Significant and
Unavoidable
Criterion 5: Create
objectionable odors affecting a
substantial number of people.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
This section incorporates the findings of the combined Air Quality (AQ) and Greenhouse Gases (GHG) Assessment (2024; prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc.) and is included as Appendix A.

Discussion
The Lake Elsinore GP EIR expects short term impacts regarding air quality as a result on constructionrelated activities from individual development projects. Additionally, buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP would result in long-term operational emissions that would exceed SCAQMD thresholds. The Lake Elsinore GP EIR also determined that buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants in which the region is in nonattainment under SCAQMD regulations for O3, PM2.5, and PM10. While the impacts to air quality would remain significant and unavoidable, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR identified mitigation measures to reduce the overall impacts resulting from implementation of the Lake Elsinore GP. These mitigation measures include MM Air Quality 1 through MM Air Quality 3, which would serve to reduce construction and operation related impacts of individual Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 50 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis development projects by requiring development projects to demonstrate their avoidance of significant impacts on air quality from associated activities compliance with regulatory requirements and the Lake Elsinore GP goals and policies.

Further, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that new development under the Lake Elsinore GP would result in exposure of sensitive receptors to air pollutants, and impacts would be significant and unavoidable. However, to reduce impacts to the greatest extent feasible, MM Air Quality 5 would require individual development projects to demonstrate avoidance of significant impacts on air quality emissions associated with sensitive land uses to reduce impacts to potential nearby sensitive receptors.

Lastly, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR identified a potential for buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP to create objectionable odors that would affect a substantial number of people. However, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR noted that all future development projects would be subject to SCAQMD Rule 402 governing odor emissions. To further reduce potential impacts, MM Air Quality 6 would require individual development projects to evaluate and determine potential for creating objectionable odors and implement mitigation measures to reduce impacts when necessary. Through the compliance with SCAQMD Rule 402 and implementation of MM Air Quality 6, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that implementation of the Lake Elsinore GP would have a less than significant impact with respect to objectionable odors.

According to the AQ Assessment, the Project would have a less than significant impact with respect to air quality as a result of Project implementation and no mitigation is required. The AQ Assessment determined that the Project would not conflict with the existing SCAQMD AQMP, as the Project would not exceed regional or localized significance thresholds or assumptions in the AQMP throughout the Project buildout phase. Further, the Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in any criteria pollutants for which the region is in nonattainment.

The AQ Assessment evaluated potential Project impacts to sensitive receptors through a localized significance threshold analysis. Based on the results of the analysis, the Project would not exceed the SCAQMD thresholds during construction and operation. As such, a less than significant impact would occur. Lastly, the AQ Assessment determined that the Project would not result in other emissions, such as those leading to odors, adversely affecting a substantial number of people because the proposed residential land use does not contain activities associated with emitting objectionable odors and construction activities would comply with SCAQMD Rule 402 to reduce construction related impacts.

Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

While no Project-specific mitigation measures are required for Project implementation, the Project would still be consistent with the mitigation measures identified in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR, which require individual developments projects to demonstrate avoidance of significant impacts through implementation of applicable regulatory requirements, applicable Lake Elsinore GP goals and policies and project-specific analyses. As such, through adherence to the applicable Lake Elsinore GP goals and policies outlined below as well as through the completion of the AQ Assessment, the Project would be consistent with the findings of the Lake Elsinore GP EIR.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 51 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis Project Mitigation Measures
No Project-specific mitigation measures are required.

Lake Elsinore General Plan Applicable Policies
Policy 1.1 Continue to implement requirement identified in the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES).

Policy 14.2 Measures shall be established that aim to reduce emissions generated from City uses, community uses (community actions), and new development (City Discretionary actions).

Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR Applicable Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.

Conclusion
As determined by the AQ assessment, the Project would result in less than significant impacts with respect to air quality and no Project-specific mitigation measures are required. Further, through the completion of the AQ assessment and adherence to the applicable Lake Elsinore GP goals and policies identified above, the Project is consistent with the Lake Elsinore GP EIR. Therefore, the Project has demonstrated that impacts to air quality would be less than significant.

As such, no new impacts relative to air quality impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR would occur. With regard to PRC Section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the Project would not result in any new impacts, or increase previously identified impact’s severity, with respect to air quality. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Lake Elsinore GP EIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of significant and unavoidable.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 52 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis

3.3 Biological Resources
Environmental Impact Issues
Prior EIR Impact
Determination
Significant
peculiar impact
with uniform
measures
incorporated?
Potentially
significant
impact not
identified in
prior EIR?
New significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
No new
information
indicating a
substantial
increase in
impact severity?
A project would result in a significant impact to biological resources if it would:

Criterion 1: Have a substantial
adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a
candidate, sensitive, or special
status species in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations, or by
the CDFW or USFWS.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 2: Have a substantial
adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or
regional plans, policies,
regulations, or by the CDFW or
USFWS.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 3: Have a substantial
adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the CWA (including
but not limited to marsh, vernal
pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 4: Interfere substantially
with the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established
native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the
use of native wildlife nursery sites.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 5: Conflict with any local
policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 53 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis Environmental Impact Issues
Prior EIR Impact
Determination
Significant
peculiar impact
with uniform
measures
incorporated?
Potentially
significant
impact not
identified in
prior EIR?
New significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
No new
information
indicating a
substantial
increase in
impact severity?
A project would result in a significant impact to biological resources if it would:

Criterion 6: Conflict with the
provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Program (HCP),
Natural Community Conservation
Plan (NCCP), or other approved
local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan.

Less Than
Significant
This section incorporates the findings of the Biological Survey (2024) and Burrowing Owl Survey (2024) prepared by BioCultural LLC Environmental Consultants, which is included as Appendices B1 and B2, respectively.

Discussion
The Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP would have potentially significant impacts on sensitive, candidate, or special-status species directly, or through the habitat modifications. Further, the Lake Elsinore GP determined that future development could include the removal of existing trees and plants. However, with the incorporation of project-specific analyses of habitat impacts in accordance with the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), future development projects could reduce their impacts to special-status, sensitive, and candidate plant and wildlife species to less than significant levels.

Further, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP could result in temporary and/or permanent impacts on wetland habitats and features within the City. To reduce potential disturbance to wetland and riparian habitats, future development projects would be required to conduct project-specific environmental reviews to identify potential impacts to riparian and wetland resources and provide mitigation measures, where appropriate. The Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that future development would have a less than significant impact to riparian habitats through project-specific impact analyses and implementation of appropriate mitigation measures.

With respect to migratory wildlife species and wildlife corridors, the Lake Elsinore GP determined that individual development projects would be required to conduct pre-construction surveys to identify any existing nests on a project site. If nests are found on the site during construction, construction shall be paused and consultation with California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) shall commence. With adherence to the pre-construction surveys, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP would have a less than significant impact on migratory wildlife and wildlife corridors.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 54 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis Lastly, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP would be consistent with the MSHCP and SKR HCP. As such, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP would have a less than significant impact on adopted conservations plans, and no mitigation was required.

According to the Biological Survey, no sensitive habitats identified in the CNDDB occur on the Project site.

Additionally, one rare plant and 13 sensitive and protected wildlife species were identified as either occurring or having the potential to occur on the Project site. See Table 3.3-1 for the list of species and their potential for occurrence on the Project site.

Table 3.3-1: Special Status Species Occurrence
Species Occurrence
Cooper’s Hawk
(Accipiter cooperii) Occurs and suitable nesting and foraging habitats exist on-site Southern California Legless Lizard
(Anniella stebbinsi)
May occur but is unlikely to have established and healthy populations
Pallid Bat (Antrozous pallidus) May occur
California Glossy Snake
(Arizona elegans occidentalis)
May occur but is unlikely to have established and health populations
Burrowing Owl
(Athene cunicularia)
Does not occur on the property based on 2023 survey; may occur in the future if the property is left alone for an extended period of time
Red-diamondback Rattlesnake
(Crotalus ruber) May occur, most likely a transient through the property Monarch Butterfly
(Danaus plexipus pop. 1)
May occur but is unlikely to have established and healthy populations
San Bernardino Ringneck Snake
(Diadophis punctatus modestus) Unlikely to occur as a resident species White-tailed Kite
(Elanus leucurus) Unlikely to occur as a resident species California Horned Lark
(Eremophila alpestris actia) May occur
Western Mastiff Bat
(Eumops perotis californicus) May occur
Yuma Myotis
(Myotis yumanensis) May occur
Western Spadefoot Toad
(Spea hammondii) May occur
Smooth tarplant (Centromadia
pungens ssp. laevis) May occur
Direct impacts as a result of construction activities associated with the Project would include the permanent removal of the limited vegetation that occurs on the Project site that may function as habitat for both common and rare wildlife. Indirect impacts associated with construction of the Project include fugitive dust and increased noise levels associated with operating heavy construction equipment. Other Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 55 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis alterations made to the existing topography of the Project site during construction could also have indirect impacts on hydrological conditions, erosion and sediment transport, and establishment of nonnative plants and invasive weeds. Once operational, human presence would also contribute to direct and indirect impacts to existing plants and wildlife.

According to the Biological Survey, no riparian habitats exist within the Project site. Specially, there were no native vegetation communities located within the Project site, and the plants that dominate the Project site include non-native invasive plants and non-native ornamental plants. The identified cover types include non-native grasslands as well as developed and landscaped areas. The plant communities found within the Project are highly disturbed and widespread through the region. The Project site was not found to support special-status plant species during the time of the biological survey; therefore, removal of the disturbed vegetation existing on the Project site would be considered less than significant. While there is potential for at least one special-status plant species to occur, the smooth tarplant, no significant impacts are anticipated to occur to the smooth tarplant as a result of Project implementation. Once operational, no impacts to plant communities and habitats would occur as a result of Project operations.

Additionally, no past records were found that indicated the presence of sensitive amphibian species near the Project site. All best management practices (BMPs) required by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) would be in place and functional throughout the life of the Project to ensure materials from the site do not contaminate the Leach Canyon Channel and other outlets that connect to Lake Elsinore and suitable amphibian habitat.

Construction-related activities may potentially impact avian species such as nesting raptors, passerines, and other special-status bird species, including Cooper’s hawk and burrowing owl. The Burrowing Owl Survey determined that the Project site has the suitable habitat for burrowing owls, including portions of walls, pipes, and standpipes that exist on site from the remains of a demolished building. While suitable habitat is present on the Project site, no burrowing owls were found on the Project site during the survey.

Additionally, no indicative feathers, castings, prey remains, or owl whitewash were observed. The presence of domestic dogs and cats, as well as human disturbances further suggests the absence of burrowing owls on site.

Such construction-related activities could result in the direct loss of active nests of both common and special-status bird species or the abandonment of active nets as a result of noise and/or vibrations generated by construction-related activities. As a result, the Biological Survey recommended that preconstruction surveys be implemented to assess potential construction impacts on nesting birds within the Project site. To abide by the recommendations, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR MM Biological Resources 4 would be implemented, which states that if construction occurs between February 1 and August 31 a qualified biologist would conduct a breeding bird survey no more than thirty days prior to the start of construction to determine the presence of nests within the Project site. If nests are found on site, then the Project would also implement Lake Elsinore GP MM Biological Resources 5, which would require construction to cease and consultation with CDFW must commence prior to resuming construction, to ensure impacts to burrowing owl are less than significant. With the implementation of MM Biological Resources 4 and 5, Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 56 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis impacts to nesting birds and other special-status species birds potentially occurring within the Project site would be less than significant.

According to the Biological Survey, there was no indication that the site is located within an established core and linkage for wildlife movement since the site is surrounded entirely by development. The Leach Canyon Channel may serve to funnel wildlife to and from Lake Elsinore, but since no Project activities are proposed to occur within the channel, no impacts are anticipated.

Through compliance with the Lake Elsinore GP EIR mitigation measures, the Project would not result in adverse impacts to biological resources. As such, the Project would be consistent with the findings of the Lake Elsinore GP EIR and a less than significant impact would occur.

Project Mitigation Measures
No Project-specific mitigation measures are required.

Lake Elsinore General Plan Applicable Policies
Policy 1.4 Encourage revegetation with native plants compatible with natural surrounding habitat where soils have been disturbed during construction, and discourage plants identified in the MSHCP as unsuitable for conservation areas.

Policy 2.1 Biological resource analyses of proposed projects shall include discussion of potential impacts to any plant or wildlife species that is officially listed as threatened or endangered by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and/or the California Department of Fish and Game but not covered by the MSHCP.

Lake Elsinore General Plan Applicable EIR Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measures identified in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR apply to the Project:

MM Biological Resources 4 Not more than thirty days prior to construction activities that occur between February 1 and August 15 of any year, surveys for nesting bird species shall be conducted by a qualified biologist selected by the developer and approved by the City. If no active avian nests are identified on or within 250 feet of the limits of the construction area, up to the limits of the project site, no further mitigation is necessary. Alternatively, to avoid impacts, the City may allow individual projects the option of beginning construction after the previous breeding season for bird species has ended (after August 15) and before the next breeding season begins (before February 15).

MM Biological Resources 5 If active nests for avian species are found within the construction footprint of any future project, construction activities shall be delayed Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 57 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis within a 250-foot buffer zone surrounding nests of other special-status avian species until the young have fledged. This buffer zone shall not extend beyond the project site. No action other than avoidance shall be taken without CDFG consultation.

Conclusion
The Project would incorporate the Lake Elsinore GP EIR MM Biological Resources 4 and 5 to reduce potential impacts to valuable biological resources such as nesting birds, protected and special-status amphibians, and burrowing owls. Further, through the completion of a Biological Survey and Burrowing Owl Survey, the Project is consistent with the Lake Elsinore GP, which requires individual development projects to demonstrate impacts to biological resources. With the compliance of the Lake Elsinore GP EIR mitigation measures and adherence to policies related to biological resources as outlined in the Lake Elsinore GP, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that impacts to biological resources resulting from implementation of the Lake Elsinore GP, would be less than significant.

No new impacts relative to biological resources impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR would occur. With regard to PRC Section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the Project would not result in any new impacts, or increase previously identified impact’s severity, with respect to air quality. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Lake Elsinore GP EIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 58 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis This page intentionally left blank.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 59 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis

3.4 Cultural Resources and Paleontological Resources
Environmental Impact Issues
Prior EIR Impact
Determination
Significant
peculiar impact
with uniform
measures
incorporated?
Potentially
significant
impact not
identified in
prior EIR?
New significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
No new
information
indicating a
substantial
increase in
impact severity?
The Lake Elsinore GP would result in a significant impact to cultural and paleontological resources if it would:

Criterion 1: Cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance
of a historical resource as defined
in California Code of Regulations,
Section 15064.5.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 2: Cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance
of an important archaeological
resource pursuant to California
Code of Regulations, Section
15064.5
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 3: Directly or indirectly
destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique
geological feature.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 4: Disturb any human
remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
This section incorporates the findings of the Cultural Resources Assessment (2023; revised 2024) and prepared by BioCultural LLC Environmental Consultants, and the findings of the Paleontological Resource Assessment (2023) prepared by PaleoWest, LLC, which is included as Appendix C1 (Confidential) and Appendix C2, respectively.

Discussion
According to the Cultural Resources Assessment, no previously recorded cultural resources were identified during the records search for within the Project site. However, within the 0.25-mile buffer surrounding the Project site, two previously recorded cultural resources were identified.

During the intensive pedestrian survey that was conducted on August 17, 2023, one newly identified historical structural foundation site was identified within the Project site. The newly identified cultural resource site was evaluated under California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) eligibility criteria to determine whether or not it constitutes a historical resource under CEQA. Following the evaluation, it was determined that the newly recorded historical site was found not eligible for the CRHR under any criteria for listing on the CRHR. However, the Cultural Resources Assessment has recommended archaeological monitoring as a mitigation measure to protect potential unknown subsurface archaeological, cultural, Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 60 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis and/or tribal cultural resources. Therefore, as part of the City’s Standard conditions of Approval (COAs), the Project would abide by COA CUL-1, COA CUL-2, and COA CUL-3. Considering that the Lake Elsinore GP EIR has also identified MM Cultural /Paleontological Resources 2-8 that requires all development Projects to implement archaeological monitoring and proper protocol for the inadvertent archaeological and human remain discoveries, COA CUL-1 through CUL-3 as recommended in the CRA would be consistent with the Lake Elsinore GP, and no new Project-specific mitigation measures are required. With the implementation of the Lake Elsinore GP MM Cultural/Paleontological Resources 2-8, the Project would have less than significant impacts to cultural resources that may occur within the Project site. As previously mentioned, a Paleontological Resource Assessment was conducted for the Project to identify any geological units or paleontological resources as well as the paleontological sensitivity of any geological units to assess how such resources may be impacted as a result of Project development.

Based on the Western Science Center (WSC) records search, no previously recorded significant vertebrate fossil localities were identified within the Project site or immediate vicinity. Additionally, while the alluvial deposits within the Project site have a high preservation potential, any sediments that could be encountered would be far too young, meaning the Project site has low sensitivity for paleontological resources. Based on the results of the records search and the low paleontological sensitivity of the Project site, the Paleontological Resource Assessment determined that no unique geological units or significant paleontological resource exist or have the potential to be aversely impacts by Project development, and a less than significant impact would occur. Similarly, Figure 3.2-3 of the Lake Elsinore GP EIR identified the site as having low sensitivity for paleontological resources.5 The Lake Elsinore GP EIR assesses potential impacts to historical and archaeological resources in each planning district. The Project site is within the Lake View Planning District, and the Lake Elsinore GP EIR did not identify potential impacts to historical resources within the Lake View Planning District. However, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR did determine that the Lake View Planning District could have potential impacts to archaeological sites. Further, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR evaluated that with the incorporation of Cultural Resources Policies 7.1-7.5, which requires future development projects to assess potential project-specific impacts to archaeological resources, consultation with Native American tribes, and implementation of mitigation measures, if necessary, would reduce impacts to archaeological resources to less than significant levels. Further, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR identified MM Cultural/Paleontological Resources 3-8, to further reduce potential impacts to cultural resources. With the adherence to the aforementioned Cultural Resources Policies and cultural resources mitigation measures, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that impacts to cultural resources as a result of implementation of the Lake Elsinore GP would be less than significant.

Through compliance with the Lake Elsinore GP EIR mitigation measures and policies, the Project would not result in adverse impacts to cultural and paleontological resources. As such, the Project would be consistent with the findings of the Lake Elsinore GP EIR and a less than significant impact would occur. 5 City of Lake Elsinore. 2011. Draft Program EIR Section 3.2 Cultural Resources, Figure 3.2-3, page 3.2-25. https://www.lakeelsinore.org/DocumentCenter/View/2292/Section-32---Cultural-and-Paleontological-Resources-PDF. Accessed September 2024.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 61 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis Project Mitigation Measures
No Project-specific mitigation measures are required.

Standard City Conditions of Approval:

COA CUL-1 Prior to construction of the proposed Project, a qualified archaeological monitor with relevant Riverside County experience and who will work directly under the direction of a Secretary of Interior’s (SOI) professional archaeologist, should be retained by the Project proponent to monitor the initial construction-related ground disturbances activities as there is potential to encounter buried cultural materials, as well as in the case cultural resources are found and cannot be avoided. If the lead agency requires, an Archaeological Management Plan will be prepared to establish procedures for monitoring.

COA CUL-2 If archaeological monitoring is needed, the Project archaeologist, may, at their discretion, terminate monitoring if (and only if) no subsurface cultural resources have been detected.

If buried cultural resource artifacts are uncovered during ground disturbance activities the archaeological monitor will have the authority tore-direct grading activities to other location within the Project to examine the resources and possibly conduct subsurface testing (Phase II), as indicated in the Archaeological Management Plan. A research design associated with such work must be written before any subsurface fieldwork beings. The Plan shall include a description of how and where artifacts will be curated. If the site is determined to be significant through the testing process, continued impacts to the site would be considered significant and possibly unavoidable impacts. Impacts to the significant resource must take place either through avoidance or a Phase 3 excavation.

Should any prehistoric or tribal cultural resource be identified within the Project site, Native American consulting parties shall be contacted regarding the disposition and treatment of the resource(s).

COA CUL-3 In the event of the unanticipated discovery of human remains, work in the immediate vicinity of the find shall stop and no further disturbance shall occur until the Riverside County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to CEQA, Section 15604.5(e), State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and PRC Section 5097.98. The County Coroner shall be notified of the find immediately. If the Coroner determines that the human remains are of Native American in origin, then the Coroner shall notify the NAHC, who is responsible for identifying and notifying the Native American most likely descendant (MLD). The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and make recommendations regarding the treatment and disposition of human remains and items associated with Native American burials. If an agreement regarding disposition of human remains between the MLD and the Landowner or a MLD cannot be identified, the landowner shall comply with the disposition and documentation required as defined by PCR 5097.98 Section (e).

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 62 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis Lake Elsinore General Plan Applicable Policies
Policy 6.1 Encourage the preservation of significant archaeological, historical, and other cultural resources located within the City.

