Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
1 1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 FINDINGS OF FACT
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that the environmental impacts of a project be examined and disclosed prior to approval of a project. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a), No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are:
1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR [referred to in these Findings as “Finding 1”].
2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency [referred to in these Findings as “Finding 2”]. 3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR [referred to in these Findings as “Finding 3”].
Having received, reviewed and considered the Northern Gateway Logistics Center (Project), State Clearinghouse (SCH) # 2021110379; as well as all other information in the record of proceedings on this matter, the following Findings regarding the CEQA Documents for the Project are hereby adopted by the City of Menifee (City).
1.2 DOCUMENT FORMAT
These Findings have been categorized into the following sections:
1)Section 1.0 Findings of Fact provides an introduction to these Findings. 2)Section 2.0 Project Summary provides a summary of the Project, overview of other discretionary actions required for the Project, and a statement of Project objectives. 3)Section 3.0 Environmental Review and Public Participation provides a summary of those activities that have preceded the consideration of the Findings for the Project as part of the environmental review process, and a summary of public participation in the environmental review for the Project.
4)Section 4.0 Findings Regarding Environmental Impacts Determined to Have No Impacts or Be Less Than Significant sets forth findings regarding those potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the CEQA Documents which the City has determined to be less than significant with the implementation of Project design features.
EXHIBIT “C”
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
2 5)Section 5.0 Findings Regarding Potentially Significant Environmental Impacts which can be Mitigated to a Level of Less Than Significant sets forth findings regarding those significant or potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the CEQA Documents which the City has determined can feasibly be mitigated to a less than significant level through the imposition of mitigation measures included in the Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Project.
6)Section 6.0 Findings Regarding Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts Which Cannot Be Mitigated to a Level of Less than Significant sets forth findings for significant and unavoidable project impacts. It should be noted that the proposed Project would does not include any significant and unavoidable impacts.
7)Section 7.0 Findings Regarding Growth Inducing Impacts sets forth findings regarding growth- inducing impacts.
8)Section 8.0 Findings Regarding Project Alternatives sets forth findings regarding alternatives to the Project.
9)Section 9.0 Findings Regarding the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program contains findings regarding the MMRP for the Project.
10)Section 10.0 Other Findings contains other relevant findings adopted by the City with respect to the Project.
11)Section 11.0 Statement of Overriding Considerations contains the Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Project. It should be noted that the proposed Project would does not include any significant and unavoidable impacts.
12)Section 12.0 Certification of the Final EIR contains information pertaining to the certification of the Final EIR.
The Findings set forth in each section herein are supported by findings and facts identified in the administrative record of the Project.
1.3 CUSTODIAN AND LOCATION OF RECORDS
The documents and other materials that constitute the administrative record for the City’s actions regarding the Project are located at the City of Menifee Community Development Department, 29844 Haun Road, Menifee, California 92586. The City is the custodian of the administrative record for the Project.
2.0 PROJECT SUMMARY
2.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION/LOCATION
The Project is generally located southwest of the Interstate 215/Ethanac Road interchange in the City, County of Riverside, State of California. The Project is generally bounded by farmland, the Ethanac Wash Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
3 channel, Ethanac Road, and vacant land to the north; SCE utility corridor, McLaughlin Road, and single- family residences to the south; Ethanac Wash, Barnett Road, and vacant land to the east; and Evans Road and vacant land to the west. The Project site is comprised of five parcels total (Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs): 331-060-007, 331-060-008, 331-060-020, 331-060-023, and 331-060-030).
The majority of the Project site consists of vacant, undeveloped land with grassland/agriculture. The Project would include the development of two new concrete tilt up warehouse and distribution buildings with associated office space on 20.17 acres of land. Building 1 is proposed to be 105,537 square feet (sq. ft.) consisting of 6,000 sq. ft. of office space and 99,537 sq. ft. of warehouse space and is located on the north side of the site. Building 2 is on the southern end of the site and is proposed to be 292,715 sq. ft. consisting of 8,000 sq. ft of office space, 7,000 sq. ft. of mezzanine, and 277,715 sq. ft. of warehouse area.
Buildings 1 and 2 combined would consist of 398,252 sq. ft. of total building area. Associated facilities and improvements of the Project site includes loading dock doors (15 for Building 1; 37 for Building 2), on-site landscaping, and related on-site and off-site improvements (including relocation of an underground flood channel). The proposed warehouse uses are considered speculative in nature, but may be used for receiving, storing, and distribution of manufactured goods, pursuant to the City of Menifee Development Code (Menifee Development Code)’s definition for Warehousing, logistics, and distribution facilities. The Project includes a total of 354 automobile parking spaces, 41 truck trailer parking spaces, and 52 dock doors. The Project also includes an on-site private driveway south of Building 2 that would allow automobiles and trucks to head westbound from Barnett Road to Evans Road.
2.2 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS
The City is the Lead Agency under CEQA and is responsible for reviewing and certifying the adequacy of the EIR for the Project. It is expected that the City, at a minimum, would consider the data and analyses contained in this EIR when making their permit determinations. Prior to development of the Project, discretionary permits and approvals must be obtained from local, state and federal agencies, as listed below.
Major Plot Plan No. PLN23-0040 proposes to construct two concrete tilt-up buildings totaling 398,252 sq. ft building area on the 20.17-acre Project site. The maximum building height allowed is 100 feet. The proposed building heights fall below this limit at 44 feet in height for Building 1 and 43.6 feet in height for Building 2. The Project includes a total of 354 automobile parking spaces, 41 truck trailer parking spaces, and 52 dock doors. The proposed conceptual landscape plan proposes an approximate total of 105,837 sq. ft. of landscape area or approximately 12 percent of the Project site.
Other permits required for the Project may include, but are not limited to, the following: issuance of encroachment permits for driveways, sidewalks, and utilities; security and parking area lighting; building permits; grading permits; tenant improvement permits; and permits for new utility connections.
2.3 STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES
The following objectives have been established for the Project by the City and Project applicant:
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
4 Objective 1: Fulfill the City of Menifee’s vision of developing the Economic Development Corridor – Northern Gateway in conformity with the City’s General Plan. The presence of Northern Gateway Logistics Center will attract businesses and investment that will stimulate economic growth.
Objective 2: Provide tax revenue to ensure future prosperity for the City and its residents.
Objective 3: Create employment opportunities for City residents and surrounding communities.