Policy 6.3 When significant cultural/archaeological sites or artifacts are discovered on a site, coordination with professional archaeologists, relevant state and, if applicable, federal agencies, and the appropriate Native American tribes regarding preservation of sites or professional retrieval and preservation of artifacts or by other means of protection, prior to development of the site shall be required. Because ceremonial items and items of cultural patrimony reflect traditional religious beliefs and practices, developers shall waive any and all claims to ownership and agree to return all Native American ceremonial items and items of cultural patrimony that may be found on a project site to the appropriate tribe for treatment. It is understood by all parties that unless otherwise required by law the site of any reburial Native American human remains or cultural artifacts shall not be disclosed and shall be governed by public disclosure requirements of the California Public Resources Act.

Policy 6.4 If archaeological excavations are recommended on a project site, the City shall require that all such investigations include Native American consultation, which shall occur prior to project approval.

Lake Elsinore General Plan Applicable EIR Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measures identified in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR apply to the Project:

MM Cultural/Paleontological
Resource 2
Prior to issuance of grading permit(s) for the project, the project applicant shall retain an archaeological monitor to monitor all ground disturbing activities in an effort to identify any unknown archaeological resources. Any newly discovered cultural resource deposits shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation.

MM Cultural/Paleontological
Resource 3
At least 30 days prior to seeking a grading permit, the project applicant shall contact the appropriate tribe to notify that Tribe of grading, excavation and the monitoring program, and to coordinate with the City of Lake Elsinore and the Tribe to develop a Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement. The Agreement shall address the treatment of known cultural resources, the designation, responsibilities, and participation of Native American Tribal monitors during grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities; project grading and development scheduling; terms of Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 63 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis compensation; and treatment and final disposition of any cultural resources, sacred sites, and human remains discovered on the site.

MM Cultural/Paleontological
Resource 4
Prior to issuance of any grading permit, the project archaeologist shall file a pre-grading report with the City and County (if required) to document the proposed methodology for grading activity
observation. Said methodology shall include the requirement for a qualified archaeological monitor to be present and to have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities. In accordance with the agreement required in MM Cultural/Paleontological Resources 2, the archaeological monitor’s authority to stop and redirect grading will be exercised in consultation with the appropriate tribe in order to evaluate the significance of any archaeological resources discovered on the property. Tribal monitors shall be allowed to monitor all grading, excavation and ground breaking activities, and shall also have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities in consultation with the project archeologist.

MM Cultural/Paleontological
Resource 5
The landowner shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including sacred items, burial goods and all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project area to the appropriate tribe for proper treatment and disposition.

MM Cultural/Paleontological
Resource 6
All sacred sites, should they be encountered within the project area, shall be avoided and preserved as the preferred mitigation, if feasible.

MM Cultural/Paleontological
Resource 7
If inadvertent discoveries of subsurface archaeological/cultural resources are discovered during grading, the Developer, the project archaeologist, and the appropriate tribe shall assess the significance of such resources and shall meet and confer regarding the mitigation for such resources. If the Developer and the Tribe cannot agree on the significance or the mitigation for such resources, these issues will be presented to the Community Development Director (CDD) for decision. The CDD shall make the determination based on the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act with respect to archaeological resources and shall take into account the religious beliefs, customs, and practices of the appropriate tribe.

Notwithstanding any other rights available under the law, the decision of the CDD shall be appealable to the City of Lake Elsinore.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 64 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis MM Cultural/Paleontological
Resource 8
Individual projects implemented in accordance with the Land Use Plan shall also demonstrate compliance with Cultural and Paleontological Resources Policies 6.2, 6.4, 7.1, and 7.5. As well as compliance with applicable District Plan Policies to cultural and paleontological resources.

Conclusion
As previously discussed, in accordance with the requirements of AB 52, the City sent notification to the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, Morongo Band of Mission Indians, Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians, Pechanga Band of Indians, Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians and Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians Tribes on April 24, 2024. The Pechanga, Rincon, and Soboba tribes requested to be consulted. Meetings were held with the Soboba Tribe on July 9, 2024, April 15, 2025, and July 2, 2025. Meetings were held with the Pechanga Tribe on July 9, 2024, April 22, 2025, and June 24, 2025. Meetings were held with the Rincon Tribe on July 10, 2024 and April 03, 2025. The City concluded consultation with the Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians on April 10, 2025, the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians on August 13, 2025, and with the Pechanga Band of Indians on July 11, 2025
Through the completion of tribal consultation, the Project is consistent with the Lake Elsinore GP EIR MM Cultural/Paleontological Resources 3 mitigation measures, which requires notification and coordination with interested and important tribes as listed by the NAHC. The identified CRA mitigation measures are also consistent with MM Cultural/Paleontological Resources 2, and 4-8, which require the presence of an archaeological monitor at the commencement and duration of construction-related activities. With the incorporation of mitigation measures and adherence Cultural Resources policies as outline in the Lake Elsinore GP, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that impacts to cultural resources resulting from implementation of the Lake Elsinore GP, would be less than significant.

No new impacts relative to adverse cultural resources impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR would occur. With regard to PRC Section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the Project would not result in any new impacts, or increase previously identified impact’s severity, with respect to cultural resources.

Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Lake Elsinore GP EIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 65 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis

3.5 Energy
Environmental Impact Issues
Prior EIR Impact
Determination
Significant
peculiar impact
with uniform
measures
incorporated?
Potentially
significant
impact not
identified in
prior EIR?
New significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
No new
information
indicating a
substantial
increase in
impact severity?
The Lake Elinore GP would result in a significant impact to energy if it would:

Criterion 1: Result in potentially
significant environmental impact
due to wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of
energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
Not analyzed in
Lake Elsinore GP
EIR
Criterion 2: Conflict with or
obstruct a state or local plan or
renewable energy or energy
efficiency?
Not analyzed in
Lake Elsinore GP
EIR
This section incorporates the findings of the Energy Review (2024) prepared by MD Acoustics, LLC, which is included as Appendix D.

Discussion
Revisions to the CEQA Guidelines were implemented after the approval of the Lake Elsinore GP EIR, in which a new separate CEQA checklist topic for “Energy” was created, consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. As such, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR did not specifically address energy and the associated CEQA thresholds. However, energy conservation was discussed at a minimum in the GHG emissions impact analysis, specifically with respect to meeting GHG emissions reduction targets. Energy Measures were identified and analyzed in the GHG emissions impact analysis that included reductions in energy demand, efficient building standards and upgrades, and green business certification programs. The Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that with the implementation of energy measures would reduce wasteful energy consumption and demand.

An Energy Review was completed for the Project to determine potential impacts to energy resources as a result of Project implementation. Fuel consumed by construction equipment would be the primary energy resource expended over the course of Project construction. However, once construction is completed the use of diesel fuels would cease. Additionally, construction equipment would have engines that conform to California Air Resources Board (CARB) regulations and State emissions standards and is evidence of related fuel efficiencies. Construction of the proposed residential land uses would require the typical use of energy resources and would not include unusual characteristics or construction activities that would require the use of incompatible energy-intensive equipment. As such, construction-related fuel consumption would not result in inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of fuel.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 66 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis Once operational, the largest source of energy consumption would be vehicle operation of residents.

Associated vehicle miles traveled (VMT) generated by the Project are consistent with other similar residential uses of similar scale and configuration. As such, the Project does not propose uses or operations that would result in excessive and wasteful vehicle trips or energy consumption and would not result in inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of fuel. Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant impact.

The Project site is located in a developed area with access to and from the Project site from existing roads.

Furthermore, the Project does not propose a transportation plan and would therefore not otherwise obstruct Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) transportation planning. As the Project is required to comply with California Green Building Standard Code requirements for energy efficient buildings and appliance, the Project would not conflict with existing state energy efficiency standards. As such, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Therefore, the Project would have less than a significant impact.

Project Mitigation Measures
No Project-specific mitigation measures are required.

Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR Applicable Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures that apply to the Project are required.

Conclusion
No new impacts relative to energy resource impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR would occur. With regard to PRC Section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the Project would not result in any new impacts, or increase previously identified impact’s severity, with respect to energy. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Lake Elsinore GP EIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 67 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis

3.6 Geology and Soils
Environmental Impact Issues
Prior EIR Impact
Determination
Significant
peculiar impact
with uniform
measures
incorporated?
Potentially
significant
impact not
identified in
prior EIR?
New significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
No new
information
indicating a
substantial
increase in
impact severity?
The Lake Elsinore GP would result in a significant impact to energy if it would:

Criterion 1: Expose People or
structures to potential substantial
adverse effects including the risk of
loss, injury, or death involving:
a. 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 of based on other
substantial evidence of a
known fault (refer to Division
of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42);
b. Strong seismic ground
shaking;
c. Seismic-related ground
failure; including liquefaction
d. Landslides.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 2: Result in substantial
soil erosion of the loss of topsoil.

Less Than
Significant
Criterion 3: Is located on a geologic
unit or soil is unstable of that would
become unstable as a result of the
project and potentially result in onor off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction, or collapse.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 4: Is located on expansive
soil, as deferred in Table 18-1-B of
the Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating a substantial risk to life or
property.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 5: Have soils incapable of
adequately supporting the use of
septic tanks or alternative waste
water disposal systems where
sewers are not available for
disposal of waste water.

Less Than
Significant
Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 68 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis This section incorporates the findings of the Geologic and Geotechnical Engineering Investigation (2023) prepared by GeoSoils Consultants Inc., which is included as Appendix E.

Discussion
The Engineering Investigation assessed the Project site for potential geological hazards and determined the potential impacts to exacerbate such hazards as a result of Project implementation.

The Project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and there are no active faults on or adjacent to the property. The closest such fault to the Project site is the Glen Ivy North fault, located approximately two miles to the northwest of the site. While there are no faults on or adjacent to the Project site, the faults nearest the site may still cause moderate to intense ground shaking during the lifetime of the Project. As such, earthquake resistant design is recommended that is consistent with the 2022 California Building Code (CBC) Seismic Design Criteria. Specifically, the Engineering Investigation recommends the Project incorporate Site Class D as part of the design for the Project. With incorporation of Site Class D seismic design, the Project may reduce severe damage caused by ground rupture and strong ground shaking, including the risk of loss, injury, and death.

Since the Project site is not within or immediately adjacent to known active faults, it was determined that the ground rupture hazard potential for the Project site is considered remote. Further, relatively flat topography of the Project site does not contribute to the likelihood of landslides. While Lake Elsinore is in close proximity to the Project site, given the distance from the Project site and elevation difference between the lake and the Project site, hazards associated with seiches are considered low. Further, the Project site is not in close proximity to an ocean. The Pacific Ocean, to the southwest of the Project site, is approximately 23 miles from the Project site, with the Santa Ana Mountains located between the Pacific Ocean and the Project site. As such, risks associated with tsunamis are not considered to be a hazard to the Project site. The Engineering Investigation also determined that liquefaction is not considered a potential hazard to the Project site, considering the observed dense to very dense nature of the soils on the Project site. Lastly, the Project site was assessed for potential of collapse, and it was determined that the on-site soils that would remain in-place pose a low potential for collapse.

While no significant geological hazards were identified with high potential to occur on the Project site or be exacerbated during Project implementation, the Engineering Investigation has proposed design recommendations that may reduce potential impacts to the geology and soils on the Project site. A complete description of all proposed design recommendations is included in Appendix E.

The Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that through the City’s regulation of development under the requirements of the CBC and mitigation measures, the potential seismic hazards associated with future development within the Lake Elsinore GP would be sufficiently mitigated. Further, future development would be subject to compliance with the provisions of Chapters 17.28 and 17.32 of the City’s Zoning Code that would reduce seismic hazards to less-than-significant levels.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 69 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis Additionally, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that future development projects could contribute to erosion and the loss of topsoil. However, all future development projects would be required to comply with provisions detailed in the City’s Municipal Code that address soil erosion, including Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Chapter 14.08, Stormwater/Urban Runoff Management and Discharge Controls.

Specifically, future development projects would be required to comply with a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and, consequently, develop a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) including the use of Best Management Practices. Such compliance with the NPDES, SWPPP, and associated BMPs would also adhere to Goal 1 and Policy 1.1 of the Public Safety and Welfare Chapter of the Lake Elsinore GP as well as Policies 4.1 and 4.3 of the Resource Protection and Preservation Chapter to control erosion and protect surface water and groundwater from adverse construction-related impacts.

Through compliance with the aforementioned regulatory requirements, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that impacts associated with future development within the Lake Elsinore GP as they relate to soil erosion or loss of topsoil are considered less than significant.

Lastly, the Project does not propose development that would require the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems; thus, the Project would have no impacts in this regard.

Through incorporation of design recommendations and compliance with the Lake Elsinore GP applicable goals and policies related to geology and soils, the Project would not result in adverse impacts to geological resources that would result in significant geological hazards. As such, the Project would be consistent with the findings of the Lake Elsinore GP EIR and a less than significant impact would occur.

Project Mitigation Measures
No Project-specific mitigation measures are required.

Lake Elsinore General Plan Applicable Policies
Policy 4.1 Encourage developers to provide clean water systems that reduce pollutants being discharged into the drainage system to the maximum extent feasible and meet required federal Pollution Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) standards.

Policy 4.3 Require Best Management Practices through project conditions of approval for development to meet the Federal NPDES permit requirements.

Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR Applicable Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.

Conclusion
The Project would incorporate design recommendations as described in the Geotechnical Engineering Investigation to reduce potential impacts to geology and soils on the Project site. With the incorporation of the design recommendations and adherence to the aforementioned policies as outlined in the Lake Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 70 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis Elsinore GP, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that impacts to geology and soils resulting from implementation of the Lake Elsinore GP, would be less than significant.

No new impacts relative to adverse geological, including geology and soils impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR would occur. With regard to PRC Section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the Project would not result in any new impacts, or increase previously identified impact’s severity, with respect to geology and soils. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Lake Elsinore GP EIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 71 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis

3.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Environmental Impact Issues
Prior EIR Impact
Determination
Significant
peculiar impact
with uniform
measures
incorporated?
Potentially
significant
impact not
identified in
prior EIR?
New
significant offsite or
cumulative
impact?
No new
information
indicating a
substantial
increase in
impact severity?
The Lake Elsinore GP would result in a significant impact to greenhouse gases if it would:

Criterion 1: Generate greenhouse
gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the
environment.

Less Than
Significant
Criterion 2: Conflict with an
applicable plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the
purposes of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases.

Less Than
Significant
This section incorporates the findings of the combined Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases Assessment (2024; prepared by Urban Crossroads), which is included as Appendix A.

Discussion
The Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that development resulting from the buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP would result in less than significant impacts with respect to GHG emissions.

As determined by the Lake Elsinore GP EIR, buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP is projected to increase GHG emissions from the time the EIR was prepared in 2011 through to 2030. However, complete buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP is not anticipated to occur by 2030, and it is unlikely that emissions will increase to the projected levels. To meet emissions reduction targets, the City has prepared a Climate Action Plan (CAP). Applicable strategies and measures from the CAP were included to build the policy direction of the Lake Elsinore GP. Each measure defines the programs, policies, and projects that the City will implement to accomplish its reduction goals. These measures include reductions with respect to transportation and land use; energy; and solid waste. With implementation of the identified measures, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that the City could exceed its GHG emissions targets. As such, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that implementation of the strategies and measures set forth in the CAP and compliance with the goals, policies, and implementation measures identified in the Lake Elsinore GP would reduce potential impacts to GHG emissions and a less than significant impact would occur.

Further, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that the Lake Elsinore GP would not result in a conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted to reduce GHG emissions. As previously mentioned, adherence to the CAP, in addition to compliance with state-level measures, would allow the City to exceed target reductions by 2030. Additionally, the CAP was proposed as part of the Lake Elsinore GP and served Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 72 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis as a guide to build the goals, policies and implementation programs proposed in the Lake Elsinore GP. As such, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined implementation with the Lake Elsinore GP would be consistent and not conflict with an applicable GHG reduction plan, policy, or regulation adopted to reduce GHG emissions and impacts would be less than significant.

According to the GHG assessment, the Project would result in approximately 944.57 MTCO2e/year, which would be under the SCAQMD’s numeric threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e/year. As such, the Project would not contribute to direct or indirect GHG emissions that would have a significant impact on the environment and a less than significant impact would occur.

The GHG assessment included a consistency analysis with the City of Lake Elsinore CAP. The GHG assessment evaluated applicable CAP measures to the Project and determined that the Project is consistent with the policies outlined in the City’s CAP. Further, the GHG assessment indicates that a project can demonstrate consistency with the 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality (2022 Scoping Plan) by aligning with an approved CAP. Considering the Project is consistent with the City’s CAP, the Project is also consistent with the 2022 Scoping Plan by these standards. As such, the Project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted to reduce GHG emissions and impacts would be less than significant.

Project Mitigation Measures
No Project-specific mitigation measures are required.

Lake Elsinore General Plan Applicable Policies
Policy 14.2 Measures shall be established that aim to reduce emissions generated from City uses, community uses (community actions) and new development (City discretionary actions).

Lake Elsinore General Plan Applicable EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.

Conclusion
No new impacts relative to GHG emission impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR would occur. With regard to PRC Section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the Project would not result in any new impacts, or increase previously identified impact’s severity, with respect to GHG emissions. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Lake Elsinore GP EIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 73 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis

3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Environmental Impact Issues
Prior EIR Impact
Determination
Significant
peculiar impact
with uniform
measures
incorporated?
Potentially
significant
impact not
identified in
prior EIR?
New significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
No new
information
indicating a
substantial
increase in
impact severity?
The Lake Elsinore GP would result in a significant impact to hazards and hazardous materials if it would:

Criterion 1: Create a significant
hazard to the public of the
environment through the routine
transport, use, disposal, of
hazardous materials.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 2: Create a significant
hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the
environment.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 3: Emit hazardous
emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within onequarter mile of an existing or proposed school.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 4: 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.

Less Than
Significant
Criterion 5: 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 or private use airport,
would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or
working in the project area.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 6: For a project within
the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or
working in the project area.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 74 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis Environmental Impact Issues
Prior EIR Impact
Determination
Significant
peculiar impact
with uniform
measures
incorporated?
Potentially
significant
impact not
identified in
prior EIR?
New significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
No new
information
indicating a
substantial
increase in
impact severity?
The Lake Elsinore GP would result in a significant impact to hazards and hazardous materials if it would:

Criterion 7: Impair the
implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan.

No Impact
Criterion 8: Expose people or
structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with
wildlands.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
This section incorporates the findings of the following technical reports prepared by Partner Engineering (refer Appendix F for complete analyses):
 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (February 2023; Phase I ESA); Appendix F1  Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report (April 2023; Phase II Subsurface Investigation); Appendix F2
 Additional Investigation Report (May 2023); Appendix F3  Vapor Intrusion Technical Memorandum (January 2025; VI Tech Memo); Appendix F4 Discussion
The purpose of the Phase I ESA was to identify any adverse environmental conditions that exist on the Project site, including Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs), Historical Recognized Conditions (HRECs), and Controlled recognized Environmental Conditions (CECs). Additionally, nearby sites that have the potential to impact the property were also evaluated. The Phase I ESA historical data review indicated the site was previously used for a dry-cleaning business and agricultural uses, therefore revealing evidence of RECs present on the Project site. As such, the Phase I ESA concluded that a limited subsurface investigation should be conducted to determine the presence or absence of soil, soil vapor, and/or groundwater contamination resulting from the historical uses of the Project site.

Based on the results of the Phase II Subsurface Investigation, none of the analyzed soil samples contained hazardous substances from the historical land uses on the Project site. However, tetrachloroethylene (PCE) was detected in one soil gas sample at a concentration exceeding the residential Soil Gas Screening Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 75 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis Levels (SGSL). As such, the Phase II Subsurface Investigation determined that additional investigation be completed to evaluate the potential vapor intrusion concern to future occupants of the Project site.

Lastly, Partner Engineering conducted a Vapor Intrusion Tech Memo and concluded that the anticipated indoor air concentration inside the proposed building would be below the indoor air screening level for residential use. As such, the Vapor Intrusion Tech Memo concluded that adverse impacts to future site occupants would be unlikely to and no mitigation measures are required.

Project construction is not anticipated to involve the transport, use, creation, or disposal of hazardous materials. Small quantities of potentially hazardous substances such as gasoline, diesel fuel, lubricants for machines, and other petroleum-based products would be used on-site.

The Project would not emit hazardous emissions or involve hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste. However, the Project could involve the transport and use of materials associated with routine maintenance of the property, such as janitorial supplies for cleaning purposes and/or herbicides and pesticides for landscaping. The storage, use, handling, and disposal of any hazardous materials (such as paints and solvents) that might be stored on the Project site during construction are addressed by federal, State, and local laws, regulations and programs that govern the use, transport and/or disposal of hazardous materials. Compliance with local, State and federal laws and regulations would reduce the risk of hazardous material incidents to a less than significant impact. Therefore, the Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or to the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.