Objective 4: Infrastructure development that will include enhancements in roads, utility infrastructure and landscaping.
Objective 5:Increase trade and commerce within the City that will facilitate local and regional economic growth.
Objective 6: The institutional quality development will attract high end users and enhance the aesthetics of the underutilized vacant land.
Objective 7: Participate in backbone infrastructure that will help facilitate transportation throughout the corridor and increase public safety/traffic flow with new roads, signs, and striping.
Objective 8: Locate the Project near the I-215 freeway in order to provide adequate vehicular access to the Project site and to reduce vehicular travel through residential neighborhoods or heavily-trafficked City roadways.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
A Notice of Preparation (NOP) was distributed for the Project by the City on June 21, 2023. Additionally, the State of California Clearinghouse issued a project number for the Project, SCH # 2022120083. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15082, the NOP was circulated to interested agencies, groups, and individuals for a period of 30 days, during which comments were solicited and received, pertaining to environmental issues/topics that the Draft EIR should evaluate. These NOP responses were considered in the preparation of the Draft EIR, which upon release, was made available to all Responsible/Trustee Agencies and interested groups and individuals, as required under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15105 and 15087.
The State-mandated public review of the Draft EIR began on June 6, 2024, and concluded on July 22, 2024.
The Final EIR includes a Response to Comments package, which presents all written comments received during the public review period of the Draft EIR and includes responses to these comments and associated changes made to the EIR.
The EIR includes any exhibits or appendices thereto, the list of persons, organizations and public agencies which commented on the EIR, the comments which were received by the City regarding the EIR, and the City's written responses to comments raised in the public review and comment process, all of which are incorporated herein and made a part hereof by reference. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15084, the EIR has been reviewed and analyzed by the City as the lead agency with respect to the Project Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
5 and the EIR. The following findings for the Project and each fact in support of a finding are thus based upon substantial evidence in the record.
4.0 FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
DETERMINED TO HAVE NO IMPACTS OR BE LESS THAN
SIGNIFICANT
The City finds, based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.0 of the Draft EIR, dated June 2024, as the following environmental effects of the Project either have no impact or the impacts are less than significant, and, therefore, no mitigation measures are required. The City hereby finds that existing regulatory requirements, policies, and/or Project conditions have been identified and incorporated into the Project which avoids or substantially lessens the potentially significant effect on the environment to a less than significant level.
4.1 AESTHETICS
Impact 4.1-1: Less than Significant Impact
The Project will not significantly impact views of the San Jacinto Mountains to the northeast and east; the San Bernardino Mountains to the north; the San Gabriel Mountains to the northwest; and the Santa Ana Mountains to the west and southwest. Notably, Building 1 would be approximately 44 feet in height and Building 2 would be approximately 43 feet 6 inches in height, consistent with and well under the permitted maximum building height of 100 feet for the Economic Development Corridor - Northern Gateway (EDC- NG) zoning category. Further, Buildings 1 and 2 would be setback in accordance with the design standards of the Menifee Development Code. The development code requires front, rear, and side setbacks to be 25, 10, and 15 feet, respectively. Along Evans Road, the front setback for both buildings would be 25 feet.
The rear setback for is approximately 37 feet for Building 1 and approximately 298 feet for Building 2.
Along the future driveway, Building 2 would have a side setback approximately 20 feet from the southern property line. Building 2 would have a side setback from the northern property line at approximately 61 feet. Additionally, development standards applicable to the Project include landscape requirements.
Current standards for development within the EDC-NG zone relating to landscape require that ten percent of the total lot area, excluding that portion of the lot contained within the required front setback area, is dedicated to landscaped open space. The total landscape area would be 105,837 square feet which is 12 percent of the Project site, above the required ten percent under the Menifee Development Code.
Landscaping on the Project site is incorporated to enhance the aesthetic character of the site and soften building and screen walls. For these reasons and the reasons discussed in the EIR, the Project’s impacts on scenic vistas would be less than significant, and no mitigation relating to this issue is required. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.1-8 and 4.1-9)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not significantly affect scenic vistas. Potential aesthetic impacts to scenic views are considered less than significant. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this less than significant impact.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
6 Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.1-8 and 4.1-9.
Impact 4.1-2: No Impact
There are no officially designated state scenic highways within the City. The nearest officially designated state scenic highway is approximately 22 miles east of the Project site (SR 74 from the west boundary of the San Bernardino National Forest to SR 111 in Palm Desert). Due to the distance between the Project and this portion of SR 74 that is officially designated, the Project would not obstruct views from this highway. As previously mentioned, SR 74 is located approximately 0.93 miles northeast of the Project site and is eligible but not officially designated as a state scenic highway. Therefore, construction and operation of the Project site would not damage or obstruct a scenic resource (i.e., trees, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings) within a state scenic highway. No impact would occur. (Draft EIR, p.
4.1-9)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not significantly affect scenic highways and corridors.
Potential aesthetic impacts to scenic highways and corridors are considered less than significant.
Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR page 4.1-9.
Impact 4.1-3: No Impact
The Project is in an urbanized area and is zoned as EDC-NG which permits a mix of residential, commercial, and industrial land uses. The Project proposes construction and operation of two logistics buildings in addition to associated facilities and related on-site and off-site improvements. The Project would be designed consistently with development standards relating to building height, setbacks, and landscaping applicable to scenic quality. Through compliance with the EDC-NG development standards and design standards and guidelines, and City of Menifee General Plan (Menifee GP) goals and policies, the Project would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. (Draft EIR, p. 4.1- 10).
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not significantly affect the visual character of the City.
Potential impacts are considered less than significant. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this no impact determination.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR page 4.1-10.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
7 Impact 4.1-4: Less than Significant Impact
The Project will require minimal construction-related lighting, as the majority of the construction of the Project would be during daytime hours of construction permitted by the City of Menifee MC § 8.01.010 Hours of Construction. Once operational, all lighting at the Project site would be directed and/or shielded to prevent the light from adversely affecting adjacent properties, and no structures or features would be permitted that create adverse glare effects pursuant to the Menifee MC Chapter 9.205, Lighting Standards which states that, “all Project lighting, including spotlights, floodlights, electrical reflectors, and other means of illumination for signs, structures, landscaping, parking, loading, unloading and similar areas shall be focused, directed, and arranged to prevent glare or direct illumination on streets or adjoining property.” (Draft EIR, p. 4.1-11).
Additionally, as part of the Comprehensive Development Code update the City established Community Development Design Guidelines for any applicable residential, commercial, and industrial projects.
Lighting designs for nonresidential development must be designed in such a way that it avoids direct glare into neighboring properties. Road improvements along Evans Road, Barnett Road, and the future driveway, would include the installation of a total of 16 streetlights. In accordance with the aforementioned development standards outlined in the MC and Development Design Standards, the Project will ensure operational lighting is designed to enhance the aesthetic of the buildings and provide proper lighting along the improved roads in such a way that it mitigates additional glare to surrounding residential communities. Impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.1-10 and 4.1-11).
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. Potential impacts are considered less than significant. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.1-10 and 4.1-11.
4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Impacts 7.2-1 and 7.2-5: Less than Significant Impact
According to the California Department of Conservation’s California Farmland Finder and Exhibit OSC-5:
Agricultural Resources from the Menifee GP, the Project contains Farmland of Statewide Importance and Farmland of Local Importance.
Farmland of statewide importance is similar to prime farmland but with minor shortcomings, such as greater slopes or less ability to store soil moisture. This indicates the land must have been used for irrigated agricultural production as some point in time during the four years prior to the mapping date; 2018. According to the Menifee Final EIR, the City is focused on developing land in an economically productive way that would serve the growing population. As such, the City has placed significant emphasis on future development to include mixed-use, commercial, industrial, and residential projects rather than supporting agricultural uses that have become less economically viable. Moreover, the Menifee GP Final Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
8 EIR determined that because of the small area of farmland and the economic and regulatory constrains placed on agriculture, it is unlikely that the properties that are categorized as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, and Farmland of Statewide importance would remain in agricultural production even without the adoption of the Menifee GP. Consequently, the approval of the Menifee GP in 2013 converted 522 acres of existing state-designated farmland to nonagricultural uses and the land was reestablished for urban development.
Although the Project area has been identified to be Farmland of Statewide Importance, the adoption of the Menifee GP converted the land for nonagricultural uses. As such, the Project’s proposed industrial uses would be consistent with the Economic Development Corridor – Northern Gateway land use designation and zoned as EDC-NG which was envisioned to accommodate a mixture of non-residential and residential development. Moreover, the Economic Development Corridor – Northern Gateway land use designation does not permit agricultural use and the City does not have any prohibitions that prevent the transition of agricultural land uses to urban land uses. Therefore, impacts to Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 7-1 through 7-3).
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts to prime farmland, unique farmland or farmland of statewide importance beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Additionally, the EDC-NG zone does not permit agricultural uses. Less than significant impacts are anticipated to occur.
Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this no impact determination.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR, pages 7-1 through 7-3.
Impacts 7.2-2 through 7.2-4: No Impact
There are no lands within the City that are currently under a Williamson Act contract. The Project site is not zoned for agricultural use, and there is no forest or timberland present on the Project site that could be lost from Project implementation. For these reasons and the reasons discussed in the EIR, the Project would not create impacts on agricultural-zoned land, forestry resources, or lands user Williamson Act Contract and no mitigation relating to this issue is required. (Draft EIR, p. 7-2) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not conflict with lands zoned for agricultural use, forestry land, and timberland or land under a Williamson Contract. No potential impacts are anticipated to occur.
Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this no impact determination.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR, page 7-2.
4.3 AIR QUALITY
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
9 Impact 4.2-1: Less than Significant Impact
the Project is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The SCAQMD is required, pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), to reduce emissions of criteria pollutants for which the SCAB is in nonattainment. To reduce such emissions, the SCAQMD drafted the 2016 and 2022 AQMPs (AQMPs). The AQMPs establish a program of rules and regulations directed at reducing air pollutant emissions and achieving state (California) and national air quality standards. The AQMPs are a regional and multi-agency effort including the SCAQMD, the California Air Resource Basin (CARB), the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The pollutant control strategies in the AQMPs are based on the latest scientific and technical information and planning assumptions, including SCAG’s 2020 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), updated emission inventory methodologies for various source categories, and SCAG’s latest growth forecasts. SCAG’s latest growth forecasts were defined in consultation with local governments and with reference to local general plans. The Project is subject to the SCAQMD’s AQMPs.
Criteria for determining consistency with the AQMPs are defined by the following indicators:
Consistency Criterion No. 1: The Project will not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations, or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMPs. Consistency Criterion No. 2: The Project will not exceed the assumptions in the AQMPs or increments based on the years of the Project build-out phase.
The violations to which Consistency Criterion No. 1 refers are CAAQS and NAAQS. As shown in Draft EIR Tables 4.2-8 and 4.2-9, the Project would not exceed construction or operational emissions standards.
Therefore, the Project would not contribute to an existing air quality violation. Thus, the Project is consistent with the first criterion.
Concerning Consistency Criterion No. 2, the AQMPs contain air pollutant reduction strategies based on SCAG’s latest growth forecasts, and SCAG’s growth forecasts were defined in consultation with local governments and with reference to local general plans. The Project would not result in a change of land use designations reflected in the AQMPs. Therefore, the Project is assumed to be consistent with the AQMPs regional emissions inventory for the SCAB. Thus, the Project is consistent with the second criterion.
It is also noted that future tenant(s) of the Project site would also be required to comply SCAQMD Rule 2305 which would directly reduce NOX and particulate matter emissions. As discussed above, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the AQMPs or any applicable air quality plan. A less than significant impact would occur in this regard. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.2-21 and 4.2-22) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
10 Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR page 4.2-19 through 4.2-20.
Impact 4.2-2: Less than Significant Impact
Construction associated with the Project would generate short-term emissions of criteria air pollutants.
The criteria pollutants of primary concern within the Project area include O3-precursor pollutants (i.e., ROG and NO X) and PM 10 and PM2.5. Construction-generated emissions are short term and of temporary duration, lasting only as long as construction activities occur, but would be considered a significant air quality impact if the volume of pollutants generated exceeds the SCAQMD’s thresholds of significance. As stated above, review of Draft EIR Table 4.2-8: Construction-Related Emissions concluded that construction emissions would not exceed SCAQMD threshold for all criteria pollutants. Therefore, impacts concerning construction emissions would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, p. 4.2-23). Similarly, review of Draft EIR Table 4.2-9: Unmitigated Operational Emissions indicated that Project operational emissions would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds. (Draft EIR, p. 4.2-24). Compliance with SCAQMD Rule 2305 would further reduce criteria pollutants, specifically NO X and particulate matter emissions. Furthermore, the Project would adhere to other relevant Because Laws, Ordinances, and Regulations (LOR)-1 through LOR- 8 to further reduce emissions. Therefore, the Project would not violate any air quality standards or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. As a result, operational air quality impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.2-22 through 26) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts from the emissions beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR page 4.2-22 through 4.2-26.