The Project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials, substances or waste within one-quarter mile of a school site. The closest school to the Project site is Lakeside High School, located approximately 2,000 feet to the southwest of the Project site. Hazardous materials other than supplies used for operational maintenance of the Project are not expected to be on site. The Project would comply with all federal, State and local laws, regulations, and programs that govern the use, transport and/or disposal of hazardous materials. Compliance with local, State and federal laws and regulations would reduce the risk of hazardous material and emissions incidents to a less than significant impact.

Therefore, the Project would not create a significant hazard to existing or proposed school sites.

The Project site does not include any sites identified on a hazardous site list compiled pursuant to California Government Code Section 65962.5.6
The Project site is not within an airport land use plan area or within two miles of an airport. The nearest public airport is John Wayne Airport located 28 miles to the west of the project site. As such, the Project would not create a safety hazard regarding individuals located within an airport or private airstrip vicinity. 6 California Department of Toxic Substances Control. 2024. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/?global_id=60003205. Accessed September 2024.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 76 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis As determined in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR, future development as part of the Lake Elsinore GP would result in the increase in the generation, storage, and disposal of household hazardous wastes during operations of the Project. However, the City would continue to implement household hazardous waste collection and education programs pursuant to Policy 3.4 of the Public Safety and Welfare chapter’s Hazards and Hazardous Materials Section. Similarly, construction-related activities could increase the risk of upset of contamination of hazardous materials but would be maintained through the continued enforcement of Lake Elsinore GP policies 3.1, 3.3, and 3.5 in the Hazards and Hazardous Materials section of the Public Safety and Welfare chapter, which provides measure to ensure leak detection, reports of spills, and cleanup protocols. The Lake Elsinore GP EIR also determined that buildout of the GP would maintain compliance with all requirements under the Riverside County Hazardous Waste Management Plan (RCHWMP). Further, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR concluded that future development would not conflict with the City’s Emergency Preparedness Plan or the Riverside County Operational Area MultiJurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan and would be required to comply with all applicable local and state regulatory standards for adequate emergency access and all applicable fire code requirements for construction. Lastly, according to CalFire, the Project site is not located within a very high fire hazard zone and is not prone to hazards associated with wildfire.7 To reduce impacts to hazards and hazardous materials, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that future development projects would be required to adhere to MM Hazards 1 through 5, which requires projects to analyze potential impacts and demonstrate mitigation, when appropriate. Consequently, with the incorporation of mitigation measures MM Hazards 1 through 5 and adherence to the Lake Elsinore GP policies relating to hazards and hazardous materials, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that impacts to hazards and hazardous materials would be less than significant.

While no Project-specific mitigation measures are recommended, the Project maintains compliance with Lake Elsinore GP MM Hazards 1 through 5, by demonstrating potential impacts to hazards and hazardous materials through the Phase I and II ESAs and the Vapor Intrusion Memo. Through and compliance with the Lake Elsinore GP EIR mitigation measures and the aforementioned Lake Elsinore GP Goals and Policies, the Project would not result in adverse impacts to hazard or hazardous materials causing a significant impact to the environment or the public. As such, the Project would be consistent with the findings of the Lake Elsinore GP EIR and a less than significant impact would occur.

Project Mitigation Measures
No Project-specific mitigation measures are required.

Lake Elsinore General Plan Applicable Policies
Policy 3.1 Continue to require hazardous waste generators to implement a waste reduction program per the Riverside County Hazardous Waste Management Plan with 7 CalFire. 2024. Fire Hazard Severity Zones. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/what-we-do/community-wildfire-preparedness-and-mitigation/fire-hazardseverity-zones. Accessed September 2024.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 77 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis necessary inspections per the Riverside County Hazardous Materials Handlers Program.

Polic 3.3 Encourage the safe disposal of hazardous materials with County agencies to protect the City against a hazardous materials incident.

Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR Applicable Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.

Conclusion
The Project would not result in release of hazards or hazardous materials through the routine transport, use, disposal, or storage of hazardous materials during construction or operations. The Project would be required to adhere to all applicable local and state regulations pertaining to the transport, storage, use, and disposal of hazardous materials. Through the completion of the Phase I ESA, the Project maintains consistency with the Lake Elsinore GP EIR MM Hazards 1 mitigation measure to demonstrate the Project does not contain significant hazards or hazardous materials that may be released into the environment or be exposed to the public as a result of Project implementation. With the adherence to the Lake Elsinore mitigation measures and adherence to the Public Safety and Welfare policies as outlined in the Lake Elsinore GP, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that impacts to hazards and hazardous materials resulting from implementation of the Lake Elsinore GP, would be less than significant.

No new impacts relative to hazards and risk upset impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR would occur. With regard to PRC Section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the Project would not result in any new impacts, or increase previously identified impact’s severity, with respect to hazards and risk upset.

Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Lake Elsinore GP EIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 78 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis This page intentionally left blank.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 79 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis

3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Environmental Impact Issues
Prior EIR Impact
Determination
Significant
peculiar impact
with uniform
measures
incorporated?
Potentially
significant
impact not
identified in
prior EIR?
New significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
No new
information
indicating a
substantial
increase in
impact severity?
The Lake Elsinore GP would result in a significant impact to hydrology and water quality if it would:

Criterion 1: Violate any water
quality standards, waste discharge
requirements.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 2: Substantially deplete
groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be
a net deficit in aquifer volume or a
lowering of the local groundwater
table level (e.g., the production
rate of pre-existing nearby wells
would drop to a level which would
not support existing land uses or
planned uses for which permits
have been granted).

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 3: Substantially alter the
existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the
alterations of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner which
would result in substantial erosion
or siltation on- or off-site.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 4: Substantially alter the
existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the
alterations of the course of a
stream or river, or substantially
increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or offsite.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 5: Create or contribute
runoff water that would exceed
the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial sources of
polluted runoff.

Less Then
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 80 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis Environmental Impact Issues
Prior EIR Impact
Determination
Significant
peculiar impact
with uniform
measures
incorporated?
Potentially
significant
impact not
identified in
prior EIR?
New significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
No new
information
indicating a
substantial
increase in
impact severity?
The Lake Elsinore GP would result in a significant impact to hydrology and water quality if it would:

Criterion 6: Require or result in the
construction of new stormwater
drainage facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction
of which could cause significant
environmental effects.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 7: Otherwise
substantially degrade water
quality.

Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 8: Place within a 100-
year flood hazard area structures
that would impede or redirect
flood flows.

Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 9: Expose people or
structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury, or death involving
flooding, including flooding as a
result of the failure of a levee or a
dam.

Less than
Significant
Criterion 10: Result in inundation
by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow.

Less than
Significant
This section includes the findings from the Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared by Blue Engineering and Consulting, Inc. (2024) and is included as Appendix G.

Discussion
The City and SOI are within the Santa Ana regional watershed, which is drained by the Santa Ana River.

The primary natural surface water features within the Lake Elsinore GP are Lake Elsinore, the San Jacinto River, and Temescal Wash. The Elsinore Groundwater Basin underlies the Elsinore Valley and is managed by the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD) Groundwater Management Plan. Potential flood sources within the City closest to the Project site include Leach Canyon Channel and Lake Elsinore.

Water pollutants source in the Lake Elsinore area have historically been caused by agricultural operations that use chemicals and fertilizers on the land. As a result, Lake Elsinore has been identified on the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), and in compliance with Clean Water Act Section 303(d), list of impaired bodies of water in the state. Development consistent with the Lake Elsinore GP could result in an increase in non-point source and point source contamination from common urban sources, Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 81 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis construction activity, and vehicle use. These impacts that may directly affect surface waters through runoff can also affect groundwater quality through percolation in the watercourse and in exposed soils.

To address the potential impacts of future development within the Lake Elsinore GP, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR identified MM Hydrology 1, which would require future development projects to adhere to Flooding and Floodplains Policies 5.1-5.2; Water Resources Policies 4.1-4.4, and Biological Resource Policies 1.1-1.8 and 2.1-2.2, to reduce potential impacts to surface and groundwater quality, where applicable. Further, future development projects would be required to obtain a NPDES permit and implement associated BMPs to reduce the amount of pollutants being discharged into the drainage system. Lastly, project level assessment must be prepared for any future development for hydrology or groundwater and surface water quality impacts. With the implementation of MM Hydrology 1, adherence to the aforementioned Lake Elsinore GP policies, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP would have a less than significant impact to surface and groundwater quality.

Further, MM Hydrology 1 would also be implemented to protect the natural drainage patterns occurring within future development project sites that are located within the 100-year floodplain. Adherence to the aforementioned Lake Elsinore GP EIR policies outlined in MM Hydrology 1 would reduce potential impacts to drainage patterns and flood flows that may result in flooding to less than significant levels.

Lastly, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that portions of the City are within a dam inundation boundary from the Railroad Canyon Dam Inundation map. However, the Project site is not within the boundary of the Railroad Canyon Dam Inundation map.8 As previously stated, inundation caused by tsunamis would not occur and inundation from seiches would be low. As such, impacts associated with flooding from dam inundation or inundation caused by tsunamis or seiche would be less than significant.

The Project’s WQMP also outlined specific BMPs that would help reduce potential impacts to water quality that may be generated from runoff during construction and operations. The WQMP identified potential sources of runoff pollutants from landscape and outdoor use of pesticides as well as on-site storm drain catch basins and inlets and other impervious surfaces such as driveways, sidewalks, and parking lots. As such, permanent structural source control BMPs and operational source control BMPs would reduce surface pollution and groundwater quality.

With the incorporation of the WQMP BMPs and compliance with Lake Elsinore GP associated policies relating to surface and groundwater quality and flood hazards, the Project would have a less than significant impact on hydrology and water quality.

Through compliance with the Lake Elsinore GP EIR mitigation measures and the aforementioned Lake Elsinore GP Goals and Policies, the Project would not result in adverse impacts hydrological conditions or 8 California Department of Water Resources. 2017. Dam Breach Inundation Map Web Publisher – Railroad Canyon Dam Inundation Map. https://fmds.water.ca.gov/webgis/?appid=dam_prototype_v2 Accessed September 2024.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 82 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis water quality causing a significant impact to the environment or the public. As such, the Project would be consistent with the findings of the Lake Elsinore GP EIR and a less than significant impact would occur.

Project Mitigation Measures
No Project-specific mitigation measures are required.

Lake Elsinore General Plan Applicable Policies
Policy 5.1 Continue to ensure that new construction in floodways and floodplains conforms to all applicable provisions of the National Flood Insurance Program in order to protect buildings and property from flooding.

Policy 4.1 Encourage developers to provide clean water systems that reduce pollutants being discharged into the drainage system to the maximum extent feasible and meet required Federal NPDES standards.

Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR Applicable Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.

Conclusion
The Project would not result in adverse impacts to hydrology and water quality. The Project would be required to adhere to all applicable local and state regulations pertaining to the hydrology and water quality, such as adherence to NPDES permit requirements. Additionally, the Project would be required to comply with the Lake Elsinore GP policies relating to flood hazards and water resources. With the adherence to the Flooding and Floodplain, Water Resources, and Biological Resources policies as outlined in the Lake Elsinore GP, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that impacts to hydrology and water quality resulting from implementation of the Lake Elsinore GP, would be less than significant.

No new impacts relative to adverse hydrology and water quality impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR would occur.

With regard to PRC Section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the Project would not result in any new impacts, or increase previously identified impact’s severity, with respect to hydrology and water quality. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Lake Elsinore GP EIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 83 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Environmental Impact Issues
Prior EIR Impact
Determination
Significant
peculiar impact
with uniform
measures
incorporated?
Potentially
significant
impact not
identified in
prior EIR?
New significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
No new
information
indicating a
substantial
increase in
impact severity?
The Lake Elsinore GP would result in a significant impact to land use planning if it would:

Criterion 1: Physically divide an
established community.

Less Than
Significant
Criterion 2: Conflict with any
applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project
(including but not limited to the
general plan, specific plan, local
coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating
an environmental effect.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 3: Conflict with any
applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural community
conservation plan.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 4: Convert Prime
Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on maps
prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to
non-agricultural use.

Less than
Significant
Criterion 5: Conflict with existing
zoning for agricultural use, or a
Willamson Act contract.

Less than
Significant
Criterion 6: Involve other changes
in existing environment which,
due to their location or nature,
could result in conversion of
Farmland to non-agricultural use,
Less than
Significant
Discussion
The Project proposes development of the 4.95-acre parcel for multi-family residential uses. The proposed uses are consistent with the Residential Mixed-Use Lake Elsinore GP Land Use Designation and surrounding adjacent residential uses. The Project does not propose development of uses that would physically divide or separate neighborhoods within an established community. The Project is consistent Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 84 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis with the underlying land use and zoning designations that have been included in local and regional planning efforts.

The Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that implementation of the Lake Elsinore GP would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated to offset impacts that may conflict with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Planning Efforts and the MSHCP. Considering the Project’s minimal contribution to population growth has been accounted for in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR and that the Project is not within a MSHCP conservation area, Project impacts would be less than significant.

Furthermore, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR evaluated impacts to agricultural uses, particularly to land designated for Farmland, under the Land Use and Planning resource topic area. The Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that, although historically agricultural was once a major land use within the City, it now accounts for less than 1 percent of the land uses existing within the City and SOI. Further, none of the land that had been previously designated for agricultural use with the City and SOI were considered important farmland. Lastly, not Williamson Act contracts exist within the City and SOI. As such, impacts to the conversion of agricultural land uses for non-agricultural land uses and land designated as important farmland, was determined to be less than significant. As such, the Project would not result in the conversion of agricultural land uses nor would the development of the Project important farmland and no impact would occur. This impact determination is consistent with the certified Lake Elsinore GP EIR.

The Project would cause neither a new impact, nor an increase in the severity of an impact previously disclosed. No further analysis is required.

Project Mitigation Measures
No Project-specific mitigation measures are required.

Lake Elsinore Plan General Plan Applicable Policies
Policy 1.2 Encourage mixed use developments to reduce public service costs and environmental impacts through compatible land use relationships, and efficient circulation and open space systems.

Lake Elsinore Plan EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are applicable.

Conclusion
No new impacts relative to adverse land use impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR would occur. With regard to PRC Section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the Project would not result in any new impacts, or increase previously identified impact’s severity, with respect to land use. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Lake Elsinore GP EIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 85 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis

3.11 Mineral Resources
Environmental Impact Issues
Prior EIR Impact
Determination
Significant
peculiar impact
with uniform
measures
incorporated?
Potentially
significant
impact not
identified in
prior EIR?
New significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
No new
information
indicating a
substantial
increase in
impact severity?
The Lake Elsinore GP would result in a significant impact to mineral resources if it would:

Criterion 1: 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?
Less Than
Significant
Criterion 2: Result in the loss of
availability of a locally important
mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan,
specific plan, or other land use
plan?
Less than
Significant
Discussion
The Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that development resulting from implementation of the Lake Elsinore GP would result in less than significant impacts with respect to mineral resources with the implementation of the proposed General Plan policies pertaining to mineral resources. Historically, there were some land uses that included mineral extraction and the City, SOI, and surrounding area have been classified as MRZ-3. However, mineral extraction activities have been phased out over time and the land has been designated for residential and commercial land uses. As these land use conversions had already happened prior to the approval of the Lake Elsinore GP EIR, development under the Lake Elsinore GP would not have a significant impact on the loss of availability of known mineral resources.

The Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that with the implementation of the proposed Lake Elsinore GP policies pertaining to mineral resources, such as the implementation of the Extraction Overlay designation in specified locations within the City, would maintain the availability of mineral resources. As such, the Lake Elsinore EIR determined that buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP would have a less than significant impact on mineral resources, and no mitigation was required.

The Project is zoned for Residential Mixed-Use and mineral extraction or associated operations are not permitted within the Residential Mixed-Use zoning district.9 The Project does not propose any uses that associated with mineral extraction or operations. As such, the Project would have no impact on mineral 9 City of Lake Elsinore. 2024. City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Chapter 17.86 RMU Residential Mixed Use District. Available at:
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/LakeElsinore/html/LakeElsinore17/LakeElsinore1786.html#17.86 (accessed February 2025).

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 86 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis resources. The Project would be consistent with the findings of the Lake Elsinore GP EIR of less than significant with respect to mineral resources. No further analysis is required.

Project Mitigation Measures
No Project-specific mitigation measures are required.

Lake Elsinore Plan General Plan Applicable Policies
No General Plan policies are applicable on the Project-level.

Lake Elsinore Plan EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are applicable.

Conclusion
No new impacts relative to adverse mineral resources impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR would occur. With regard to PRC Section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the Project would not result in any new impacts, or increase previously identified impact’s severity, with respect to mineral resources.

Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Lake Elsinore GP EIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 87 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis

3.12 Noise
Environmental Impact Issues
Prior EIR Impact
Determination
Significant
peculiar impact
with uniform
measures
incorporated?
Potentially
significant
impact not
identified in
prior EIR?
New significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
No new
information
indicating a
substantial
increase in
impact severity?
The Lake Elsinore GP would result in a significant impact to noise if it would:

Criterion 1: Exposure of persons or
generation of noise levels in excess
of standards established in the
local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards
of other agencies.

Significant and
Unavoidable
Criterion 2: Exposure of persons to
or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 3: A substantial
permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the
project.

Significant and
Unavoidable
Criterion 4: A substantial
temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing
without the project.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 5: 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,
exposure of people residing or
working in the project area to
excessive noise levels.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 6: For a project within a
vicinity of a private airstrip, expose
people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise
levels.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
This section includes the findings of Noise Impact Analysis prepared by Urban Crossroads (November 2024) and is included in Appendix H.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 88 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis Discussion
The Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP would result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to increased traffic noise that would result in permanent substantial ambient noise levels in excess of standards established in the City’s Zoning Code. However, the buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP would have less than significant impacts with respect to generation of groundborne vibration and noise levels and substantial temporary or periodic ambient noise levels with the incorporation of mitigation measures MM Noise 7 and MM Noise 9.

The Noise Impact Study prepared for the Project determined that the Project would contribute to potential construction-related noise impacts, including groundborne vibration. The Noise Impact study concluded that construction vibration associated with the Project would exceed the City’s threshold at least two of the sensitive receiver locations within the Project site. As such, it is recommended that the Project use of a 24-foot vibration buffer zone to restrict the use of large loaded trucks and dozers within 50 feet of the sensitive receiver locations to reduce potential impacts. With the incorporation of the buffer zone, the Noise Impact Study determined that construction-related vibration impacts would be less than significant. While not required to make a finding of less than significant impacts, the City will impose its standard COAs, COA NOI-1, which would ensure that the Project implement the 24-foot vibration buffer.

As such, COA NOI-1 would be consistent with Approved EIR MM Noise 7, which required development projects prepare vibration mitigation plan that includes how construction-related vibration would be mitigated during. As such, the Project would not result in new impacts or new mitigation not previously analyzed or required by the Approved EIR. Further, no operation-related noise impacts are anticipated to occur, and no mitigation to reduce potential operational noise impacts are required.

Lastly, the Project site in not located within an airport land use plan or near a public or private airstrip. As such, there would be no impact regarding noise from an airport or airstrip. Impacts would be less than significant with no mitigation necessary.

Through incorporation of Project-specific mitigation measures and compliance with the Lake Elsinore GP EIR mitigation measures, the Lake Elsinore GP Noise Element, and the City’s Zoning Code, the Project would not result in adverse impacts to noise. As such, the Project would be consistent with the findings of the Lake Elsinore GP EIR and a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated would occur.

Project Mitigation Measures
No Project-specific mitigation measures are required.

Standard City Conditions of Approval
COA NOI-1 Large load trucks and dozers (80,000 pounds or more) shall not be used within 24-feet of any receiver location at the time of Project construction. Instead, smaller, rubber-tired bulldozers (less than 80,000 pounds) shall be used within this area during construction to reduce vibration effects.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 89 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis Lake Elsinore General Plan Applicable Policies
Policy 7.1 Apply the noise standards set forth in the Lake Elsinore Noise and Land Use Compatibility Matrix (see Table 3-1) and Interior and Exterior Noise Standards (see Table 3-2) when considering all new development and redevelopment proposed within the City.

Lake Elsinore Plan EIR Mitigation Measures
MM Noise 7 For projects that have a potential to generate construction-related groundborne vibration (e.g., use of pile drivers, rock drills, and pavement breakers), the City shall require the project applicant to submit construction-related vibration mitigation plan to the City for review and approval. The mitigation plan shall depict the location of the construction equipment and activities and how the vibration from this equipment and activity would be mitigated during construction of the project. The City shall require binding mitigation measures implementing the approved mitigation plan.

MM Noise 9 The City shall require project applicants to demonstrate their compliance with City standards regarding construction noise. Where project-specific analysis determines that noise standards may be exceeded, the City shall require binding mitigation measures that will reduce the construction noise to acceptable levels.

Conclusion
The Project would incorporate MM NOI-1 to reduce potential noise impacts to nearby sensitive receptors.

Further, through the completion of a Noise Survey and compliance with the identified Project-specific mitigation measures, the Project is consistent with the Lake Elsinore GP EIR mitigation measures MM Noise 7 and MM Noise 9, which requires project applicants to assess construction-related noise and ground born vibration impacts and provide appropriate mitigation measures, where applicable. With the incorporation of mitigation measures and adherence to policies related to noise as outlined in the Lake Elsinore GP Noise element and the City’s Zoning Code, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that impacts to noise from implementation of the Lake Elsinore GP, would be less than significant.

No new impacts relative to adverse noise impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR would occur. With regard to PRC Section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the Project would not result in any new impacts, or increase the previously identified impact’s severity, with respect to noise. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Lake Elsinore GP EIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of significant and unavoidable.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 90 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis This page intentionally left blank.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 91 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis

3.13 Parks and Recreation
Environmental Impact Issues
Prior EIR Impact
Determination
Significant
peculiar impact
with uniform
measures
incorporated?
Potentially
significant
impact not
identified in
prior EIR?
New significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
No new
information
indicating a
substantial
increase in
impact severity?
The Lake Elsinore GP would result in a significant impact to parks and recreation if it would:

Criterion 1: Increase the use of
existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration
of the facility would occur or be
accelerated
Less Than
Significant
Criterion 2: Induce recreational
facilities or require the
construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might
have an adverse physical effect on
the environment.

Less Than
Significant
Discussion
The Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP could potentially result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the increased use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreation facilities caused by the increase in population and development within the City and SOI. However, implementation of the applicable Lake Elsinore GP goals, policies, and implementation programs defined under the Parks and Recreation section, Land Use section of the Community For Chapter, reduce impacts on recreational facilities on a programmatic level. Furthermore, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR identified that implementation of MM Parks and Recreation 1 would further reduce impacts to parks and recreation resources caused by future individual development projects. As such, with the implementation of the applicable Lake Elsinore GP goals and policies and MM Parks and Recreation 1, buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP would have a less than significant impact on parks and recreation.

While the Project would generate approximately 347 new residents to the area surrounding the Project site, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR accounted for the increase in population and determined that with implementation of the Lake Elsinore GP goals and policies at the City-level, future development projects would not have a significant impact on parks and recreation. The Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that individual projects would have to demonstrate avoidance of impacts on parks and recreation through implementation of the applicable Lake Elsinore GP goals and policies relating to parks and recreation.

Therefore, the Project would adhere to Policy 1.1, by promoting innovative design, and to Policy 8.6 by incorporating the residential clubhouse to serve as private recreational facilities within the Project site.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 92 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis Through the compliance with the applicable Lake Elsinore GP goals and policies, the Project would have a less than significant impact on parks and recreation and would be consistent with the Lake Elsinore GP EIR.

Project Mitigation Measures
No Project-specific mitigation measures are required.

Lake Elsinore General Plan Applicable Policies
Policy 1.1 Promote innovation site design, and encourage the preservation of unique natural features, such as steep slopes, watercourses, canyons, ridgelines, rock formations, and open space with recreational opportunities.

Policy 8.6 Encourage the development of private recreational facilities within residential and mixed used developments.

Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR Applicable Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.

Conclusion
No new impacts relative to adverse parks and recreation impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR would occur. With regard to PRC Section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the Project would not result in any new impacts, or increase the previously identified impact’s severity, with respect to parks and recreation, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Lake Elsinore GP EIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 93 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis

3.14 Population and Housing
Environmental Impact Issues
Prior EIR Impact
Determination
Significant
peculiar impact
with uniform
measures
incorporated?
Potentially
significant
impact not
identified in
prior EIR?
New significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
No new
information
indicating a
substantial
increase in
impact severity?
The Lake Elsinore GP would result in a significant impact to population and housing if it would:

Criterion 1: Induce substantial
population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by
proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure) ;
Less Than
Significant
Criterion 2: Displaces substantial
numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere;
Less Than
Significant
Criterion 3: Displace substantial
number of people, necessitating
the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere.

Less Than
Significant
Discussion
The Project would include the development of a vacant parcel of land with 12 apartment buildings that would accommodate 96 dwelling units. According to the United States Census Bureau, the average persons per household in 2023 were 3.6110; therefore, the Project could potentially generate approximately 347 new people to the population. The proposed multi-family residential land uses would incrementally increase the total population in the City. However, the minimal increase in population growth has been accounted for within the Lake Elsinore GP EIR. Buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP by 2030 would accommodate a total population size of approximately 318,856 persons. Further, the Lake Elsinore Housing Element anticipates approximately 6,681 units for the 2021 to 2029 cycle. The Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP would have less than significant impacts to population growth within the City through compliance with associated goals and policies and programs that target growth-related impacts. The Lake Elsinore GP would direct growth and development in a sustainable way so the City can avoid significant physical impacts that could result from population growth.

Considering the Project site is vacant, the Project would not displace substantial existing housing or existing numbers of people requiring the construction of replacement housing. Further the Project 10 The United States Census Bureau. 2023. 2023: ACS 1-Year Estimates Data Profiles. Available at:
https://data.census.gov/table?q=persons%20per%20household%20lake%20elsinore,%20CA&g=160XX00US0639486 (accessed February 2024).

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 94 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis minimal increase in population resulting from Project development has been considered as part of the Lake Elsinore GP EIR. As such, the Project would maintain consistency with the findings of the Lake Elsinore GP and a less than significant impact would occur.

Project Mitigation Measures
No Project-specific mitigation measures are required.

Lake Elsinore General Plan Applicable Policies
Policy 1.2 Encourage the infilling of vacant residential land and the recycling of underutilized residential land, particularly downtown.

Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR Applicable Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.

Conclusion
No new impacts relative to adverse population and housing impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR would occur.

With regard to PRC Section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the Project would not result in any new impacts, or increase the previously identified impact’s severity, with respect to population and housing. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Lake Elsinore GP EIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 95 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis

3.15 Public Services
Environmental Impact Issues
Prior EIR Impact
Determination
Significant
peculiar impact
with uniform
measures
incorporated?
Potentially
significant
impact not
identified in
prior EIR?
New significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
No new
information
indicating a
substantial
increase in
impact severity?
The Lake Elsinore GP would result in a significant impact to public services if it would:

Criterion 1: 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
police protection, fire protection,
school, libraries, and animal control.

Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Discussion
Police services for the City are provided via a contract with the County of Riverside Sheriff’s Department.

The Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that with the increase in population with buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP, more police staffing would be required to adequately serve the greater population, which would also require the construction of new or improved government facilities. However, Policies 8.2, 8.3, 8.4 of the Public Safety and Welfare chapter of the Community Facilities and Protection Services section of the Lake Elsinore GP would address potentially significant impacts, mainly through coordination with the County of Riverside to provide adequate police service and staffing. With compliance with the aforementioned policies, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP would be less than significant with respect to police services.

Fire protection for the City is provided via contracts with the Riverside County Fire Department. An increase in population growth within the City would also increase demand for fire and other related emergency response services, potentially increasing the need for additional equipment and personnel.

However, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that compliance with Policy 8.1 of the Public Safety and Welfare chapter of the Community Facilities and Protection Services section of the Lake Elsinore GP would reduce potential impacts to fire protection services, and a less than significant impact would occur.

The Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP would have potentially significant impacts to schools within the City. However, through compliance with Policies 9.1 and 9.2 of the Public Safety and Welfare chapter of the Community Facilities and Protection Services section of the Lake Elsinore GP, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that impacts to schools from buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP would be less than significant.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 96 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis Lastly, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that other public facilities that may be impacted by buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP would include libraries and animal control services. However, impacts would be reduced to both libraries and animal control services through compliance with Goal 10 and related Implementation Program for libraries and Policies 11.1 and 11.2 for animal control services as outlined in the Public Safety and Welfare chapter of the Community Facilities and Protection Services section of the Lake Elsinore GP. As such, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP would have less than significant impacts to libraries and animal control services.

The Project would include the development of a 12 multi-family residential buildings that would accommodate 96 dwelling units across one 4.95-acre parcel, which would constitute a minimal increase in overall population within the City. Further, the Lake Elsinore GP determined that future buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP, which includes the Project, would have a less than significant impact to policies services, fire protection, schools, libraries, and animal control services. As such, the Project would be consistent with the findings of the Lake Elsinore GP EIR and a less than significant impact would occur.

Project Mitigation Measures
No Project-specific mitigation measures are required.

Lake Elsinore General Plan Applicable Policies
No General Plan policies are applicable on the Project-level.

Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR Applicable Mitigation Measures No Mitigation Measures are applicable.

Conclusion
No new impacts relative to adverse public services impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR would occur. With regard to PRC Section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the Project would not result in any new impacts, or increase the previously identified impact’s severity, with respect to public services.

Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Lake Elsinore GP EIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 97 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis

3.16 Transportation and Circulation
Environmental Impact Issues
Prior EIR Impact
Determination
Significant
peculiar impact
with uniform
measures
incorporated?
Potentially
significant
impact not
identified in
prior EIR?
New significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
No new
information
indicating a
substantial
increase in
impact severity?
The Lake Elsinore GP would result in a significant impact to transportation and circulation if it would:

Criterion 1: Conflict with an
applicable plan, ordinance, or
policy establishing measures of
effectiveness for the performance
of the circulation system, taking
into account all modes of
transportation including mass
transit and non-motorized travel
and relevant components of the
circulation system, including but
not limited to intersections,
streets, highways and freeways,
pedestrian and bicycle paths, and
mass transit.

Significant and
Unavoidable
Criterion 2: Conflict with an
applicable CMP, including, but not
limited to LOS standards and travel
demand measures, or other
standards established by the
county congestion management
agency for designated roads or
highways.

Significant and
unavoidable
Criterion 3: Result in a change in
air traffic patterns, including either
an increase in traffic levels or a
change in location that results in
substantial safety risks.

Less than
Significant
Criterion 4: Substantially increase
hazards due to a design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment).

Less than
significant
Criterion 5: Result in inadequate
emergency access.

Less than
Significant
Criterion 6: Conflict with adopted
policies, plans, or programs
regarding public transit, bicycle, or
pedestrian facilities, or otherwise
decrease the performance of
safety of such facilities.

Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 98 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis The analysis below is based part on the results of a Vehicle Miles Traveled Screening Analysis Memo prepared by Translutions, Inc. (2023) to determine potential traffic impacts resulting from Project development and is included in Appendix I.

Discussion
The Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that development resulting from buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP would result in significant and unavoidable impacts with respect to traffic and circulation. While the proposed road improvements would improve level of service on a regional basis, the timing of the improvements may not be constructed in time to mitigate the proposed traffic and circulation impacts to less than significant levels. Therefore, it was determined that the Lake Elsinore GP, even with mitigation and compliance with the Lake Elsinore GP policies outlined in the Circulation Section of the Community Form chapter, impacts would remain significant.

As previously mentioned, a Project-specific Vehicle Miles Traveled screening analysis (Appendix I) was prepared to determine potential traffic impacts resulting from Project development. The analysis was conducted based on the City of Lake Elsinore Traffic Impact Analysis Preparation Guide (Guide or Guidelines), adopted June 23, 2020, and Revised November 14, 2022. While the Guide includes a CEQA Assessment for VMT analysis and based on the identified VMT thresholds and screening methodologies, the City still maintains Level of Service (LOS) policies as part of the Lake Elsinore GP and discretionary review process as used as a basis for analysis for the Lake Elsinore GP EIR.

Based on the Guidelines, Multi Family Low Rise Residential (Up to 2 levels) development projects of up to 200 dwelling units are screened out of requiring a detailed analysis and the impacts are considered to be less than significant. Since the Project proposes 96 dwelling units, it screens out from further VMT analyses, and the impacts are presumed to be less than significant.

Although buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP was determined to have significant and unavoidable impacts with respect to traffic and LOS, the City has since adopted VMT screening analysis thresholds and methodologies in compliance with Senate Bill 743 (SB 743), which maintains consistency with CEQA significance thresholds for potential project-related traffic impacts. The Project would still be required to maintain consistency with the Goals and Policies outlined in the Lake Elsinore GP Circulation Section of the Community Form chapter. As such, the Project would not result in new significant impacts related to adverse traffic, circulation, and access impacts and the Project maintain consistency with the findings of the Lake Elsinore GP EIR.

Project Mitigation Measures
No Project-specific mitigation measures are required.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 99 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis Lake Elsinore General Plan Applicable Policies
Policy 6.3 Maximize the use of shared driveways and on-site circulation to minimize conflicts at access points to the roadway network.

Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are applicable.

Conclusion
No new impacts relative to adverse traffic, circulation, and access impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR would occur.

With regard to PRC Section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the previously identified impact’s severity with respect to traffic, circulation, and access to the site.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 100 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis This page intentionally left blank.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 101 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Environmental Impact Issues
Prior EIR Impact
Determination
Significant
peculiar impact
with uniform
measures
incorporated?
Potentially
significant
impact not
identified in
prior EIR?
New significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
No new
information
indicating a
substantial
increase in
impact severity?
The Lake Elsinore GP would result in a significant impact to utilities and service systems if it would:

Criterion 1: Exceed wastewater
treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality
Control Board.

Less Than
Significant
Criterion 2: Require or result in the
construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities that
the construction of could cause
significant environmental effects.

Less Than
Significant
Criterion 3: Have sufficient water
supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements
and resources, or are new or
expanded entitlements needed.

Less Than
Significant
Criterion 4: 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.

Less Than
Significant
Criterion 5: Be served by landfills
with insufficient permitted capacity
to accommodate the project’s solid
waste disposal needs.

Less Than
Significant
Criterion 6: Comply with federal,
state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste
Less Than
Significant
Criterion 7: Require or result in the
construction of new electrical,
natural gas, or telecommunication
facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which
could cause environmental effects.

Less Than
Significant
Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 102 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis Discussion
As previously described, the Project would receive water services from the EVMWD. At complete buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP, average daily wastewater generation would be 30.16 million gallons per day (GPD). Specifically, for the 229-acre Residential Mixed Use area dedicated to residential uses, the average daily GPD would be 377,850 GPD at complete buildout in 2030.11 Compared to the total estimated wastewater generation of the Lake Elsinore GP, residential uses within the Residential Mixed Use Lake Elsinore GP Land Use Designation would account for approximately 1.25 percent12 of the total wastewater average generation. Considering the Project is approximately 4.95 acres, the Project would account for approximately 2.16 percent13 of the total estimated average daily wastewater generation anticipated by residential uses of the complete buildout of the Residential Mixed Use Lake Elsinore GP Land Use Designation. Furthermore, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP would result in less than significant impacts with respect to wastewater generation and EVMWD would have adequate capacity to serve buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP. As such, the minimal increase in wastewater generation would be within the anticipated average daily wastewater generation as analyzed in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR and Project impacts would be less than significant in this regard.

At complete buildout, the estimated total annual water demand for the Lake Elsinore GP would be 66,621.85 acre-foot/year (AF/Yr).14 For the 229-acre area dedicated for residential uses within the Residential Mixed Use Land Use Designation, the average daily water demand would be 526,700 GPD, or approximately 590 AF annually.15 As previously described, the Project would account for approximately

2.16 percent of the total estimated annual water demand anticipated by residential uses of complete buildout of the Residential Mixed Use Lake Elsinore GP Land Use Designation. Furthermore, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP would result in less than significant impacts with respect to EVMWD available and future water supplies. As such, the minimal increase in water demand would result in less than significant impacts related to EVMWD water supplies in normal year, single- and multiple-dry years.

Riverside County Waste Management facilities solid waste disposal for Riverside County and the City of Lake Elsinore contracts with CR&R for trash pick-up. Solid waste produced within the City and SOI are not disposed of within the City but is transported to El Sobrante Landfill, Badlands Landfill, or Lamb Canyon Landfill. The Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that total construction-related and operation-related waste resulting from buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP would account for 0.25 percent and 2.1 percent of the combined daily permitted capacity of all landfills serving the City, respectively, resulting in a less than significant impact to solid waste facilities. Considering the Project accounts for approximately 2.16 percent of the dedicated residential uses within the Residential Mixed Use Lake Elsinore GP Land Use 11 City of Lake Elsinore. 2011. Draft Program EIR Section 3.16 – Utilities and Service Systems Table 3.16-4, page 3.16-19. https://www.lakeelsinore.org/DocumentCenter/View/2306/Section-316---Utilities-and-Service-Systems-PDF. Accessed September 2024. 12 (377,850/30,160,000) * 100 = 1.25 percent.
13 (4.95/229) * 100 = 2.16 percent.
14 City of Lake Elsinore. 2011. Draft Program EIR Section 3.16 – Utilities and Service Systems Table 3.16-9, page 3.16-26. https://www.lakeelsinore.org/DocumentCenter/View/2306/Section-316---Utilities-and-Service-Systems-PDF. Accessed September 2024. 15 (526,700 gallons/day) * (365 days/year) * ( 1 acre-foot/325,851 gallons) = 589.97 AF/Yr Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 103 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis Designation, the Project would have minimal impact to solid waste and a less than significant impact would occur.

According to the Lake Elsinore GP EIR, both Southern California Edison (SCE) and the SoCal Gas Company anticipate the ability to accommodate future growth within the City. Further, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that future development projects would be required to comply with Policies 12.1, 12.2, 12.3, and the Implementation Project as outlined in the Community Facilities and Protection Services section of the Public Safety and Welfare Chapter of the Lake Elsinore GP, which require future development projects to coordinate with SCE and the SoCal Gas Company to request “will serve” letters and to notify the utility service providers early in the planning process. Through compliance with the aforementioned Lake Elsinore GP policies, the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that future buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP would have less than significant impacts on electrical, natural gas, and telecommunication services and facilities.

Project implementation would result in a minimal increase in demand for water, sewer, trash, and energy services. The Project would be consistent with the existing land use designation and zoning of the Project site. Considering that Lake Elsinore determined that complete buildout of the Lake Elsinore GP, which includes development of the Project site for the proposed land uses, would be less than significant, the Project would have less than significant impacts with respect to associated utilities and service systems.

As such, the Project would maintain consistency with the findings of the Lake Elsinore GP EIR.

Project Mitigation Measures
No Project-specific mitigation measures are required.

Lake Elsinore General Plan Applicable Policies
Policy 12.3 Encourage developers to incorporate energy efficient design measures into their projects and pursue available energy efficiency assistance programs from SCE and other utility agencies.

Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR Applicable Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.

Conclusion
No new impacts relative to adverse public utilities impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR would occur. With regard to PRC Section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the Project would not result in any new impacts, or increase the severity of the previously identified impacts, with respect to public utilities.

Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Lake Elsinore GP EIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 104 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis

3.18 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Environmental Impact Issues
Prior EIR Impact
Determination
Significant
peculiar impact
with uniform
measures
incorporated?
Potentially
significant
impact not
identified in
prior EIR?
New significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
No new
information
indicating a
substantial
increase in
impact severity?
Would the Project:

Criterion 1: Does the project have
the potential to substantially
degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below selfsustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, substantially reduce
the number or restrict the range of
a rare or endangered plant or
animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Criterion 2: 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)?
Significant and
Unavoidable
Criterion 3: Does the project have
environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
Significant and
Unavoidable
Discussion
As described throughout the analysis above, the Project would not result in significant impacts to the environment that cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level through the application of uniformly applied development policies and/or standards that were not already disclosed in the certified Lake Elsinore EIR. The Project would be required to implement a range of standard and uniformly applied development policies and standards, as well as Project-applicable identified mitigation measures, all of which are identified in the certified Lake Elsinore EIR and associated technical studies prepared to assess Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 105 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis Project-related environmental impacts. Both the Lake Elsinore GP and Project-specific mitigation measures would reduce the majority of potentially significant impacts to less than significant levels. The cumulative impacts associated with development of the Project were considered, analyzed and disclosed in the Lake Elsinore GP EIR. As demonstrated in the analyses above, the Project displays consistency with the Lake Elsinore GP EIR.

As mentioned in Sections 3.3 and 3.4, the Project would not result in cumulative impacts that were not contemplated in the certified Lake Elsinore GP EIR nor would the Project result in peculiar site-specific impacts, impacts to biological resources or impacts to cultural and/or historical resources. Furthermore, these impact determinations are consistent with the certified Lake Elsinore GP EIR. The Project would adhere to Lake Elsinore GP EIR mitigation measures MM Biological Resources 4-5, and MM Cultural/Paleontological Resource 2-8, which would further ensure that impacts related to biological and cultural resources would be reduced to less than significant levels.

As described in the analyses above, the Project would not result in environmental effects that would cause new or more severe impacts on human beings either directly or indirectly. While the Lake Elsinore GP EIR determined that implementation of the Lake Elsinore GP would have a significant and unavoidable impact in this regard, the Project would have a less than significant impact. Where mitigation is required, the Project would implement such measures to reduce potential direct and indirect impacts to human beings to less than significant levels.

Considering the analyses above, the Project would not cause neither a new impact, nor an increase in the severity of an impact previously disclosed. No further analysis is required.

Section 3.0
Environmental Analysis
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 106 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis This page intentionally left blank.

Section 4.0
References
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 107 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis

4. REFERENCES
BioCultural. 2023. Biological Survey for Riverside County Assessor’s Parcel Number 379315003.

BioCultural. 2023. Burrowing Owl Survey for Riverside County Assessor’s Parcel Number 379315003.