Impact 4.2-4: No Impact
The Project does not involve any of the land uses that would result in emissions, such as those leading to odors, that would adversely affect a substantial number of people. The Project would also be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 402 to prevent occurrences of public nuisances. Therefore, the Project would not create objectionable odors, and no impact would occur. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.2-35 and 4.2-36) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts from the emissions (leading to odors), beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. No impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR page 4.2-33 through 4.2-34.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
11 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impact 4.3-2: Less than Significant Impact
No jurisdictional drainages, riparian/riverine and/or wetland features were observed within the Project site during the field survey. Furthermore, a jurisdictional delineation was conducted for the Drainage 1/Ethanac Wash located along the eastern portion of the Project site. As part of the Project, a storm drain would be installed from the western bank of Drainage 1, that would include the installation of riprap within the channel bottom. Draft EIR Appendix C3 concluded that no riparian vegetation or wetland obligate plant species were observed within Drainage 1. Further, Drainage 1 does not hold water for long enough to create anaerobic condition, ultimately forming hydric soils. Thus, Drainage 1 did not meet wetland requirements. Therefore, because regulatory approvals from the United States Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) would not be required since Drainage 1 was created wholly in the uplands and did not replace an existing blueline stream it does not qualify as waters of the United States. However, the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) may assert jurisdiction over the storm drain channel which would require a Report of Waste Discharge and Streambed Alteration Agreement. (Draft EIR, p. 4.3-17) Overall, Project development would not result in significant impacts to riparian/riverine habitats and a Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP) would not be required under the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) for the loss of riparian/riverine habitats and a DBESP would not be required under the MSHCP for the loss of riparian/riverine habitat. Further, no sensitive habitats were identified within the Project site. Lastly, the Project applicant would obtain a Report of Waste Discharge and Streambed Alteration Agreement prior to Project implementation. Thus, no riparian habitat or sensitive natural communities would be impacted from Project implementation.
However due to the impacts to the storm drain channel, impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, p. 4.3-17)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts to 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, beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR page 4.3-17.
Impact 4.3-3: No Impact
No inundated areas, wetland features, or wetland plant species that would be considered wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the CWA occur within the Project footprint. As a result, implementation of the Project would not result in any impacts or have substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands.
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
12 The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means, beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. No impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact. (Draft EIR, p.
4.3-18)
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR page 4.3-18.
Impact 4.3-4: No Impact
The Project site has not been identified as occurring in a wildlife corridor or linkage. The nearest linkage to the Project site, as identified by the MSHCP, occurs approximately 1.6 miles to the southwest of the Project site in association with the San Jacinto River. The Project would be confined to existing areas that have been heavily disturbed and are isolated from regional wildlife. Therefore, the Project site does not function as a major wildlife movement corridor or linkage. As such, implementation of the Project is not expected to have a significant impact to wildlife movement opportunities or prevent local wildlife movement through the area. Due to the lack of any identified impacts to wildlife movement, migratory corridors or linkages or native wildlife nurseries, no mitigation is required. Thus, impacts to wildlife corridors or linkages are not expected to occur. (Draft EIR, p. 4.3-18) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts to 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, beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. No impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR page 4.3-18.
Impact 4.3-5: Less than Significant Impact
The Project would be constructed in compliance with the Menifee GP Open Space and Conservation Element’s goals and policies pertaining to the conservation of biological resources. The Menifee GP’s Open Space and Conservation Element provides goals and policies for the conservation of biological resources.
Goal OSC-8 protects biological resources and Policy OCS-8-5 calls for the recognition of the impacts new development will have on the City's natural resources and to identify ways to reduce these impacts. The Menifee MC contains Chapter 9.200: Tree Preservation, which would require that the Project to, “protect trees, considered to be a valuable community resource…”, but there are no trees on the Project site, and therefore this regulation would not apply. Adherence with the Menifee GP goals and policies pertaining to the protection of biological resources would ensure that impacts are less than significant.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
13 Additionally, there are no local policies or ordinances that pertain to the proposed project. Therefore, impacts to local polices or ordinances are not expected to occur from development of the proposed project, and mitigation is not required. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.3-18 and 4.3-19) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.3-18 and 4.3-19.
4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact 4.4-1 and 4.4-2: Less than Significant Impact
The Cultural Resources Assessment (CRA; Draft EIR Appendix D) concluded that portions of the Project site have been subject to three previous cultural resources assessments, and no cultural resources have been previously identified within its boundaries. The field survey also did not identify any cultural resources (including architectural historical resources, prehistoric archaeological resources, or historic archaeological resources) within the Project site boundaries as the Project site has been subject to severe disturbances associated with mechanical clearing and discing as well as flooding.
While the CRA did not indicated sensitivity for unknown cultural resources within the Project boundaries, ground disturbing activities always have the potential to reveal buried deposits not observed on the surface. Accordingly, monitoring of future earth-disturbing activities would be conducted in accordance with Standard Conditions of Approval (COA)-CUL-1 through COA CUL-6 (refer to COA-CUL-1 and COA-CUL- 6 in Section 4.4, Cultural Resources). Lastly, a record search of the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) SLF was completed for the area of potential effect, “the Project site”, and the search returned negative results. Therefore, the Project’s potential impacts concerning the significance of a cultural resource are determined to be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.4-12 through 4.4-17).
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not significantly generate impacts to historical or archaeological resources, beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated with compliance with applicable COAs. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.4-12 through 4.4-17.
Impact 4.4-3: Less than Significant Impact
There are no cemeteries on or near the Project site. Most Native American remains are found within areas associated with prehistoric or historic archaeological sites. Since the CRA concluded that prehistoric or Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
14 historic cultural materials could be encountered during ground-disturbing activities, human remains could also be encountered. Therefore, the Project would adhere to COA CUL-7 and COA CUL-8 in the event that human remains are uncovered during ground disturbing activities and impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.4-17 and 4.4-18).