BioCultural. 2023. Cultural Resources Assessment in Support of a Commercial Residential Development Project, Lake Elsinore, Riverside County, California.

Blue Engineering and Consulting. 2024. Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan.

California Department of Toxic Substances Control. (2024). DTSC's Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List - Site Cleanup (Cortese List).
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/?global_id=60003205.

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). (2018). California State Scenic Highway System Map. https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e805 7116f1aacaa.

California Department of Water Resources. 2017. Dam Breach Inundation Map Web Publisher – Railroad Canyon Dam Inundation Map. https://fmds.water.ca.gov/webgis/?appid=dam_prototype_v2.

CalFire. 2024. Fire Hazard Severity Zones. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/what-we-do/community-wildfirepreparedness-and-mitigation/fire-hazard-severity-zones.

City of Lake Elsinore. 2013. City of Lake Elsinore General Plan Chapter 9.0 Lake View District Plan, page LV-3. https://www.lake-elsinore.org/DocumentCenter/View/2233/90-Lake-View-District-PDF City of Lake Elsinore. 2011. General Plan Draft Program EIR. https://www.lake-elsinore.org/467/GeneralPlan---Certified-EIR.

City of Lake Elsinore. 2024. The Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Chapter 17.86 RMU Residential Mixed Use District.https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/LakeElsinore/#!/LakeElsinore17/LakeElsinore1786 .html#17.86
City of Lake Elsinore. 2024. The Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Chapter 19.08 Water Efficient Landscape Requirements.https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/LakeElsinore/#!/LakeElsinore19/LakeElsino re1908.html#19.08
GeoSoils Consultants. 2023. Geologic and Geotechnical Engineering Investigation.

MD Acoustics. 2024. CEQA Energy Review.

Section 4.0
References
Riverside Drive Apartments Project 108 CEQA Section 15183 Analysis PaleoWest. 2023. Paleontological Resource Assessment for the 32281 Riverside Drive Development Project.

Partner Engineering and Science, Inc. 2023. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report.

Partner Engineering and Science, Inc. 2023. Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report.

Partner Engineering and Science, Inc. 2023. Additional Investigation Report.

Partner Engineering and Science, Inc. 2025. Vapor Intrusion Technical Memorandum.

Translutions. 2023. 32281 Riverside Drive Apartments VMT Screening Analysis.

The United States Census Bureau. 2023. 2023: ACS 1-Year Estimates Data Profiles. https://data.census.gov/table?q=persons%20per%20household%20lake%20elsinore,%20CA&g= 160XX00US0639486
Urban Crossroads. 2024. Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis.

Urban Crossroads. 2024. Noise Impact Analysis.
0 155 310
US Feet
±
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California VI FIPS 0406 Feet Planning Application No. 2023-06
RDR No. 2023-05
Aerial Map
Earthstar
Geographics

LINCOLN ST

DOLLY DR

LAKE VISTA DR
ADAMS
ST

TAYLOR ST

LINNET DR

MADISON
ST

MARI DR

WILSON ST

MADISON CT

AMBER LN
ROBIN
DR

HIGHLANDS RD

AMBERWOOD CT

CLEVELAND CT MCKINLEY ST

ROOSEVELT DR

MONROE ST

BUCHANAN ST

FLANNERY ST

RIVERSIDE DR EISENHOWER DR

LAKE CREST DR
Maxar
0 120 240
US Feet
±
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California VI FIPS 0406 Feet Planning Application No. 2023-06
RDR No. 2023-05
Vicinity Map LINCOLN ST

AMBER LN MADISON ST

WILSON ST

MADISON CT

BUCHANAN ST

CLEVELAND CT MCKINLEY ST

MONROE ST

FLANNERY ST

EISENHOWER DR

RIVERSIDE DR

LAKE CREST DR
0 100 200
US Feet
±
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California VI FIPS 0406 Feet Planning Application No. 2023-06
RDR No. 2023-05
General Plan Exhibit
F -
Floodway
F -
Floodway
MDR - Medium
Density
Residential
P/I -
Public/Institutional
R -
Recreational
R -
Recreational
RMU -
Residential
Mixed Use
RMU -
Residential
Mixed Use
GC - General
Commercial
LMR -
Low-Medium
Residential
MDR - Medium
Density
Residential
HDR - High
Density
Residential

FLANNERY ST

MADISON CT

MCKINLEY ST CLEVELAND CT MONROE ST

EISENHOWER DR

RIVERSIDE DR

LAKE CREST DR
0 100 200
US Feet
±
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California VI FIPS 0406 Feet Planning Application No. 2023-06
RDR No. 2023-05
Zoning Exhibit
C2 - General
Commercial
RMU -
Residential
Mixed Use
RMU -
Residential
Mixed Use
R1 - Single
Family
Residential
F - Floodway

MADISON
ST

MADISON CT

FLANNERY ST

CLEVELAND CT MCKINLEY ST

MONROE ST

EISENHOWER DR

RIVERSIDE DR

LAKE CREST DR
RIVERSIDE DRIVE APARTMENTS 32281 RIVERSIDE DRIVE, ELSINORE, CA 96 Apartment Homes WJK DEVELOPMENT CO. / RSI EQUITY GRANT KEENE (949)677-0668 MICHAEL McHALE, ARCHITECT (949) 566-4951 3/13/24 SCALE: 1" = 30' - 0" SCHEMATIC SITE PLAN 14 1 N37°32'54"E N52°27'29"W
395.65' 545.35'
395.69' RAMP CALL BOX 20' 1-WAY DRIVE 20' 1-WAY DRIVE 10 10 9 9 10 5155 10 8 1112 8 10 4 8 CARPORTS RAMP RAMP 9
RAMP 2 STORY BLDG 9 BLDG TYPE A1 2 STORY BLDG 10 BLDG TYPE A2 2 STORY BLDG 7 BLDG TYPE B1 2 STORY BLDG 6 BLDG TYPE A2 2 STORY BLDG 12 BLDG TYPE B1 2 STORY BLDG 11 BLDG TYPE B2 2 STORY BLDG 5 BLDG TYPE B1 2 STORY BLDG 4 BLDG TYPE B2 EVCS EVCS ACTIVE ACTIVE RAMP
RAMP RAMP GATE GATE 5' WIDE WALKWAY 28' DRIVE AISLE
28' DRIVE AISLE RAMP RAMP
NO

PARKING

VAN NO PARKING VAN ACCESSIBLE

ACCESSIBLE

EVCS EVCS
RIVERSIDE DRIVE CL EISEHOWER DRIVE CL 8 CARPORTS
8 CARPORTS 8 CARPORTS 8 CARPORTS 2 STORY BLDG 8 BLDG TYPE A2 8 CARPORTS BUILDING TYPE A PLAN NO.: D.U. S.F. COVERED BALCONY S.F. QUANTITY PATIO S.F. 1 710 S.F. 60 S.F. 84 S.F. 8 D.U. TOTAL: 5,680 S.F. 240 S.F. 336 S.F. 8 D.U. BUILDING TYPE B PLAN NO.: D.U. S.F. COVERED BALCONY S.F. QUANTITY PATIO S.F. 2 1,080 S.F. 60 S.F. 84 S.F. 8 D.U. TOTAL: 8,640 S.F. 240 S.F. 336 S.F. 8 D.U. BUILDINGS SUMMARY BUILDINGS BLDG. NO.: D.U. S.F. COVERED BALCONY S.F. QUANTITY PATIO S.F. A 28,400 S.F. 1,200 S.F. 1,200 S.F. 5 BLDGS. B 60,480 S.F. 1,680 S.F. 1,680 S.F 7 BLDGS. CLUB 1,597 S.F. 490 S.F. 1 BLDG. TOTAL: 87,517 S.F. 3,370 S.F. 4,032 S.F. 13 BLDGS. PARKING ANALYSIS PARKING REQUIRED: 1 BDRM: 40 D.U. X 1.67 SPACES = 67 SPACES 2 BDRMS: 56 D.U. X 2.33 SPACES = 131 SPACES TOTAL: 96 D.U. 198 SPACES QUANTITY PROVIDED: 200 SPACES TYPE QUANTITY QUANTITY REQUIRED PROVIDED CARPORTS: 96 SPACES 99 SPACES OPEN SPACES: 102 SPACES 101 SPACES HANDICAP SPACES: CARPORTS: 99 X 2% 2 SPACES 2 SPACES OPEN SPACES: ASSIGNED: 62 X 2% 2 SPACES 2 SPACES GUEST: 40 X 5% 2 SPACES 3 SPACES ELECTRIC VEHICLE PARKING: ACTIVE EVCS SPACES REQUIRED: 21 SPACES 21 ACTIVE EVCS (1 VAN SPACE) PROVIDED PARKING SPACE SIZES: ALL OPEN NON-HANDICAP PARKING SPACES SHALL BE 9' WIDE BY 18' DEEP WITH WHEEL STOPS WHEN PARKING SPACES ARE ADJACENT TO WALKWAYS. STRIPING SHALL BE 4" WIDE PAINTED ON TOP OF PAVING. ALL CARPORTS SHALL BE 9'-6" WIDE BY 20' DEEP. HANDICAP SPACES SHALL BE 10' WIDE IN CARPORTS. PLAN SQ. FTG. BDRMS BATHS BALCONY QUANTITY 1 730 S.F. 1 1 60 S.F 40 D.U. [41.6 PERCENT] 2 1,090 S.F. 2 2 60 S.F 56 D.U. [58.4 PERCENT] TOTAL: 96 D.U. PROJECT SUMMARY ZONE: RMU APN: 379-315-033 GROSS SITE AREA: 4.95 ACRES (215,793 S.F.) NET SITE AREA: 4.90 ACRES (213,415 S.F.) NO. OF DWELLING UNITS: 96 D.U. ALLOWABLE DENSITY: 19-24 D.U./ ACRE DENSITY PROVIDED: 19.6 D.U./ ACRE CONSTRUCTION TYPE: TYPE V-B, SPRINKLERED OCCUPANCY TYPE: R-2, B, U PARKING LOT LANDSCAPE SUMMARY PARKING LOT AREA: 79,009 S.F. REQUIRED LANDSCAPE AREA: 79009 S.F. X 5% 3,950 S.F. (5%) PROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA: 5,042 S.F. (6.24%) RAMP RAMP NO
PARKING 5 CARPORTS CLUBHOUSE
UP
UP UP
UP UP
UP UP
UP UP
UP UP
UP
UP
UP UP
UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP FIRE TRUCK TURNING RADIUS 14' RADIUS 38' RADIUS 5' WIDE WALKWAY 5' WIDE WALKWAY 5' WIDE WALKWAY 5' WIDE WALKWAY
5' WIDE WALKWAY
5' WIDE WALKWAY
5' WIDE WALKWAY 5' WIDE WALKWAY
5' WIDE WALKWAY 6' HIGH SPLIT FACE BLOCK WALL 6' HIGH SPLIT FACE BLOCK WALL 6' HIGH SPLIT FACE BLOCK WALL
10'-6" 20'-0" 31'-10" 20'-0"
12'-8"
9'-0" 5'-6" 20'-0" 28'-0" 20'-0" 4'-2"
10'-8" 10' 16'-6" 10' 20'-0" 28'-0" 20'-0" 15'-0" 13'-0" 21' 20'-0" 20'-0" 14'-0" 20'-0" DECORATIVE PAVING 15' 25'-6" 28' 21' 20'-0" 28'-0" 20'-0" 15'-0" 12'-4" 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 15'
13' 5'-10" 10'-0" 10'-0"
20'-0"
15'
20'
15'
20'-0"
16'
12'-6"
10' 10'-0" 13'-0" 17'-0"
10'
10' MONUMENT SIGNAGE 9' 8' (VAN)
18' HANDICAP SYMBOL HANDICAP STRIPING 9' 5' (STD.)
ACCESSIBLE PARKING (BY ADA) GATED ENTRANCES MOTORIZED DRIVEWAY GATES SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH KNOX KEY SWITCHES ON BOTH THE PRIVATE PROPERTY SIDE AND THE PUBLIC ACCESSIBLE SIDE OF THE GATES. IF VEHICLE SENSOR LOOPS ARE PROVIDED TO OPERATE THE GATES AUTOMATICALLY FROM THE EGRESS DIRECTION, THEN THE KEY SWITCHES ARE ONLY REQUIRED ON THE INGRESS SIDE (CFC 503.6) MOTORIZED DRIVEWAY GATES SHALL ALSO BE EQUIPPED WITH A SYSTEM THAT AUTOMATICALLY OPENS THE GATES REMOTELY BY SIGNAL PREEMPTION FROM AN APPROACHING EMERGENCY FIRE APPARATUS VEHICLE. UPON INSTALLATION OF THE SYSTEM FUNCTIONAL TESTING SHALL BE WITNESSED BY THE LAKE ELSINORE FIRE DEPARTMENT. REFER TO LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR GATE DATA TOT LOT BBQ SPA POOL SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOMES SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOMES SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOMES RAMP RAMP 8 CARPORTS 60' CHANNEL 5,680 S.F. 5,680 S.F. 5,680 S.F. 5,680 S.F. 5,680 S.F. 8,640 S.F. 8,640 S.F. 8,640 S.F. 8,640 S.F. RAMP RAMP 4'-2"
10'-8" NO PARKING VAN ACCESSIBLE NO PARKING RAMP 6
RAMP 5' WIDE WALKWAY
5' WIDE WALKWAY
20' 12'-0" 18'-6" 19'-1" 15'-9" 20'
UP
UP UP
UP 35' KNOX BOX - INFRARED GATE OPENER 58

RAMP RAMP RAMP NO

PARKING
8 CARPORTS
UP UP
UP UP
UP UP
UP UP
5' WIDE WALKWAY 20'-0" 13'-8" 10'-0" 15'-6"
20'
12'-0"
10'-0"
20'-6" 13'-8" 2 STORY BLDG 2 BLDG TYPE B1 8,640 S.F.2 STORY BLDG 3 BLDG TYPE B2 8,640 S.F.2 STORY BLDG 1 BLDG TYPE A1 5,680 S.F. 10 8 CARPORTS MOTOR 10 4 CARPORTS 20'-0" MOTOR RAMP RAMP
NO

PARKING
VAN 88
364' 131' EMERGENCY GATE 24' DRIVEWAY

RAMP RAMP GATE GATE

ACCESSIBLE
VAN
ACCESSIBLE CLUBHOUSE PLAN NO.: S.F. COVERED. QUANTITY PATIO S.F. CLUBHOUSE 1,597 S.F. 490 S.F. 1 KNOX BOX - INFRARED GATE OPENER TOTAL 1ST FLOOR PRIVATE SPACE SHALL BE 125 S.F. PER UNIT INCLUDING OPEN AND COVERED PRIVATE SPACE 1ST FLOOR PRIVATE OPEN SPACE SUMMARY TOTAL 1ST FLOOR PRIVATE OPEN SPACE 6,000 S.F.

UP UP
UP UP 15'-6" 17'-0" 17'-0"
RAMP 20'RAMP MAIL
VAN
ACCESSIBLE 28' DRIVE AISLE
28' DRIVE AISLE 28' DRIVE AISLE
20'-0"
16' KNOX BOX - INFRARED GATE OPENER
5 CARPORTS 5 CARPORTS RAMP
18'-6"
R.O.W.
5 CARPORTS 3 CARPORTS 3 C.Y. TRASH BIN 3 C.Y. TRASH BIN 3 C.Y. TRASH BIN 3 C.Y. TRASH BIN 3 C.Y. TRASH BIN 3 C.Y. TRASH BIN 3 C.Y. TRASH BIN 3 C.Y. TRASH BIN 3 C.Y. TRASH BIN 3 C.Y. TRASH BIN 3 C.Y. TRASH BIN 3 C.Y. TRASH BIN TRASH ENCLOSURES TRASH BINS REQUIRED: 1 3 C.Y. BIN PER 8 D.U. 12 3 C.Y. BINS TRASH BINS PROVIDED: 12 3 C.Y. BINS COMMON OPEN SPACE ANALYSIS & SUMMARY NET SITE AREA: 213,415 S.F. DRIVEWAYS & PARKING: 79,009 S.F. PARKING LOT LANDSCAPE: 5,042 S.F. BUILDING ROOFS: 52,652 S.F. PRIVATE OPEN SPACE: 6,420 S.F. COMMON OPEN SPACE: 70,292 S.F. S.F. (33%) 8' HIGH SPLIT FACE BLOCK WALL 8' HIGH SPLIT FACE BLOCK WALL RIVERSIDE DRIVE APARTMENTS 32281 RIVERSIDE DRIVE, ELSINORE, CA 96 Apartment Homes WJK DEVELOPMENT CO. / RSI EQUITY
GRANT KEENE (949)677-0668 MICHAEL McHALE, ARCHITECT (949) 566-4951 3/22/24 SCALE: 1" = 30' - 0" SCHEMATIC SITE PLAN 14 PATH OF TRAVEL2 N37°32'54"E N52°27'29"W
395.65' 545.35'
395.69' RAMP CALL BOX 20' 1-WAY DRIVE 20' 1-WAY DRIVE 10 10 9 9 10 5155 1112 8 10 4 8 CARPORTS RAMP RAMP 9
RAMP 2 STORY BLDG 9 BLDG TYPE A1 2 STORY BLDG 10 BLDG TYPE A2 2 STORY BLDG 7 BLDG TYPE B1 2 STORY BLDG 6 BLDG TYPE A2 2 STORY BLDG 12 BLDG TYPE B1 2 STORY BLDG 11 BLDG TYPE B2 2 STORY BLDG 5 BLDG TYPE B1 2 STORY BLDG 4 BLDG TYPE B2 EVCS EVCS ACTIVE ACTIVE RAMP
RAMP RAMP GATE GATE 5' WIDE WALKWAY 28' DRIVE AISLE
28' DRIVE AISLE
NO

PARKING
VAN

ACCESSIBLE

EVCS EVCS

RIVERSIDE DRIVE CL EISEHOWER DRIVE CL
8 CARPORTS 8 CARPORTS 8 CARPORTS 2 STORY BLDG 8 BLDG TYPE A2 8 CARPORTS RAMP RAMP NO
PARKING 5 CARPORTS CLUBHOUSE
UP
UP UP
UP UP
UP UP
UP UP
UP UP
UP
UP
UP UP
UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP 5' WIDE WALKWAY 5' WIDE WALKWAY 5' WIDE WALKWAY 5' WIDE WALKWAY
5' WIDE WALKWAY
5' WIDE WALKWAY
5' WIDE WALKWAY 5' WIDE WALKWAY
5' WIDE WALKWAY 6' HIGH SPLIT FACE BLOCK WALL 6' HIGH SPLIT FACE BLOCK WALL 6' HIGH SPLIT FACE BLOCK WALL
10'-6" 20'-0" 31'-10" 20'-0"
12'-8"
9'-0" 5'-6" 20'-0" 28'-0" 20'-0" 4'-2"
10'-8" 10' 16'-6" 10' 20'-0" 28'-0" 20'-0" 15'-0" 13'-0" 21' 20'-0" 20'-0" 14'-0" 20'-0" DECORATIVE PAVING 15' 25'-6" 28' 21' 20'-0" 28'-0" 20'-0" 15'-0" 12'-4" 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 15'
13' 5'-10" 10'-0" 10'-0"
20'-0"
15'
20'
15'
20'-0"
16'
12'-6"
10' 10'-0" 13'-0" 17'-0"
10'
10' MONUMENT SIGNAGE 9' 8' (VAN)
18' HANDICAP SYMBOL HANDICAP STRIPING 9' 5' (STD.)

ACCESSIBLE PARKING (BY ADA) TOT LOT BBQ SPA POOL SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOMES SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOMES SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOMES RAMP RAMP 8 CARPORTS 60' CHANNEL 5,680 S.F. 5,680 S.F. 5,680 S.F. 5,680 S.F. 5,680 S.F. 8,640 S.F. 8,640 S.F. 8,640 S.F. 8,640 S.F. RAMP RAMP 4'-2"
10'-8" NO PARKING VAN ACCESSIBLE NO PARKING RAMP 6
RAMP 5' WIDE WALKWAY
5' WIDE WALKWAY
20' 12'-0" 18'-6" 19'-1" 15'-9" 20'
UP
UP UP
UP 35' 58

RAMP RAMP RAMP NO

PARKING
8 CARPORTS
UP UP
UP UP
UP UP
UP UP
5' WIDE WALKWAY 20'-0" 13'-8" 10'-0" 15'-6"
20'
12'-0"
10'-0"
20'-6" 13'-8" 2 STORY BLDG 2 BLDG TYPE B1 8,640 S.F.2 STORY BLDG 3 BLDG TYPE B2 8,640 S.F.2 STORY BLDG 1 BLDG TYPE A1 5,680 S.F. 10 8 CARPORTS 10 4 CARPORTS 20'-0" RAMP RAMP
NO

PARKING
VAN 88
364' 131' EMERGENCY GATE 24' DRIVEWAY

RAMP RAMP GATE GATE

ACCESSIBLE
VAN

ACCESSIBLE
UP UP
UP UP 15'-6" 17'-0" 17'-0"
RAMP 20'RAMP MAIL
VAN
ACCESSIBLE 28' DRIVE AISLE
28' DRIVE AISLE 28' DRIVE AISLE
20'-0"
16' KNOX BOX - INFRARED GATE OPENER
5 CARPORTS 5 CARPORTS RAMP
18'-6"
R.O.W.
5 CARPORTS 3 CARPORTS A.D.A. PATH OF TRAVEL SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS OF DIV.II, CHAPTER11A & 11B · ALL SIDEWALKS ARE A PATH OF TRAVEL · SEE A.D.A. SHEETS A.D.A-1 THROUGH A.D.A-5 FOR ACCESSIBILITY DETAILS · ALL WALKWAYS SHALL HAVE MAX. SLOPE OF 2%. PATH OF TRAVEL 10 8 CARPORTS 3 C.Y. TRASH BIN 3 C.Y. TRASH BIN 3 C.Y. TRASH BIN 3 C.Y. TRASH BIN 3 C.Y. TRASH BIN 3 C.Y. TRASH BIN 8 RAMP RAMP NO PARKING VAN ACCESSIBLE 3 C.Y. TRASH BIN 3 C.Y. TRASH BIN 3 C.Y. TRASH BIN 3 C.Y. TRASH BIN 3 C.Y. TRASH BIN 3 C.Y. TRASH BIN MICHAEL McHALE, ARCHITECT (949) 566-4951
8/9/23 SCALE: 1" = 4' - 0" PLAN 1 & PLAN 2 FLOOR PLANS 3 1ST FLOOR PLAN 5'-0" x 12'-0" BALCONY 11'-0" x 11'-10" BDRM 1 14'-8" x 12'-0" GREAT RM BAR 5'-0" x 12'-0" BALCONY 11'-0" x 11'-10" BDRM 1 14'-8" x 12'-0" GREAT RM BAR UTILITY 11'-0" x 11'-10" BDRM 1 14'-8" x 12'-0" GREAT RM W/DW.H. BAR 12'-0" x 5'-0" BALCONY 9'-0" x 12'-6" KITCHEN 15'-6" x 14'-10" GREAT RM BATH 1 BATH 2 10'-10" x 12'-0" BDRM 2 COAT LINEN ENTRY PANTRY LINEN LINEN 11'-4" x 14'-0" BDRM 1 W/DW.H. 9'-0" x 12'-6" KITCHEN 15'-6" x 14'-10" GREAT RM BATH 1 BATH 2 10'-10" x 12'-0" BDRM 2 COAT LINEN ENTRY PANTRY LINEN LINEN 11'-4" x 14'-0" BDRM 1 BAR PLAN 1 2ND FLOOR PLAN PLAN 1 1ST FLOOR PLAN PLAN 2 2ND FLOOR PLAN PLAN 2 31'-7 1/2"
6'-2" 25'-5 1/2"
6'-6" 26'-8" 2'-5" 10'-4" 16'-4"
31'-2"
6'-2" 25'-0"
6'-6" 26'-8" 2'-5" 10'-4" 16'-4" 36'-9" 2'-0"
33'-3"
5'-3" 28'-0"
12'-4 1/2" 24'-4 1/2" ELSINORE APARTMENTS LAKE ELSINORE , CA 96 Apartment Homes WJK DEVELOPMENT CO. / RSI EQUITY
GRANT KEENE (949) 677-0668 36'-9" 2'-0"
33'-3"
5'-3" 28'-0"
6'-6"
12'-4 1/2" 24'-4 1/2"
6'-6" BATH 1 BATH 1 KITCHEN ENTRY PANTRY LINEN LINEN LINEN LINEN PANTRY W/D 11'-0" x 12'-0" COAT COAT PATIO PATIO UTILITY KITCHEN 11'-0" x 12'-0" BAR W/D DWELLING UNITS SUMMARY PLAN NO. SQ. FTG. BDRMS BATHS 1 730 S.F. 1 1 2 1,092 S.F. 2 2 MICHAEL McHALE, ARCHITECT (949) 566-4951
8/9/23 SCALE: 1" = 8' - 0" BLDG. TYPE A1 2 STORY FLOOR PLANS, ROOF PLAN & EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 4 1ST FLOOR PLAN BUILDING A1 2ND FLOOR PLAN BUILDING A1 ROOF PLAN BUILDING A1 58'-4" 2'-5" 53'-6" 2'-5" 26'-8" 2" 26'-8" 75'-6"
6'-6" 62'-6" 6'-6"
31'-2" 2" 31'-2" 58'-4" 2'-5" 53'-6" 2'-5" 26'-8" 2" 26'-8" 75'-6"
6'-6" 62'-6" 6'-6"
31'-2" 2" 31'-2" PLAN 1 PLAN 1R PLAN 1R PLAN 1 UTILITY CLOSET PLAN 1 PLAN 1R PLAN 1R PLAN 1 UTILITY CLOSET COVERED PATIO COVERED BALCONY BUILDING SUMMARY 1ST FLOOR: DWELLING UNITS: 2,920 S.F. COVERED PATIOS: 380 S.F. STAIRS: 182 S.F. UTILITY: 68 S.F. 2ND FLOOR: DWELLING UNITS: 2,920 S.F. BALCONIES: 380 S.F. LANDINGS: 137 S.F. TOTAL: DWELLING UNITS: 5,840 S.F. COVERED PATIOS: 380 S.F. BALCONIES: 380 S.F. UTILITY: 68 S.F. TOTAL NO. D.U. 8 D.U. DWELLING UNITS SUMMARY PLAN NO. SQ. FTG. QUANTITY BDRMS BATHS 1 730 S.F. 8 D.U. 1 1 2 1,092 S.F. 0 D.U. 2 2 FRONT & REAR EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS BUILDING A1 SIDES EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS BUILDING A1 12 4 FLAT CONCRETE ROOF TILES 2X6 RE/S FASCIA/BARGE SHAPED FOAM TRIM @ WINDOWS & DOORS W.I. RAILING FOAM TRIM SIM. STONE VENEER EXTERIOR PLASTER FOAM TRIM 9'-1" 9'-1"
7'-6" 7'-6"
3'-0" T.O.SLAB T.O.TRIM T.O.PLATE T.O.SHTG. T.O.WDO. T.O.PLATE T.O.WDO3'-6" T.O.GUARD FLAT CONCRETE ROOF TILES 2X6 RE/S FASCIA/BARGE EXTERIOR PLASTER EXTERIOR PLASTER FOAM TRIM 9'-1" 9'-1"
7'-6" 7'-6"
3'-0" T.O.SLAB T.O.TRIM T.O.PLATE T.O.SHTG. T.O.WDO. T.O.PLATE T.O.WDO3'-6" T.O.GUARD SHAPED FOAM TRIM @ WINDOWS & DOORS W.I. RAILING FOAM TRIM SHUTTERS SIMULATED STONE VENEER FOAM TRIM 12"X12" REVEAL W/ FOAM TRIM ELSINORE APARTMENTS LAKE ELSINORE , CA 96 Apartment Homes WJK DEVELOPMENT CO. / RSI EQUITY
GRANT KEENE (949) 677-0668
RIDGE
4:12
4:12RIDGE RIDGE 4:12 4:12 4:12 4:12 VALLEY VALLEY VALLEY VALLEY 4:12 HIP HIP 4:12 HIP HIP 4:12 4:12 ROOF OUTLINE BUILDING OUTLINE CONCRETE 'S' TILE · ROOF MATERIAL: CONCRETE "S" TILE · ROOF PITCH: 4:12 · ROOF OVERHANG: FASCIA: 12" BARGE : 12" 28'-10" BLDG HEIGHT UP UP LANDING UP UP LANDING COVERED PATIO COVERED PATIO COVERED PATIO LANDING LANDING UP UP LANDING LANDING UP UP COVERED BALCONY COVERED BALCONY COVERED BALCONY 12 4 FIX FIX MICHAEL McHALE, ARCHITECT (949) 566-4951
8/9/23 SCALE: 1" = 8' - 0" BLDG. TYPE A2 2 STORY FLOOR PLANS, ROOF PLAN & EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 5 12 4 12 4 1ST FLOOR PLAN BUILDING A2 2ND FLOOR PLAN BUILDING A2 ROOF PLAN BUILDING A2 58'-4" 2'-5" 53'-6" 2'-5" 26'-8" 2" 26'-8" 75'-6"
6'-6" 62'-6" 6'-6"
31'-2" 2" 31'-2" 58'-4" 2'-5" 53'-6" 2'-5" 26'-8" 2" 26'-8" 75'-6"
6'-6" 62'-6" 6'-6"
31'-2" 2" 31'-2" PLAN 1 PLAN 1R PLAN 1R PLAN 1 UTILITY CLOSET PLAN 1 PLAN 1R PLAN 1R PLAN 1 UTILITY CLOSET BUILDING SUMMARY 1ST FLOOR: DWELLING UNITS: 2,920 S.F. COVERED PATIOS: 380 S.F. STAIRS: 182 S.F. UTILITY: 68 S.F. 2ND FLOOR: DWELLING UNITS: 2,920 S.F. BALCONIES: 380 S.F. LANDINGS: 137 S.F. TOTAL: DWELLING UNITS: 5,840 S.F. COVERED PATIOS: 380 S.F. BALCONIES: 380 S.F. UTILITY: 68 S.F. TOTAL NO. D.U. 8 D.U. DWELLING UNITS SUMMARY PLAN NO. SQ. FTG. QUANTITY BDRMS BATHS 1 730 S.F. 8 D.U. 1 1 2 1,092 S.F. 0 D.U. 2 2 9'-1" 9'-1"
7'-6" 7'-6"
3'-0" T.O.SLAB T.O.TRIM T.O.PLATE T.O.SHTG. T.O.WDO. T.O.PLATE T.O.WDO3'-6" T.O.GUARD 9'-1" 9'-1"
7'-6" 7'-6"
3'-0" T.O.SLAB T.O.TRIM T.O.PLATE T.O.SHTG.T.O.WDO. T.O.PLATE T.O.WDO 3'-6" T.O.GUARD4'-0" T.O.TRIM
8'-0" T.O.SGD8'-0" T.O.SGD CONCRETE 'S' ROOF TILES 2X6 RE/S FASCIA/BARGE W.I. RAILING FOAM TRIM 2X6 SHAPED FOAM TRIM @ DOORS & WINDOWS EXTERIOR PLASTER FOAM TRIM LOUVERED DOORS CONCRETE STOOP SIMULATED STONE VENEER 48"
11'-0" FLAT CONCRETE ROOF TILES 2X6 RE/S FASCIA/BARGE W.I. RAILING FOAM TRIM EXTERIOR PLASTER FOAM TRIM SIMULATED STONE VENEER FOAM TRIM FRONT & REAR EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS BUILDING A2 SIDES EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS BUILDING A2 ELSINORE APARTMENTS LAKE ELSINORE , CA 96 Apartment Homes WJK DEVELOPMENT CO. / RSI EQUITY
GRANT KEENE (949) 677-0668
RIDGE
4:12
4:12RIDGE RIDGE 4:12 4:12 4:12 4:12 VALLEY VALLEY VALLEY VALLEY 4:12 HIP HIP 4:12 HIP HIP 4:12 4:12 ROOF OUTLINE BUILDING OUTLINE CONCRETE 'S' TILE · ROOF MATERIAL: CONCRETE 'S' TILE · ROOF PITCH: 4:12 · ROOF OVERHANG: FASCIA: 12" BARGE : 12" 18"X24" REVEAL W/ FOAM TRIM SHAPED FOAM POTSHELF CORBELS SHAPED FOAM POTSHELF CORBELS 28'-10" BLDG HEIGHT UP UP LANDING UP UP LANDING LANDING LANDING UP UP LANDING LANDING UP UP COVERED PATIO COVERED PATIO COVERED PATIO COVERED PATIO COVERED BALCONY COVERED BALCONY COVERED BALCONY COVERED BALCONY 12 4 FIX FIX BUILDING SUMMARY 1ST FLOOR: DWELLING UNITS: 4,368 S.F. COVERED PATIOS: 400 S.F. STAIRS: 142 S.F. UTILITY: 68 S.F. 2ND FLOOR: DWELLING UNITS: 4,368 S.F. BALCONIES: 400 S.F. LANDINGS: 135 S.F. TOTAL: DWELLING UNITS: 8,736 S.F. COVERED PATIOS: 400 S.F. BALCONIES: 400 S.F. UTILITY: 68 S.F. TOTAL NO. D.U. 8 D.U. DWELLING UNITS SUMMARY PLAN NO. SQ. FTG. QUANTITY BDRMS BATHS 1 730 S.F. 0 D.U. 1 1 2 1,092 S.F. 8 D.U. 2 2 MICHAEL McHALE, ARCHITECT (949) 566-4951 8/9/23 SCALE: 1" = 8' - 0" 6 BLDG. TYPE B1 2 STORY FLOOR PLANS, ROOF PLAN & EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 1ST FLOOR PLAN BUILDING B1 2ND FLOOR PLAN BUILDING B1 ROOF PLAN BUILDING A1 77'-8" 2'-0" 73'-8" 2'-0" 36'-9" 2" 36'-9" 79'-8"
6'-6" 66'-8" 6'-6"
33'-3" 2" 33'-3" 77'-8" 2'-0" 73'-8" 2'-0" 36'-9" 2" 36'-9" 79'-8"
6'-6" 66'-8" 6'-6"
33'-3" 2" 33'-3" PLAN 2 PLAN 2R PLAN 2R PLAN 2 UTILITY CLOSET UTILITY CLOSET RIDGE 4:12 RIDGE RIDGE 4:12 4:12 4:12 4:12 4:12
4:12
4:12
VALLEY

VALLEY VALLEY
VALLEY 12 4 12 4
9'-1" 9'-1"
7'-6" 7'-6"
3'-0" T.O.SLAB T.O.TRIM T.O.PLATE T.O.SHTG.T.O.WDO. T.O.PLATE T.O.WDO 3'-6" T.O.GUARD4'-0" T.O.TRIM
8'-0" T.O.SGD8'-0" T.O.SGD
9'-1" 9'-1"
7'-6" 7'-6"
3'-0" T.O.SLAB T.O.TRIM T.O.PLATE T.O.SHTG. T.O.WDO. T.O.PLATE T.O.WDO3'-6" T.O.GUARD 48"
11'-0" FLAT CONCRETE ROOF TILES 2X6 RE/S FASCIA/BARGE SHUTTERS SHAPED FOAM TRIM @ WINDOWS & DOORS W.I. RAILING FOAM TRIM EXTERIOR PLASTER FOAM TRIM SHUTTERS EXTERIOR PLASTER 12" SQ. REVEAL W/ SIMULATED STONE VENEER FOAM TRIM FLAT CONCRETE ROOF TILES 2X6 RE/S FASCIA/BARGE W.I. RAILING FOAM TRIM 2X6 SHAPED FOAM TRIM @ DOORS & WINDOWS EXTERIOR PLASTER FOAM TRIM LOUVERED DOORS CONCRETE STOOP SIMULATED STONE VENEER ROOF OUTLINE BUILDING OUTLINE FLAT CONCRETE TILE ELSINORE APARTMENTS LAKE ELSINORE , CA 96 Apartment Homes WJK DEVELOPMENT CO. / RSI EQUITY
GRANT KEENE (949) 677-0668 SIDES EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS BUILDING B1 FRONT & REAR EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS BUILDING B1 · ROOF MATERIAL: FLAT CONCRETE TILE · ROOF PITCH: 4:12 · ROOF OVERHANG: FASCIA: 12" BARGE : 12" HIP HIP
HIP
HIP 4:12 4:12
33'-2" BLDG HEIGHT COVERED PATIO COVERED BALCONY COVERED PATIO COVERED PATIO COVERED PATIO COVERED BALCONY COVERED BALCONY COVERED BALCONY DN LANDING DNLANDING DN DN LANDING LANDING UP UP LANDING UP UP LANDING TRIM FIX TRIM FIX BUILDING SUMMARY 1ST FLOOR: DWELLING UNITS: 4,368 S.F. COVERED PATIOS: 240 S.F. STAIRS: 142 S.F. UTILITY: 68 S.F. 2ND FLOOR: DWELLING UNITS: 4368 S.F. BALCONIES: 240 S.F. LANDINGS: 135 S.F. TOTAL: DWELLING UNITS: 8,736 S.F. COVERED PATIOS: 240 S.F. BALCONIES: 240 S.F.. UTILITY: 68 S.F. TOTAL NO. D.U. 8 D.U. DWELLING UNITS SUMMARY PLAN NO. SQ. FTG. QUANTITY BDRMS BATHS 1 730 S.F. 0 D.U. 1 1 2 1,092 S.F. 8 D.U. 2 2 MICHAEL McHALE, ARCHITECT (949) 566-4951 8/9/23 SCALE: 1" = 8' - 0" 7 BLDG. TYPE B2 2 STORY FLOOR PLANS, ROOF PLAN & EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 1ST FLOOR PLAN BUILDING B2 2ND FLOOR PLAN BUILDING B2 ROOF PLAN BUILDING B2 77'-8" 2'-0" 73'-8" 2'-0" 36'-9" 2" 36'-9" 79'-8"
6'-6" 66'-8" 6'-6"
33'-3" 2" 33'-3" 77'-8" 2'-0" 73'-8" 2'-0" 36'-9" 2" 36'-9" 79'-8"
6'-6" 66'-8" 6'-6"
33'-3" 2" 33'-3" PLAN 2 PLAN 2R PLAN 2R PLAN 2 UTILITY CLOSET UTILITY CLOSET COVERED PATIO COVERED BALCONY RIDGE 4:12 RIDGE RIDGE 4:12 4:12 4:12 4:12 4:12
4:12
4:12
VALLEY

VALLEY VALLEY
VALLEY
HIP
HIP
HIP
HIP SIDES EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS BUILDING B2 FRONT & REAR EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS BUILDING B2 12 4 12 4 2X6 RE/S FASCIA/BARGE W.I. RAILING FOAM TRIM 2X6 SHAPED FOAM TRIM @ DOORS & WINDOWS EXTERIOR PLASTER LOUVERED DOORS CONCRETE STOOP SIMULATED STONE VENEER FOAM TRIM LOW PROFILE "S" CONCRETE ROOF TILES 2X6 RE/S FASCIA/BARGE SHAPED FOAM TRIM @ WINDOWS & DOORS W.I. RAILING FOAM TRIM EXTERIOR PLASTER EXTERIOR PLASTER FOAM TRIM FOAM POTSHELF W/ CORBELS FOAM POTSHELF W/ CORBELS 18"X24" REVEAL W/ SIMULATED STONE VENEER FOAM TRIM 9'-1" 9'-1"
7'-6" 7'-6"
3'-0" T.O.SLAB T.O.TRIM T.O.PLATE T.O.SHTG. T.O.WDO. T.O.PLATE T.O.WDO3'-6" T.O.GUARD 48"
11'-6"
12"X18" REVEAL W/ FOAM TRIM FOAM TRIM
9'-1" 9'-1"
7'-6" 7'-6"
3'-0" T.O.SLAB T.O.TRIM T.O.PLATE T.O.SHTG.T.O.WDO. T.O.PLATE T.O.WDO 3'-6" T.O.GUARD4'-0" T.O.TRIM
8'-0" T.O.SGD8'-0" T.O.SGD LOW PROFILE "S" CONCRETE ROOF TILES ROOF OUTLINE BUILDING OUTLINE CONCRETE "S" TILEELSINORE APARTMENTS LAKE ELSINORE , CA 96 Apartment Homes WJK DEVELOPMENT CO. / RSI EQUITY
GRANT KEENE (949) 677-0668 · ROOF MATERIAL: CONCRETE "S" TILE · ROOF PITCH: 4:12 · ROOF OVERHANG: FASCIA: 12" BARGE : 12" 4:12 4:12 33'-2" BLDG HEIGHT COVERED PATIO COVERED PATIO COVERED PATIO DN LANDING DNLANDING DN DN LANDING LANDING UP UP LANDING UP UP LANDING COVERED BALCONY COVERED BALCONY COVERED BALCONY FIX FIX MICHAEL McHALE, ARCHITECT (949) 566-4951
8/9/23 SCALE: 1" = 4' - 0" CLUBHOUSE FLOOR PLAN & ROOF PLAN 8 ELSINORE APARTMENTS LAKE ELSINORE , CA 96 Apartment Homes WJK DEVELOPMENT CO. / RSI EQUITY GRANT KEENE (949) 677-0668 ROOF PLAN · ROOF MATERIAL: CONCRETE "S" TILE · ROOF PITCH: 4:12 · ROOF OVERHANG: FASCIA: 12" BARGE : 12" RIDGE