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not significantly generate impacts to human remains, beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated with compliance with applicable COAs. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.4-17 and 4.4-18.
4.6 ENERGY
Impact 4.5-1: Less than Significant Impact
The Project would comply with the applicable Title 24 standards and other relevant energy and fuel efficiency laws and regulations. Compliance itself with applicable Title 24 standards would ensure that the Project energy demands would not be inefficient, wasteful, or otherwise unnecessary. Therefore, potential impacts are considered less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.5-10 through 4.5-16) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts due to the wasteful or inefficient energy use beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.5-10 through 4.5-16.
Impact 4.5-2: Less than Significant Impact
The Project would be required to comply with these existing energy standards. Compliance with state and local energy efficiency standards would ensure that the Project meets all applicable energy conservation policies and regulations. As such, the Project would not conflict with applicable plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency. SCAG’s 2020-2045 RTP/SCS or Connect SoCal, adopted in September 2020, integrates transportation, land use, and housing to meet GHG reduction targets set by CARB. The document establishes GHG emissions goals for automobiles and light-duty trucks, as well as an overall GHG target for the region consistent with both the target date of AB 32 and the post-2020 GHG reduction goals of SB 375. The Project would not conflict with the stated goals of the Connect SoCal. Potential impacts are considered not significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.5-16 and 4.5-17) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
15 The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts stemming from conflicts with established renewable energy or energy efficiency plans beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR.
Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.5-16 and 4.5-17.
4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Impact 4.6-1 (i) and 4.6-2 (ii): Less than Significant Impact There are no known active or potentially active faults on or trending toward the Project site and the Project site is not located within a mapped Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. Since there are no known faults located on or trending towards the Project site, the Project would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects involving rupture of a known earthquake fault. Additionally, there was no evidence of faulting identified during the Geotechnical Investigation (Draft EIR Appendix F) of the Project site. The Project site is not subject to surface rupture of a known active fault; therefore, the possibility of significant fault rupture on the Project site is considered to be low. Nevertheless, all Project components would be constructed to the current California Building Code (CBC) Seismic Design Parameters. Structures for human occupancy must be designed to meet or exceed CBC standards for earthquake resistance. All grading and fill placement activities would be completed in accordance with the CBC requirements and the Menifee MC’s Grading Ordinance (Chapter 7.90 Grading Regulations).
Following these requirements, the Project would be designed to resist strong seismic ground shaking and thereby provide reasonable protection from serious injury and reduce catastrophic property damage and loss of life to less than significant levels. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.6-9 and 4.6-10) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts regarding fault rupture or strong seismic ground shaking beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.6-9 and 4.6-10.
Impact 4.6-3(iii): Less than Significant Impact
The Project site is located within a zone of “low” potential for liquefaction. Due to the depth of groundwater greater than 50 feet, the generally dense nature of the underlying soils, and the presence of cohesive soils, the potential for liquefaction and liquefaction-induced settlement is considered very low.
The proposed development would primarily consist of compacted fill over dense alluvial fan deposits.
These soils are not considered susceptible to dynamic settlement. Due to the very low potential for liquefaction, the potential for lateral spreading is also considered very low. Therefore, the Project the Project would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
16 loss, injury, or death involving seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, and impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, p. 4.6-10)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts seismic ground failure or landslides beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated.
Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR page 4.6-10.
Impact 4.6-4(iv): No Impact
According to the Project’s Geotechnical Investigation (Draft EIR Appendix F), the Project site is nearly flat.
Research and field observations did not indicate the presence of landslides on the Project site or in the immediate vicinity. Review of regional geologic maps of the area do not indicate the presence of known or suspected landslides at the site or in the vicinity of the site. According to the Menifee GP Liquefaction and Landslides map the Project site and the immediate area are not within a zone of generalized landslide susceptibility. The Project area is also outside of the hazard zone for rockfall/debris-flow. The relatively flat topography of each site along with its location outside of identified landslide susceptibility and rockfall/debris-flow hazard areas would lead to no impact occurring. (Draft EIR, p. 4.6-11) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts related to landslides beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. No impact is anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR page 4.6-11.
Impact 4.6-5: Less than Significant Impact
Grading and earthwork activities during construction would expose soils to potential short-term erosion by wind and water. Accordingly, the Project would implement erosion siltation control measures to reduce duce runoff from the site and to hold topsoil in place during all grading activities. Additionally, the Project would comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit (CGP) which requires development and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a monitoring plan, which would include erosion-control and sediment-control Best Management Practices (BMPs). The BMPs would be required to meet or exceed measures required by the CGP to control potential construction-related pollutants and would comply with Menifee MC Title 8, Chapter 8.26 – Grading Regulations. Conformance to these requirements and verification by the City as part of the development approval process would ensure that potential impacts from construction of the Project are less than significant.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
17 Following construction of the Project, the Project site would be covered with hardscape which would not contribute to erosion, and it would contain some landscaping, but these areas would include ground covers to reduce erosion and loss of on-site soils post-construction. This would ensure that operation of the Project site would not result in the loss of topsoil or sedimentation into local drainage facilities and water bodies. Additionally, the Project will include the installation of a network of storm drains and gutters that would capture any erosion during operational activity. Therefore, the potential for substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil is considered less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.6-11 and 4.6-12) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts related to soil erosion or the loss of topsoil, beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. A less than significant impact is anticipated.
Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.6-11 and 4.6-12.
Impact 4.6-6: Less than Significant Impact
Liquefaction and landslides are not considered to be a design concern for the Project, and potential for lateral spreading and dynamic settlement would be low. The City’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) lists the types of geologic hazards known to occur in the City regarding slope instability, leading to possible mudflow, liquefaction, and collapsible or expansive soils. The Project site is not located in an area identified as susceptible to slope instability, landslides, or liquefaction. Soil liquefaction is not likely to occur at this site primarily because the groundwater level is deep (in excess of 50 feet). The Project site is relatively flat and is not located adjacent to any potentially unstable topographical feature, such as a hillside or riverbank. Therefore, impacts associated with these hazards would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, p. 4.6-12)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the Project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse beyond those concluded in the EIR. A less than significant impact is anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR page 4.6-12.
Impact 4.6-8: Less than Significant Impact
No septic tanks or other alternative wastewater disposal systems are proposed. Therefore, no impact concerning soils adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste disposal systems would occur. (Draft EIR, p. 4.6-13)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
18 The City hereby finds that the Project would not have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater as concluded in the EIR. No impact is anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR page 4.6-13.