RIDGE RIDGE RIDGE HIPHIP
HIP
HIP
HIP
HIP

HIP VALLEY
VALLEY
VALLEY
VALLEY
HIP
4:12
4:12 4:12 4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12 4:12 4:12
4:12 LOW PROFILE "S" CONCRETE TILE GUTTER & DOWNSPOUTROOF OUTLINE BUILDING OUTLINE D.S. D.S. D.S. D.S. 50'-11 1/2" 50'-11 1/2" 30'-0" 20'-11 1/2" 16'-0" 14'-0" 16'-0" 4'-11 1/2" 50'-6 1/2"
11'-6 1/2" 4'-0" 5'-0" 30'-0"
14'-1"
50'-6"
32'-5" 4'-0" LANAI 10' CEILING FITNESS 10' CEILING RECEPTION 10' CEILING LEASING 10' CEILING MAIL ROOM 10' CEILING COVERED ENTRY 10' CEILING UNISEX UNISEX UTILITY WORK ROOM 10' CEILING D.F. COFFEE ASST. BAR CLUBHOUSE: 1,460 S.F. MAIL ROOM: 182 S.F. LANAI: 490 S.F. FLOOR PLAN MICHAEL McHALE, ARCHITECT (949) 566-4951
8/9/23 SCALE: 1" = 4' - 0" CLUBHOUSE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 9 ELSINORE APARTMENTS LAKE ELSINORE , CA 96 Apartment Homes WJK DEVELOPMENT CO. / RSI EQUITY GRANT KEENE (949) 677-0668
3'-0"
7'-6"
8'-0"
10'-0"
3'-0"
6'-8"
8'-0"
10'-0"
8'-0"
3'-0"
7'-6"
8'-0"
10'-0"
3'-0"
8'-0"
10'-0"
3'-0"
8'-0"
10'-0" 12 4 12 4 12 4 12 4 T.O.SLAB T.O.TRIM T.O.PLATE T.O.WDO BULKHEAD T.O.SLAB T.O.TRIM T.O.PLATE BULKHEAD T.O.DOOR T.O.SLAB T.O.PLATE T.O.WDO T.O.SLAB T.O.PLATE T.O.WDO T.O.TRIM T.O.TRIM BULKHEAD T.O.PLATE BULKHEADT.O.TRIM T.O.WDO. EXTERIOR PLASTER FOAM TRIM 2X6 FOAM TRIM AROUND WINDOWS DOORS SIMULATED STONE VENEER LOW PROFILE "S" CONCRETE ROOF TILES 2X6 RE/S FASCIA/BARGE GUTTER & DOWNSPOUT FAUX VENT EXTERIOR PLASTER FOAM TRIM SIMULATED STONE VENEER LOW PROFILE "S" CONCRETE ROOF TILES 2X6 RE/S FASCIA/BARGE GUTTER & DOWNSPOUT EXTERIOR PLASTER FOAM TRIM SIMULATED STONE VENEER LOW PROFILE "S" CONCRETE ROOF TILES 2X6 RE/S FASCIA/BARGE GUTTER & DOWNSPOUT EXTERIOR PLASTER FOAM TRIM SIMULATED STONE VENEER LOW PROFILE "S" CONCRETE ROOF TILES 2X6 RE/S FASCIA/BARGE GUTTER & DOWNSPOUT FRENCH DOORS CONCRETE STOOP FOAM TRIM FRENCH DOOR CONCRETE STOOP LEFT SIDE VIEW FRONT VIEW RIGHT SIDE VIEW REAR VIEW 17'-9"
MICHAEL McHALE, ARCHITECT (949) 566-4951
8/9/23 SCALE: 1" = 2' - 0" TRASH ENCLOSURE TYPE 1 10 6 C.Y. TRASH BIN 4 C.Y. TRASH BIN Ø5'-0" FLOOR PLAN ROOF & CEILING PLAN DRIVEWAY VIEW LEFT SIDE VIEW RIGHT SIDE VIEW REAR VIEW 4:12 4:12 4:12
4:12 18'-8"
13'-4"
4'-0" 8'-8"
6'-2"
8'-0" BOTT. OF BEAM TOP OF WALL DRIVEWAY 12 4 12 4 12 4 12 4 1'-4" 1'-4" RIDGE HIP
HIP
HIP
HIP D.S. D.S.
5'-0" 9'-0" 9'-0"
6'-4" 6'-4" CONCRETE "S" STYLE TILE ROOF 6X6 TUBE STEEL SUPPORT 2X6 RE/S FASCIA W/ GUTTER & DOWNSPOUTS 8" X 8" X 16", 6' HIGH SPLIT FACE BLOCK WALL WITH MATCHING CAP CONCRETE "S" STYLE TILE ROOF 6X6 TUBE STEEL SUPPORT 2X6 RE/S FASCIA W/ GUTTER & DOWNSPOUTS 8" X 8" X 16", 6' HIGH SPLIT FACE BLOCK WALL WITH MATCHING CAP CONCRETE "S" STYLE TILE ROOF 6X6 TUBE STEEL SUPPORT 2X6 RE/S FASCIA W/ GUTTER & DOWNSPOUTS 8" X 8" X 16", 6' HIGH SPLIT FACE BLOCK WALL WITH MATCHING CAP 4" SQUARE 3/16" THICK STEEL TUBE JAMBS CONCRETE "S" STYLE TILE ROOF 6X6 TUBE STEEL SUPPORT 2X6 RE/S FASCIA W/ GUTTER & DOWNSPOUTS 16 GA. RIBBED METAL GATES WITH 2" X 2" X 1/4" STEEL ANGLE IRON FRAME AND DIAGONAL BRACING. 38" WIDE X 5'-6" HIGH PEDESTRIAN GATE GUTTER & DOWNSPOUTS ROOF OUTLINE BUILDING OUTLINE 6X6 TUBE STEEL SUPPORT EXTERIOR CEMENT PLASTER CEILING WITH K-LATH BACKING CONCRETE "S" STYLE ROOF 38" WIDE X 5'-6" HIGH PEDESTRIAN GATE 6X6 TUBE STEEL POST 60" CLEAR WIDTH CONCRETE WALKWAY. 8" X 8" X 16", 6' HIGH SPLIT FACE BLOCK WALL WITH MATCHING CAP 6" X 6" PCC CURB. 4X4 PCC BUMPER STOP 6" THICK PCC LOADING PAD OVER 90% COMPACTED BASE, 2% MAXIMUM SLOPE. 16 GA. RIBBED METAL GATES WITH 2" X 2" X 1/4" STEEL ANGLE IRON FRAME AND DIAGONAL BRACING. 11'-8 5/16" BUILDING HEIGHT ELSINORE APARTMENTS LAKE ELSINORE , CA 96 Apartment Homes WJK DEVELOPMENT CO. / RSI EQUITY
GRANT KEENE (949) 677-0668

LIMIT OF WORK LIMIT OF WORK

LIMIT OF WORK

LIMIT OF WORK PL PL PL PL
5'
10'
MIN.
4'-6"
5'
5'-3"
10' 10' 30' O.C. TYP. 30' O.C. TYP. 30' 10' MIN. 35'
6'
30' O.C. TYP.

NO

PARKING

VAN NO PARKING VAN ACCESSIBLE

ACCESSIBLE

EVCS EVCS
NO

PARKING NO

PARKING
NO

PARKING
VAN

ACCESSIBLE
VAN

ACCESSIBLE
VAN
ACCESSIBLE 30' POOL / SPA AREA BARBECUE PICNIC AREA AT POOL AREA FIRE PIT SHEET 1 OF 3 SITE FURNITURE ENHANCED PAVERS RIVERSIDE DRIVE APARTMENTS Conceptual Landscape Plan 32281 Riverside Drive, Lake Elsinore, CA | May 6, 2024 c · s c a p e LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE · CAD DRAFTING · 3D VISUALIZATION WWW.C-SCAPE-CREATIVE.COM · CORONA, CA 宦 宵 宨 室 宷 宬 容 宨 NORTH 0 20 40 60 80 c · s c a p e SCALE: 1" = 20' - 0" RIVERSIDE DRIVE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL AREA EXISTING RESIDENTIAL AREA EXISTING DRAINAGE CHANNEL LEGEND 1. PLANTING AREA 2. NATURAL GRAY CONCRETE PAVING 3. ENHANCED ACCENT PAVING W/ CONCRETE BANDING 4. LARGE CANOPY TREE (24" BOX MIN.) 5. SMALL ACCENT TREE (24" BOX MIN.) 6. POCKET PICNIC AREAS W/ D.G. PAVING, PICNIC TABLE, AND FREESTANDING GRILL 7. LARGE ACCENT TREES (36" BOX MIN.) 8. PROPERTY LINE 9. ASPHALT DRIVEWAY / PARKING STALLS 10. PATIO SPACE (1ST FLOOR ONLY) W/ 42"HT. MASONRY WALL SURROUNDINGS 11. TRASH ENCLOSURE LOCATIONS PER ARCHITECT'S PLANS 12. TUBULAR STEEL FENCING, 6'HT. 13. SECONDARY EMERGENCY STEEL GATES W/ A KNOX RAPID ENTER SYSTEM 14. BACKGROUND TREES (24" BOX) 15. VERTICAL FOUNDATION TREES (15 GAL. MIN.) 16. PARKING STALLS W/ CARPORT PER ARCHITECT'S PLANS 17. OPEN LAWN AREA OR DECOMPOSED GRANITE 18. ACCENT ONSITE PALM TREES 19. LEDGE STONE CALL BOX LOCATION 20. STONE PROJECT ID SIGNAGE WALL LOCATION 21. BENCH SEATING AND TRASH RECEPTACLE 22. TABLE SET / LOUNGE CHAIRS 23. COLORED CONCRETE POOL DECK, 2 COLORS, CHECKERBOARD PATTERNED 24. BARBECUE COUNTER W/ SHADE TRELLIS 25. LOW STONE SEAT WALLS 26. GATED ENTRY AREA - TUBULAR STEEL TELESCOPIC SLIDING GATES W/ FULL HEIGHT LEDGE STONE WALL AND PILASTERS. GATES SHALL HAVE A KNOX RAPID ENTER SYSTEM AND AN INFRARED GATE OPENER. 27. RIVERSIDE DRIVE STREET TREES 28. POOL ENTRY GATE W/ WOOD OR STEEL OVERHEAD 29. POOL AREA STEEL FENCING 30. SWIMMING POOL 31. SPA - 12' DIA. 32. GAS FIRE PIT, ROUND 33. MASONRY BUILT-IN SEATING 34. PROPERTY SPLIT-FACE CMU BLOCK WALL 35. RIVERSIDE DRIVE PROPERTY BLOCK WALL, 8'HT. 36. STONE PILASTER, 8'-8"HT. 37. STONE PILASTER, 6'-8"HT. 38. CITY PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY LANDSCAPE AREAS - ALL LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION TO BE INSTALLED PER CITY STANDARD DRAWING DETAILS. 39. SPLIT-FACE CMU BLOCK PILASTER BUILDING 11 BUILDING 12 BUILDING 9 BUILDING 2 BUILDING 10 BUILDING 8 BUILDING 7 BUILDING 6 BUILDING 5 BUILDING 4 BUILDING 1 BUILDING 3 CLUBHOUSE 1216 7 17 1 2 11 9 6 17158 1434 2205 18 226 1926 12 13 8 9 11 34 16 15 51721 25 31 28 33 32 23 30 28 24 22 29 18 1 10 PROJECT ID WALL 3 OPEN LAWN AREA 29 1 14 273635 14 4 10 10 7 2 6 6 RIGHT OF WAY 3635 36 35 38 38 39 39 39
SHEET 2 OF 3 RIVERSIDE DRIVE APARTMENTS Conceptual Wall / Fence and Entry Area Design 32281 Riverside Drive, Lake Elsinore, CA | May 6, 2024 c · s c a p e LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE · CAD DRAFTING · 3D VISUALIZATION WWW.C-SCAPE-CREATIVE.COM · CORONA, CA 宦 宵 宨 室 宷 宬 容 宨 c · s c a p e 6'
8' - RIVERSIDE DRIVE ONLY LEGEND 1. 8x4x16 PRECISION CMU BLOCK WALL CAP 2. 6x8x16 SPLIT-FACE CMU BLOCK 3. FINISH GRADE ELEVATION VIEW SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" NOTE: · REFER TO STRUCTURAL ENGINEER'S DETAILS & CALCULATIONS FOR ALL CONNECTIONS, FOOTING, AND REINFORCING INFORMATION. 2 1 3 SECTION VIEW SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 6'-8" 2" 43
8"
MIN. 21 LEGEND 1. CONCRETE FOOTING 2. FINISH GRADE 3. 4" PRECISION CMU BLOCK CAP 4. 16x8x16 SPLIT-FACE CMU BLOCK NOTE: · REFER TO STRUCTURAL ENGINEER'S DETAILS & CALCULATIONS FOR ALL CONNECTIONS, FOOTING, AND REINFORCING INFORMATION. 1. P.I.P. CONCRETE CAP - REFER TO FINISH SCHEDULE 2. STONE VENEER - REFER TO FINISH SCHEDULE 3. CONCRETE CURB 4. FINISH SURFACE, ENHANCED DRIVEWAY PAVING 5. CALL BOX: PROVIDED BY OWNER. VERIFY CUTOUT DIMENSIONS AND INSTALL PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS LEGEND NOTE: · REFER TO STRUCTURAL ENGINEER'S DETAILS & CALCULATIONS FOR ALL CONNECTIONS, FOOTING, AND REINFORCING INFORMATION. · GATE CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SHOP DRAWING ELECTRICAL FOR DIRECTORY KIOSK 2'-10" EQ. EQ.
7" 3" ELEVATION VIEW SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0" ±3' 112" TYP. 15 4 3 2 ±4'-10" SECTION VIEW SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0" 1. P.I.P. CONCRETE CAP 2. STONE VENEER, TO MATCH CLUBHOUSE 3. 16x8x16 CMU COLUMN BLOCK CONSTRUCTION 4. FINISH GRADE 5. CONCRETE FOOTING 6. COMPACTED SUBGRADE 1 112" TYP. 3"
7' - ENTRY AREA
8'-8"- RIVERSIDE DR.
(REFER TO PLAN) 4 5 6 23 16"SQ.
8"
MIN. LEGEND NOTE: · REFER TO STRUCTURAL ENGINEER'S DETAILS & CALCULATIONS FOR ALL CONNECTIONS, FOOTING, AND REINFORCING INFORMATION. ±22"SQ. SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" ELEVATION VIEW SECTION VIEW SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 8' O.C. 412"O.C. MAX. 2"MAX.

CLEAR
6'
2"MAX.

CLEAR
3"
MIN. 1% 21349 6 785 231496 LEGEND 1. 2"SQ. TUBULAR STEEL POST 2. 112"SQ. TUBULAR STEEL TOP RAIL 3. 5 8"SQ. TUBULAR STEEL PICKETS @ 4 12" MAXIMUM O.C. 4. 112"SQ. TUBULAR STEEL BOTTOM RAIL 5. COMPACTED SUBGRADE 6. FINISH GRADE 7. SINK POST INTO FOOTING 8. CONCRETE FOOTING 9. 6"W. CONCRETE CURB AT GRADE, CONTINUOUS, FOR POOL ENCLOSURE FENCE ONLY NOTES: · REFER TO STRUCTURAL ENGINEER'S DETAILS & CALCULATIONS FOR ALL CONNECTIONS, FOOTING, AND REINFORCING INFORMATION. · ALL WELDS TO BE CONTINUOUS AND GROUND SMOOTH. · ALL EXPOSED SURFACES SHALL RECEIVE TWO (2) COATS MOISTURE-PROOF PRIMER AND TWO (2) FINISH COATS - REFER TO FINISH SCHEDULE FOR COLOR. · ALL CONNECTORS, FASTENERS AND OTHER HARDWARE TO BE HOT DIPPED GALVANIZED. · PICKETS AND INTERMEDIATE RAILINGS SHALL BE PROVIDED SUCH THAT A 4-INCH DIAMETER SPHERE CANNOT PASS THROUGH ANY OPENING STONE PILASTER SPLIT FACE CMU BLOCK WALL TUBULAR STEEL FENCING STONE CALLBOX ENTRY AREA AT RIVERSIDE DRIVE VEHICULAR / PEDESTRIAN ENTRY GATE 8'-8" HT. 8' HT. 7' HT. PROJECT ID WALL CONCEPT IMAGES (REFERENCE ONLY) SIGNAGE LETTERING DESIGN IS CONCEPTUAL AND IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE. 6'-8" HT. SPLIT FACE CMU BLOCK PILASTER 6' HT.

Brisbane Box Crape Myrtle SHEET 3 OF 3 Silver Streak Flax Lily Heavely Bamboo Ruellia brittoniana 'Katie' Katie Blue Dwarf Ruellia Rosmarinus o. 'T.B.' Tuscan Blue Rosemary Teucrium c. 'Prostratum' Wall Germander Callistemon v. "Little John" Dwarf Bottlebrush Tecoma x 'Sunrise' Sunrise Esperanza Hesperaloe parv. Red Yucca Agave desmettiana Smooth Agave Caesalpinia pulcherrima Mexican Red Bird of Paradise Nassella tenuissima Mexican Feather Grass Leucophyllum f. 'Green Cloud' Green Cloud Texas Ranger Muhlenbergia c. 'Regal Mist' Pink Muhly SHRUBS - 15 OR 5 GALLON CONTAINER SIZE GROUND COVERS - 1 GALLON OR FLATS TREES - REFER TO LEGEND FOR BOX SIZE Bougainvillea spp. Bougainvillea Salvia leucantha Mexican Bush Sage Penstemon eatonii Firecracker Penstemon Senna artemisioides Feathery Cassia CONCEPTUAL PLANT PALETTE IRRIGATION NOTES THE PLANT PALETTE AND IRRIGATION SYSTEMS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED TO ENSURE MAXIMUM WATER CONSERVATION. CONSIDERATIONS HAVE BEEN GIVEN TO SELECTING PLANT MATERIALS THAT ARE DROUGHT-TOLERANT WHILE MAINTAINING THE INTEGRITY OF THE OVERALL COMMUNITY. IRRIGATION PRACTICES EMPLOYING STATE-OF-THE-ART EQUIPMENT ENSURE THAT WATER IS BEING CONSUMED CONSERVATIVELY. IRRIGATION SYSTEMS CONFORM TO THE STATE'S WATER CONSERVATION ASSEMBLY BILL 325. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS WILL BE IRRIGATED WITH A PERMANENT, UNDERGROUND AUTOMATIC SYSTEM. IRRIGATION SYSTEMS WILL BE SEPARATED FOR TURF AND SHRUB AREAS. IRRIGATION SYSTEMS WILL HAVE 100% IRRIGATION COVERAGE. WATER-SAVING EQUIPMENT SUCH AS FLOW SENSORS, MOISTURE SENSORS, AND IRRIGATION PROGRAM USING CIMIS (CALIFORNIA IRRIGATION MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM) DATA WILL BE INCLUDED. LANDSCAPE NOTES 1. TREE ROOT BARRIERS SHALL BE INSTALLED WHERE TREES ARE PLACE WITHIN 5 FEET OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDING WALKS CURBS OR STREET PAVEMENTS OR WHERE NEW PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ARE PLACED ADJACENT TO EXISTING TREES. 2. ALL REQUIRED PLANTING AREAS WILL BE COVERED WITH MULCH TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 3 INCHES, EXCLUDING AREAS PLANTED WITH GROUND COVER. 3. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A HEALTHY AND DISEASE-FREE GROWING CONDITION AT ALL TIMES. ALL REQUIRED PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE MAINTAINED FREE OF WEEDS, DEBRIS AND LITTER. THE LONG TERM MAINTENANCE OF THE PROJECT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE OWNER DISEASED OR DEAD PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE SATISFACTORILY TREATED OR REPLACED PER THE CONDITIONS OF THE PERMIT. RIVERSIDE DRIVE APARTMENTS Conceptual Landscape Plan - Plant Material Imagery 32281 Riverside Drive, Lake Elsinore, CA | May 6, 2024 c · s c a p e LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE · CAD DRAFTING · 3D VISUALIZATION WWW.C-SCAPE-CREATIVE.COM · CORONA, CA 宦 宵 宨 室 宷 宬 容 宨 c · s c a p e Dietes vegeta Fortnight Lily Trachelospermum j. Star Jasmine Rosa 'Iceberg' White Shrub Rose ALL PLANTING AREAS TO RECEIVE 3"THICK LAYER OF ORGANIC BARK MULCH AND 100% COVERAGE AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION. Pittosporum t. 'W.D.' Dwarf Mock Orange Cercis occidentalis Redbuds Koelreuteria paniculata Golden Rain Tree Cupressus s. 'Stricta' Italian Cypress Lagerstroemia indica Lophostemon confertus Lantana "New Gold" New Gold Lantana Pennisetum spp. Fountain Grass Dianella t. 'Silver Streak' Nandina domestica Podocarpus elo. Blue Ice Yellowwood African Sumac Rhus lancea Afghan Pine Pinus eldarica Platanus acerifolia London Plane Tree Jacaranda mimosifolia Jacaranda Phoenix dactylifera Date Palm Phoenix roebelenii Pigmy Date Palm Agave attenuata Foxtail Agave Agave 'Blue Glow' Blue Glow Agave Festuca g. 'Elijah Blue' Elijah Blue Fescue Senecio mandraliscae Blue Chalk Rosmarinus o. 'H.C.' Huntington Carpet Rosemary Olive Olea europaea PLANT LEGEND PINUS ELDARICA ACACIA STENOPHYLLA RHUS LANCEA ALBIZIA JULIBRISSIN LOPHOSTEMON CONFERTA PODOCARPUS GRACILIOR BACKGROUND TREES: PHOENIX DACTYLIFERA ACCENT PALMS: 18' BTH OR TALLER KOELREUTERIA PANICULATA JACARANDA MINOSIFOLIA PLATANUS ACERIFOLIA 'BLOODGOOD' OLEA EUROPAEA 'WILSONII' LARGE ACCENT TREES: Chinese Elm Ulmus parvifolia 39 COUNTS ULMUS PARVIFOLIA PLATANUS ACERIFOLIA 'BLOODGOOD' LARGE CANOPY TREES: CUPRESSUS SEMPERVIRENS 'STRICTA' PODOCARPUS ELONGATUS PRUNUS C. 'BRIGHT N TIGHT' VERTICAL FOUNDATION TREES: LAGERSTROEMIA INDICA 'MUSKOGEE' OR 'NATCHEZ' CERCIS OCCIDENTALIS PHOENIX ROEBELENII SMALL ACCENT TREES: 36" BOX OR LARGER 11 COUNTS 24" BOX OR LARGER 19 COUNTS 24" BOX OR LARGER 13 COUNTS 15 GAL. OR LARGER 96 COUNTS 24" BOX OR LARGER 4 COUNTS CITY STREET TREE - RIVERSIDE DR. (Installed per City's standard drawings) STREET TREE: 10 COUNTS SPECIAL NOTES - CITY PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY AREAS ALL LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION WITHIN PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY (RIVERSIDE DRIVE STREETSCAPE AREAS) SHALL BE INSTALLED PER CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE STANDARD DRAWINGS FOR IRRIGATION AND PLANTING DETAILS. INSTALLED PER CITY'S STANDARD DRAWINGS Platanus acerifolia London Plane Tree 15 GAL. OR LARGER PLATANUS ACERIFOLIA 'BLOODGOOD'

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, will hold a Public Hearing on November 04, 2025, at the Lake Elsinore Cultural Center, 183 North Main Street, Lake Elsinore, California, 92530, at 6:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, to consider the following:

Planning Application No. 2023-06 (Riverside Drive Apartments): The proposed project is a request by Elevated Entitlements, LLC, requesting approval of a Residential Design Review (RDR No. 2023-05) to construct a 96-unit multi-family residential apartment complex and related site improvements on an approximately 4.95-acre site in the Residential Mixed Use District. The project includes a total of 12 apartment buildings with eight units per building and an approximately 1,600 square-foot clubhouse for community recreational use. The apartment units are proposed to be approximately 710 square feet and 1,080 square feet. The project site is located at 32281 Riverside Drive. (APN: 379-315-033)
The proposed project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Pub. Res. Code §§21000 et seq.: “CEQA”) and the CEQA Guidelines (14 C.C.R. §§ 15000 et seq.) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 (Projects Consistent with a Community Plan or Zoning).

ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to submit written information, express opinions, or otherwise submit written evidence by email to [email protected].

If you wish to legally challenge any action taken by the City on the above matter, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else at the Public Hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City prior to or at the Public Hearing. If you require accommodation to participate in a Public Hearing, please contact the Administrative Secretary at (951) 848-0493. All Agenda materials are available for review on the City’s website at www.lake-elsinore.org, the Friday before the Public Hearing.

FURTHER INFORMATION on this item may be obtained by contacting Carlos Serna, Associate Planner in the Planning Division at [email protected] or (951) 824-7415.

Damaris Abraham,
Community Development Director
3512 14 Street
Riverside, California 92501
(951) 368-9229
[email protected]
City of Lake Elsinore
130 South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, California 92530
Account Number: 5209153
Ad Order Number: 0011761403
Customer's Reference/PO Number:

Publication: The Press-Enterprise
Publication Dates: 10/24/2025
Total Amount: $372.17
Payment Amount: $0.00
Amount Due: $372.17
Notice ID: 1um78IJiFQk2skcMROfR
Invoice Text: [https://res.cloudinary.com/dgqq2xsfd/image/upload/enoticeproduction/exports/1761061631900/image001.jpg] NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, will hold a Public Hearing on November 04, 2025, at the Lake Elsinore Cultural Center, 183 North Main Street, Lake Elsinore, California, 92530, at 6:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, to consider the following: Planning Application No. 2023-06 (Riverside Drive Apartments): The proposed project is a request by Elevated Entitlements, LLC, requesting approval of a Residential Design Review (RDR No. 2023-05) to construct a 96-unit multi-family residential apartment complex and related site improvements on an approximately

4.95-acre site in the Residential Mixed Use District. The project includes a total of 12 apartment buildings with eight units per building and an approximately 1,600 squarefoot clubhouse for community recreational use. The apartment units are proposed to be approximately 710 square feet and 1,080 square feet. The project site is located at 32281 Riverside Drive. (APN: 379-315-033) The proposed project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Pub. Res. Code §§21000 et seq.: “CEQA”) and the CEQA Guidelines (14 C.C.R. §§ 15000 et seq.) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 (Projects Consistent with a Community Plan or Zoning). ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to submit written information, express opinions, or otherwise submit written evidence by email to [email protected] . If you wish to legally challenge any action taken by the City on the above matter, you may be limited to PC NOPH PA 2023-06 (Riverside Drive Apts) - Page 1 of 1 The Press-Enterprise
3512 14 Street
Riverside, California 92501
(951) 368-9229
City of Lake Elsinore
130 South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, California 92530
Publication: The Press-Enterprise

PROOF OF PUBLICATION OF
Ad Desc: 0011761403
FILE NO. 0011761403

PROOF OF PUBLICATION
I am a citizen of the United States. I
am over the age of eighteen years and
not party to or interested in the aboveentitled matter. I am an authorized representative of THE PRESSENTERPRISE, a newspaper of
general circulation, printed and
published daily in the County of
Riverside, and which newspaper has
been adjudicated a newspaper of
general circulation by the Superior
Court of the County of Riverside, State
of California, under date of April 25,
1952, Case Number 54446, under
date of March 29, 1957, Case Number
65673, under date of August 25, 1995,
Case Number 267864, and under date
of September 16, 2013, Case Number
RIC 1309013; that the notice, of which
the annexed is a printed copy, has
been published in said newspaper in
accordance with the instructions of the
person(s) requesting publication, and
not in any supplement thereof on the
following dates, to wit:
10/24/2025
I certify (or declare) under the penalty
of perjury that the foregoing is true and
correct.

Date: October 24, 2025.

At: Riverside, California
______________________________
Signature
PC NOPH PA 2023-06 (Riverside Drive Apts) - Page 1 of 1

ELEVATED
E."' I LE.lilEN S
Legend
c:::J 300 Foot Buffer
32281 Riverside Dr.
300 Foot Radius Map of 32281 Riverside Dr.
0 0.03
Author: Moe Farrag
Date: 08/14/2025

0.06 N

0.12Miles A
Refrence Number APN Property Owner
WJK Development Co. (Applicant)
Elevated Entitlements (Agent)
53 379315033 QILIANG CHANG (Property Owner)
1 379100008 JENNIFER CHIENG FEN CHEN
2 379100020 HAN CAROLINE YOUNGHEE REVOCABLE TR DTD 03/05/2020 3 379100002 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
5 379331024 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONT
7 379100011 EMERALD BAY RV PARK
10 379314025 FRANCISCO FARIAS
11 379314024 ISIDRO L. PRECIADO
12 379330022 DAVID R. HICKS
13 379331001 ROGELIO D. SANCHEZ
14 379330021 ANDREW R. HURTADO
15 379331002 STEVEN W. PRADO
16 379315032 MARIO DELATORRE
17 379330020 WILFREDO SANCHEZ
18 379314001 FRANCISCO FARIAS FLORES
19 379331003 CHARLES R. VREELAND
20 379330019 DELAPENA ADAM PHILIPPE LIVING TRUST DTD 12/5/23 21 379331004 ANTHONY LEAS
22 379330018 JUAN CARLOS GARCIA
23 379331005 HENRY DELANO
24 379315029 NORINE E. MAY
25 379330017 JAMES L. NICHOLAS
26 379331006 ARTURO D. BERNAL
27 379330016 RICHARD J. GUILD
28 379331007 DEMETRIO CONTRERAS
29 379330015 MARIO H. HERNANDEZ
30 379331008 RODOLFO F. AURE
31 379330014 CAVALLUCCI JOSEPH E
32 379331009 MILLER LORRAINE REVOCABLE TRUST DTD 08/29/17 33 379330013 ELADIO R. ARRENQUIN
34 379331010 ARTURO COLUNGA
35 379330012 SERGIO HUERTA
36 379331011 SACHIKO TOKUISHI
37 379330011 HERNANDEZ FAMILY TRUST UA DTD 06/14/2021
38 379331012 RONALD D. LINN
39 379330010 SAUL GOMEZ BERRUM
40 379331013 M PATRICK OLESON
41 379331014 MARGARET MORENO
42 379331015 PABLO DOMINGUEZ
43 379315027 JOHNY FNU
44 379315021 NORINE E. MAY BIEHL
45 379315019 MAREK KURIATA
46 379315017 EISENHOWER TRUST DTD 5/14/22
47 379315015 MEDEL MARY ESTHER SONJ
48 379315016 JORGE L ZAVALA ALCARAZ
49 379315013 ALEX GANG LI
50 379314021 CANIS TRUST DTD 08/05/21
51 379314022 ARTHUR S. ALARCON
52 379314023 NICODEMUS K. MATHEWS
55 379313002 FELIPE RODRIGUEZ
56 379313011 JOHN A. RIELLO
57 379313013 ZHONG WEN LIVING TRUST
58 379313014 FRANCISCO RINCON
59 379313015 GUARDADO HERNANDEZ FAMILY TRUST DTD 05/27/2020 60 379314019 TOMAS PEREZ
61 379314028 WARREN D. GADDY
62 379314029 HERBERT B. BARAJAS
63 379315001 DANIEL YOSHIRO HERNANDEZ
64 379315014 FRANCISCO CORNEJO
65 379315018 ALEXANDER EDWIN LAGERSTROM
66 379315025 ARNOLDO LEONEL ESTRADA
67 379314017 ARAMPATH GUNAWARDHANA
68 379314007 GILBERT S. CARMONA
69 379314008 IMELDA GONZALEZ
70 379314015 ROMAN MENDOZA
71 379314035 SOPANY HANTHIP
72 379315026 IGNACIO GONZALEZ
74 379315009 EVARISTO VARGAS PEDROZA
75 379313006 ARNALDO TAPIA
76 379314002 RSC MARKETING & SALES INC
77 379314004 JUAN RAMOS MORALES
78 379314006 JUDITH G. MADRIGAL
79 379314036 OSCAR PONCE
80 379315004 BRYAN JESUS DURAN
81 379315012 RONDAL L. FRAISER
82 379315022 CARMEN O. HARTMAN
83 379315028 JOSE DE JESUS GODOY
84 379315005 VERA LYNN SNYDER
85 379313007 JOHNSON FAMILY TRUST DATED 11/26/99
86 379313009 ROGERIO SILVEIRA
87 379314005 ELEAZAR RAMIREZ
88 379314009 MATTHEW JAMES HARRISON
89 379314013 OAK TREE APARTMENTS
90 379314020 CYNTHIA L. SOLIS
91 379315008 JACQUELINE JOHNSON
92 379315024 MARIA LOZA
93 379315031 MARIO SANCHEZ HERNANDEZ JOSE
94 379315006 ISMAEL OSORIO
95 379100021 EVMWD
96 379314018 NORBERTO F. DISUMMO
97 379313001 MARICELA VIRAMONTES
99 379314012 FIDENCIO DELGADO
100 379315011 SWH 2017-1 BORROWER
101 379314040 SERGIO SOLIS CONTRERAS
102 379313008 LUCIO H. LUGO
103 379314011 LILIANA MORENO
104 379314014 JOHN CHARLES EARHART
105 379314027 PETER RUSSO
106 379315010 BAUM FAMILY TRUST DATED 2/16/93
107 379314032 JOSE CLARO MENA
108 379314038 MARIO ALFONSO BUENROSTRO
109 379315020 JOSE NAVARRETE-MORALES
110 379313003 OSCAR NAJERA MARTINEZ
111 379313005 JOHN GARCIA
112 379314016 ANDRE DAVIS
113 379314026 REO GROUP INC
114 379314031 JUAN NAJERA MARTINEZ
115 379314034 ABELINA G. VELAZQUEZ
116 379314037 FERNANDO ZARATE
118 379315002 GUILLERMO T. MEDINA
119 379315007 RAMON RAMIREZ GUZMAN
120 379313004 RUSSELL MAY
121 379313010 EDWARD THANGARATNAM
122 379313012 MAURICE QUINTERO
123 379314010 ABEL VARELA
124 379314030 BAUM FAMILY TRUST DATED 2/16/1993
125 379314033 GLADYS GONZALEZ
126 379315003 JOHNNA TNAE WRIGHT
127 379315023 ROBERT VELOZ
128 379090021 LAKESHORE PLAZA
Mailing Address Mailing City Mailing State Mailing Zip
28392 Airoso St. Rancho Mission Viejo CA 92694
5716 Corsa Ave Suite 201 Westlake Village CA 91362
40993 DIANA LN LAKE ELSINORE CA 92532 <Null>
606 N 1ST ST SAN JOSE CA 95112 <Null>
22 PARMA IRVINE CA 92602 <Null>
130 S MAIN ST LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
1995 MARKET ST RIVERSIDE CA 92501 <Null>
9440 SANTA MONICA BLVD STE 301 BEVERLY HILLS CA 90210 <Null> 1131 MONROE ST LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
26006 WESTRIDGE AVE MENIFEE CA 92586 <Null>
3496 LAKE CREST DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
2425 S RITA WAY SANTA ANA CA 92704 <Null>
3498 LAKE CREST DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3499 LAKE CREST DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
15209 GRAND AVE LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3500 LAKE CREST DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3501 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3501 LAKE CREST DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3502 LAKE CREST DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3503 LAKE CREST DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3504 LAKE CREST DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3505 LAKE CREST DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
29880 LONGHORN DR CANYON LAKE CA 92587 <Null>
3506 LAKE CREST DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3507 LAKE CREST DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3508 LAKE CREST DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3509 LAKE CREST DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3510 LAKE CREST DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3511 LAKE CREST DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3512 LAKE CREST DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3513 LAKE CREST DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3514 LAKE CREST DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3515 LAKE CREST DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
6581 WESTERN AVE BUENA PARK CA 90621 <Null>
1627 HANGING ROCK MONTEBELLO CA 90640 <Null>
15067 FICUS ST LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
30366 WHITE COVE CT CANYON LAKE CA 92587 <Null>
3520 LAKE CREST DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
P O BOX 63 LAKE ELSINORE CA 92531 <Null>
3523 LAKE CREST DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3525 LAKE CREST DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
6611 MT PALOMAR DR BUENA PARK CA 90620 <Null>
29880 LONGHORN DR CANYON LAKE CA 92587 <Null>
44897 CORTE RODRIGUEZ TEMECULA CA 92592 <Null>
3800 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3804 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3802 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
4115 LIVE OAK LN YORBA LINDA CA 92886 <Null>
27042 MARBELLA MISSION VIEJO CA 92691 <Null>
2229 1/2 W BALL RD ANAHEIM CA 92804 <Null>
3905 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
1104 CLEVELAND CT LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
5444 OLD RANCH RD OCEANSIDE CA 92057 <Null>
24303 RIMFORD PL DIAMOND BAR CA 91765 <Null>
1128 CLEVELAND CT LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
647 MAGNOLIA AVE CORONA CA 92879 <Null>
3807 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
4642 KIMBERWICK CIR IRVINE CA 92604 <Null>
1123 MONROE ST LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
4560 TYLER ST RIVERSIDE CA 92503 <Null>
3806 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3708 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3604 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
4521 CAMPUS DR NO 377 IRVINE CA 92612 <Null>
5286 NORCRIS LN YORBA LINDA CA 92886 <Null>
3605 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3709 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
1111 MONROE ST LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3602 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
1116 MONROE ST LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
1112 CLEVELAND CT LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
P O BOX 310856 FONTANA CA 92331 <Null>
3507 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
35885 TRABUCO RD APT 52 LAKE FOREST CA 92630 <Null>
1109 MONROE ST LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
1106 MONROE ST LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
1122 MONROE ST LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3700 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3508 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
P O BOX 51002 IRVINE CA 92714 <Null>
111 CLEVELAND CT LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
P O BOX 28799 SANTA ANA CA 92799 <Null>
3509 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3607 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
110 N LINCOLN AVE STE 100 CORONA CA 92882 <Null>
3809 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
1114 MONROE ST LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3606 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3502 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
1110 MONROE ST LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
P O BOX 3000 LAKE ELSINORE CA 92531 <Null>
31553 CANYON VIEW DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92532 <Null>
25668 BEJOAL ST BARSTOW CA 92311 <Null>
3703 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
8665 HARTFORD DR STE 200 SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255 <Null>
1101 MONROE ST LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
1116 CLEVELAND CT LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3701 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
PO BOX 77851 CORONA CA 92877 <Null>
29301 MARITIME CIR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
29220 SHORE BREEZE ST LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
1117 MONROE ST LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
1105 MONROE ST LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3704 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
1106 CLEVELAND CT LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
1110 CLEVELAND CT LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3801 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
6535 WILSHIRE BLV NO 206 LOS ANGELES CA 90048 <Null>
1119 MONROE ST LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
1113 MONROE ST LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
1107 MONROE ST LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
617 FALL PL NAMPA ID 83686 <Null>
1112 MONROE ST LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
31308 DURNEY CT TEMECULA CA 92591 <Null>
35 LONG VIEW RD TRABUCO CANYON CA 92679 <Null>
1124 CLEVELAND CT LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3609 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
29220 SHORE BREEZE ST LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
1115 MONROE ST LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
1104 MONROE ST LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
3608 EISENHOWER DR LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 <Null>
8558 CHALMIN DR NO 401 LOS ANGELES CA 90035 <Null>
Property Address
<Null> 32281 RIVERSIDE DR
<Null> <Null>
<Null> <Null>
<Null> <Null>
<Null> <Null>
<Null> <Null>
<Null> 1131 MONROE ST
<Null> 1133 MONROE ST
<Null> 3496 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3497 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3498 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3499 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3500 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3500 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3501 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3501 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3502 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3503 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3504 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3505 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3506 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3506 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3507 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3508 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3509 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3510 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3511 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3512 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3513 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3514 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3515 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3516 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3517 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3518 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3519 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3520 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3521 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3523 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3525 LAKE CREST DR
<Null> 3600 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3702 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3706 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3800 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3804 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3802 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3808 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3901 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3903 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3905 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 1104 CLEVELAND CT
<Null> 1122 CLEVELAND CT
<Null> 1126 CLEVELAND CT
<Null> 1128 CLEVELAND CT
<Null> 1130 CLEVELAND CT
<Null> 3807 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 1125 MONROE ST
<Null> 1123 MONROE ST
<Null> 1100 MONROE ST
<Null> 3806 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3708 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3604 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3803 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3603 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3605 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3709 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 1111 MONROE ST
<Null> 3602 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 1116 MONROE ST
<Null> 1112 CLEVELAND CT
<Null> 3503 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3507 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3601 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 1109 MONROE ST
<Null> 1106 MONROE ST
<Null> 1122 MONROE ST
<Null> 3700 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3508 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 1108 MONROE ST
<Null> 1114 CLEVELAND CT
<Null> 1118 CLEVELAND CT
<Null> 3509 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3607 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3705 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3809 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 1114 MONROE ST
<Null> 3606 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3502 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 1110 MONROE ST
<Null> <Null>
<Null> 3805 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 1102 CLEVELAND CT
<Null> 3703 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 1120 MONROE ST
<Null> 1101 MONROE ST
<Null> 1116 CLEVELAND CT
<Null> 3701 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 3707 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 1127 MONROE ST
<Null> 1118 MONROE ST
<Null> 1117 MONROE ST
<Null> 1105 MONROE ST
<Null> 3704 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 1106 CLEVELAND CT
<Null> 1110 CLEVELAND CT
<Null> 3801 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 1129 MONROE ST
<Null> 1119 MONROE ST
<Null> 1113 MONROE ST
<Null> 1107 MONROE ST
<Null> 1102 MONROE ST
<Null> 1112 MONROE ST
<Null> 1108 CLEVELAND CT
<Null> 1120 CLEVELAND CT
<Null> 1124 CLEVELAND CT
<Null> 3609 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 1121 MONROE ST
<Null> 1115 MONROE ST
<Null> 1104 MONROE ST
<Null> 3608 EISENHOWER DR
<Null> 32391 RIVERSIDE DR