4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Potential significant impacts were determined to occur related to greenhouse gas emissions. Refer to Section 5.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions below for further discussion and Section 4.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Draft EIR for a more through discussion regarding the Project’s potential impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions during the Project’s construction and operational phases.
4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Impact 4.8-2: Less than Significant Impact
Database searches did not reveal any Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUSTs), Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) or Aboveground Storage Tank (ASTs) located on the Project site. Additionally, the Project site itself is not on the Cortese List, and the Project site has not been cited or issued violation notices by any environmental regulatory agency for improper use or disposal of hazardous materials. However, Project construction activities would include the use of materials such as fuels, lubricants, and greases in construction equipment and coatings used in construction. Accordingly, compliance with applicable laws and regulations concerning hazardous materials would ensure that all potentially hazardous materials are used and handled in an appropriate manner and would minimize the potential for safety impacts. All contaminated waste would be required to be collected and disposed of at an appropriately licensed disposal or treatment facility under SCAQMD Rule 1166. Furthermore, strict adherence to all emergency response plan requirements set forth by Riverside County Fire Department would be required through the duration of the Project construction phase. Project construction workers would also be required to conduct safe handling of hazardous material.
Operation of the Project site would involve typical hazardous materials and chemicals such as solvents and cleaning products associated with operation of an industrial/warehouse type use. Any routine transport, use, and disposal of these materials during warehouse operations must adhere to federal, state, and local regulations for transport, handling, storage, and disposal of hazardous substances. Prior to Project approval, a Hazardous Materials Business Plans (HMBP) would be required for approval to show conformance with all applicable materials handling protocols. Adherence to these regulations is overseen and enforced by the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health Hazardous Materials Branch.
Overall, compliance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations concerning hazardous materials would ensure that impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.8-25 and 4.8-26).
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
19 The City hereby finds that the Project would not 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 beyond those concluded in the EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.8-25 and 4.8-26).
Impact 4.8-3: Less than Significant Impact
No existing or proposed schools are located within one-quarter mile of the Project site. The closest schools to the Project site are Railway Elementary School located approximately 2.4 miles to the northwest and Romoland Elementary School located approximately 1.4 miles to the northeast. Therefore, the Project would not emit hazardous emissions or include the handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, and/or wastes within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. The transport of hazardous substances or materials to-and-from the Project site during construction and long-term operational activities would be required to comply with applicable federal, state, and local regulations intended to reduce public safety hazards. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp.
4.8-26)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts due to being within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school, beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR page 4.8-26.
Impact 4.8-4: Less than Significant Impact
According to the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) EnviroStor Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List, the Project site is not included on the hazardous sites list compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.9. In addition, the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) (Draft EIR Appendix H) did not identify any environmental concerns for the Project site. Therefore, no impact would occur. (Draft EIR, p. 4.8-26)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts from hazardous materials compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.8-26.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
20 Impact 4.8-5: Less than Significant Impact
The Project site is located within Compatibility Zone E of the MARB. Within Compatibility Zone E of the AIA, residential density and non-residential intensity are not restricted. Furthermore, based on the MARB Inland Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan – Map MA – 4 noise impacts are low to moderate and risk of accidents is low. Airspace protection is the major concern in that aircraft pass over these areas while flying to, from, or around the MARB. The Project would be designed in accordance with the Compatibility Zone E and all state, county, and local goals, policies, and regulations. Furthermore, the Project does not require review by ALUC because the City is consistent with the Perris Valley and MARB airport land use compatibility plan (ALUCP). To be consistent with the requirements of Zone E, COA HAZ-1 has been included, and therefore the Project would not result in a significant impact. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.8-27 and 4.8- 28)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts due to conflicts with public or private airports beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated.
Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.8-27 and 4.8-28.
Impact 4.8-6 Less than Significant Impact
The Project site does not contain any emergency facilities, nor does it serve as an emergency evacuation route. During construction and long-term operation of the Project, adequate emergency access for emergency vehicles would be maintained along public streets that abut the Project site. Furthermore, the proposed roadways would be designed in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local requirements. In addition, all roads would be maintained during construction activities, and buildout of the Project’s on-and off-site circulation improvements would provide additional points of access in the surrounding area. Construction or operations of the Project would not significantly disrupt or interfere with emergency access or impede access to nearby roadways or interfere with the City’s emergency management program. Impacts would be less than significant in this regard and mitigation is not required. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.8-28 and 4.8-29)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not impair implementation or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR page 4.8-28 through 4.8-29.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
21 Impact 4.8-7 Less than Significant Impact
The Project area is not located in a State Responsibility Area (SRA), or lands classified as Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ). According to CAL FIRE’s FHSZ Map Viewer, the Project site is located in a LRA and is classified as a non-Very High FHSZ. Consequently, the Project would not directly, or indirectly expose people or structures significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires and no impact would occur. (Draft EIR, p. 4.8-29)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts involving the exposure of people or structures to the risk of wildland fires beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.8-29.
4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Impact 4.9-2: Less than Significant Impact
The Project would construct on-site and off-site potable water and recycled water systems in accordance with Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) design standards to receive water services from EMWD.
Thus, the Project would utilize potable and recycled water and would not use any on-site or off-site groundwater wells, nor any other groundwater extractive methods to service the Project. Furthermore, a Will Serve Letter prepared by the EMWD (Draft EIR Appendix L) determined that EMWD will be able to provide water services to the Project site via the closest EMWD waster system. Accordingly, the Project would include water system improvements that are constructed in accordance with EMWD’s standards, specifications, and master plan. Since the Project would not directly draw water from the groundwater basin, implementation of the Project in this regard would not substantially deplete or decrease groundwater supplies or directly impact groundwater supplies. Impacts would be less than significant.
Additionally, while construction activities would introduce new impermeable surfaces to the Project site, the Project would reduce the amount of runoff from the new impervious areas with implementation of design measures in the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP). These measures include, but are not limited to, low impact development (LID) BMPs and other stormwater drainage controls. The LIDs would be engineered to capture and control run-off prior to being released downstream. This would increase the duration that water is held on-site prior to being released to downstream receiving waters. This timed- release allows water to slowly infiltrate the ground and helps facilitate recharge. In addition, LIDs that include permeable materials, enable run-off to immediately infiltrate and begin the recharge process.
Lastly, the Project site also includes areas that would be landscaped with permeable surfaces in accordance with EMWD’s Water Efficient Guidelines for New Development, which also would facilitate groundwater recharge. Therefore, with the required measures in place, the loss of the permeable area would not be substantial and groundwater recharge would maintain pre-project conditions. The Project Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
22 would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or substantially interfere with groundwater recharge. Impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.9-19 and 4.9-20) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts from the reduction of groundwater resources beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.9-19 and 4.9-20.
Impact 4.9-6: Less than Significant Impact
the Project is underlain by the San Jacinto Groundwater Basin. For groundwater management plan and reporting purposes, the San Jacinto Groundwater Basin is further separated into the Hemet/San Jacinto Management Plan Area, where the San Jacinto Fault Zone strongly influences the groundwater hydrology and is adjudicated under the Hemet-San Jacinto Watermaster, and the West San Jacinto Management Plan Area, for which EMWD is the designated Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA). The Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for the San Jacinto groundwater basin was prepared for EMWD in September 2021 and submitted to the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) on January 31, 2022. As discussed above, the Project’s components are not anticipated to obstruct groundwater facilities as groundwater facilities are not planned by EMWD for this Project. Furthermore, it was concluded that the Project would not substantially deplete or decrease groundwater supplies or directly impact groundwater supplies. (Draft EIR, p. 4.9-23)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts due to conflicts with adopted water quality control plans or sustainable groundwater management plans beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.9-23.
4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Impact 4.10-1 No Impact
The Project will not be located in an established residential community, and it would not physically divide any such community. The Project would occupy an area to be fully designated/classified as EDC-NG which permits Industrial uses. Accordingly, the Project’s proposed warehousing uses would be consistent with established land use and zoning designations. The Project would be designed in accordance with all applicable development standards correlated to industrial development. Furthermore, the Project would not involve the removal of vital roadways or points of connection for residents but would improve Project Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
23 area roadways. Therefore, development of the Project would not divide an established community and no impact would occur. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.10-5 and 4.10-6) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts to established communities beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. No impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.10-5 through 4.10-6.
Impact 4.10-2: Less than Significant Impact
The Project would not cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. As set forth in the EIR, regionally, the Project would comply with the goals and policies presented in SCAG’s Connect SoCal (refer to Draft EIR Table 4.10-3 in Section 4.10, Land Use and Planning). Locally, the Project would comply with the Menifee GP (see Draft EIR Table 4.10-4 in Section 4.10, Land Use and Planning and its land use goals and policies, the Menifee Development Code, and the March Air Reserve Base/Inland Port Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. For these reasons and the reasons set forth in the EIR, the Project would have a less than significant impact relating to this issue, and no mitigation is required. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.10-6 through 4.10-20).
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts due to conflicts with adopted land use policies beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.10-6 through 4.10-20.
4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
Impact 7.3-1 and 7.3-2: No Impact
The Project site is located in a heavily disturbed and partially developed portion of the City. The previous uses at the Project site does not include mining activities or mineral processing. Furthermore, the California Department of Conservation’s Mines Online mapper concluded that no active mining sites exist within the City. Therefore, the Project would not interfere with any existing or potential mining activities.
No impact would occur. (Draft EIR, p. 7-3).
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
24 The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts due to the loss of mineral resources beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. No impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR page 7-3.
4.13 NOISE
Impact 4.11-1: Less than Significant Impact
The Project would not result in the generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. As shown in Draft EIR Table 4.11-8, the Project’s construction noise levels would not exceed the applicable Federal Transit Administration (FTA) construction threshold. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.11-14 and 4.11-15) The highest exterior noise level at residential receptors would occur during the overlap of the grading, building construction, and paving phases and would be 68.6 A-Weighted Sound Level (dBA) which is below the FTA’s 80 dBA threshold.
Construction equipment would operate throughout the Project site and the associated noise levels would not occur at a fixed location for extended periods of time. Although sensitive uses may be exposed to elevated noise levels during Project construction, these noise levels would be acoustically dispersed throughout the Project site and not concentrated in one area near surrounding sensitive uses.
Additionally, as shown in Draft EIR Table 4.11-9, Project-generated noise levels at the nearest off-site properties would range from 29.2 dBA Leq to 46.7 dBA Leq during the daytime and would not exceed the Menifee MC noise limit of 65 dBA Leq. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.11-17 and 4.11-18) Similarly, Project-generated noise levels during the nighttime would range from 28.9 dBA Ldn to 43.4 dBA Leq and would not exceed the Menifee MC noise limit of 45 dBA Leq. As such, Project noise impacts from on-site operations would be less than significant. As shown in Draft EIR Table 4.11-10, although the “Opening Year With Project” scenario traffic noise levels would exceed the Normally Acceptable Standard along Ethanac Road, noise levels would not exceed the 3.0 dBA increase significance threshold along any of the surrounding roadways. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.11-18 and 4.11-19) As a result, the Project would not result in a perceptible increase in traffic noise levels and impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.11-13 through
4.11-19).
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not result in the generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.11-13 through 4.11-19.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
25 Impact 4.11-2: Less than Significant Impact
The Project would not generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. The nearest structure to the Project construction site is approximately 435 feet away. Table 4.11-11 shows that at 435 feet the vibration velocities from construction equipment would not exceed 0.0012 in/sec PPV, which is below the FTA’s 0.20 in/sec PPV threshold for building damage and below the 0.4 in/sec PPV annoyance threshold. It is also acknowledged that construction activities would occur throughout the Project site and would not be concentrated at the point closest to the nearest structure.
Additionally, since the Project’s truck movements would be at low speed (not at freeway speeds) and would be over smooth surfaces (not under poor roadway conditions), Project-related vibration associated with truck activity would not result in excessive ground-borne vibrations; no vehicle-generated vibration impacts would occur. In addition, there are no sources of substantial ground-borne vibration associated with the Project, such as rail or subways. The Project would not create or cause any vibration impacts due to operations. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.11-19 and 4.11-20)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts due to excessive groundborne vibrations beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.11-19 and 4.11-20.
Impact 4.11-3: Less than Significant Impact
The public airport nearest to the Project site is the Perris Valley Airport, located approximately 1.7 miles to the northwest. According to the Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Document, the Project site is not located within the Perris Valley Airport 65 CNEL noise contour. As such, Perris Valley Airport noise levels would not exceed the City’s normally acceptable noise standard (75 dBA CNEL) for industrial uses; refer to Table 4.11-6. Additionally, the Project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Thus, the Project would not expose substantial numbers of people to excessive noise levels from airports and impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.11-20 through 4.11-21) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts stemming from proximity to airport land use plan areas or private airstrips beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.11-20 through 4.11-21
4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
26 Impact 7.4-1: Less than Significant Impact
The Project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in the area. The Project would have a beneficial effect on the City’s employment base by developing a site that is largely vacant with a new industrial/warehouse facility with ancillary office space and mezzanine. Given that the current unemployment rate for Riverside County is approximately 4.5 percent and the City (4.2 percent), it is reasonably assured that the jobs would be filled by people living in the City, unincorporated County area, and surrounding communities. Utilizing SCAGs Employment Density Study of 1 employee per square feet per employee (581 for warehousing; 481 for Office) in Riverside County, the Project could potentially create approximately 692 permanent job opportunities once the Project is developed. This would represent 4.5 percent of employment growth. However, employment growth does not directly translate into population growth.
Data from the Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University found that approximately 13 percent of Americans move each year, and of those 21 percent move for job-related reasons. 13 percent of 692 is 90 people and 21 percent of 90 people is 19 people. Therefore, the Project could potentially generate approximately 19 new residents in the City Menifee which represents approximately 0.07 percent and
0.003 percent of the City’s and County’s population growth forecast of 129,800 people, and 2,927,000 people, respectfully, by 2045
Additionally, the Project would occupy an area to be fully designated/classified as EDC-NG. The Project’s proposed warehousing uses would be consistent with established land use and zoning designations.
Therefore, any growth associated with the Project is planned and accounted for. Furthermore, the Project proposed roadway and utility infrastructure improvements would be installed beneath the public rights- of-way that abut the Project site to serve the Project site. As a result, the Project would not be anticipated to induce substantial population growth in the Project area. Therefore, impacts associated with substantial, unplanned population growth would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, p. 7-4) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts from induced population growth beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated.
Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR page 7-4.
Impact 7.4-2: No Impact
No housing of any kind exists onsite and as such, no home or residents would be displaced with the implementation of the Project. As such, the Project would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere; therefore, no impact would occur. (Draft EIR, p. 7-4)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
27 The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts from the displacement of individuals or housing beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. No impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR page 7-4.
4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
Impact 4.12-1: Less than Significant Impact
The Project Applicant would be required to pay Development Impact Fees (DIFs) toward new fire facilities.
Additionally, the Project would be designed in accordance with Menifee MC’s fire safety and fire suppression features, including type of building construction, fire sprinklers, a fire hydrant system, and paved access. With payment of these fees, the Project would receive adequate fire protection service and would not result in adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of or need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities, and would not adversely affect service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives. Because no fire protection facilities exist on the Project site, development of the Project would not conflict with existing fire structures or require modification of fire protection facilities.
Compliance with applicable local and state regulations would ensure that Project implementation would result in a less than significant impact to fire protection services. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.12-7 and 4.12-8) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts to fire services beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.12-7 and 4.12-8.
Impact 4.12-2: Less than Significant Impact
The Project would be subject to the applicable DIFs. Funding for the operation and maintenance of existing services comes from the City’s General Fund, Measure DD funds, and development impact fees. The Project site would be adequately served by existing Menifee Police Department (MPD) facilities, equipment, and personnel such that new facilities would not be required. Because the Project site is not residential, although some calls for service are anticipated, the increase for police services would not be significantly impacted due to construction and operation of the Project warehouse. Additionally, development of the site would increase property tax revenues to provide a source of funding to offset any increases in demands for public services generated by the Project. Overall, impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.12-9 and 4.12-10)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
28 The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts to police services beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.12-9 and 4.2-10.
Impact 4.12-3: Less than Significant Impact
The Project would not draw a substantial number of new residents to the districts and therefore, would not indirectly generate school-aged students requiring public education. The Project does not include residential land uses and would not directly introduce new school-age children within the Romoland School and Perris Union Highschool Districts (RUSD and PUSHD, respectively). Furthermore, the Project is not expected to draw a substantial number of new residents to the surrounding area and would not, therefore, substantially increase enrollment at RUSD and PUSHD schools. Because the Project would not directly generate students and is not expected to indirectly draw a substantial number of students to the area, the Project would not cause or contribute to a need to construct new or physically altered public school facilities. Although the Project would not create a direct demand for public school services, PUHSD and RUSD currently requires school mitigation impact fees per square foot for commercial/industrial developments. RUSD and PUSHD use these fees to pay for facility expansion and upgrades needed to serve new students. Payment of these fees in compliance with Government Code section 65996 fully addresses all impacts to school facilities. For the foregoing reasons and the reasons discussed in the EIR, the Project would not result in a significant impact relating to this issue, and no mitigation is required. (Draft EIR, p. 4.12-10)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts to schools beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR page 4.12-10.
Impact 4.12-4: Less than Significant Impact
Project implementation would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered park facilities, the need for new or physically altered park facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives. Because no park facilities exist on the Project site, the Project would not conflict with existing park structures or require modification of park facilities. Therefore, Project implementation would result in a less than significant impact to park facilities. (Draft EIR, p. 4.12- 11)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
29 The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts to parks beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.12-11.
Impact 4.12-5: Less than Significant Impact
Project implementation would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered other public facilities, need for new or physically altered other public facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives. Because no public facilities exist on the Project site, development of the Project would not conflict with existing public structures or require modification of public facilities. Therefore, Project implementation would result in a less than significant impact to other public facilities. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.12-11 and 4.12-12) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts to other public facilities beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.12-11 and 4.12-12.
4.16 RECREATION
Impact 7.5-1 and 7.5-2: No Impact
The Project is a non-sort warehouse building with office and mezzanine space that does not include any recreational facilities and the Project applicant does not propose any residential development or other land use that may generate a population that would increase the use of any existing neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities. Implementation of the Project would not result in the increased use or substantial physical deterioration of an existing neighborhood or regional park.
Implementation of the Project would not have an adverse physical effect on the environment as it pertains to construction/expansion of recreational facilities. Therefore, no impact would occur. (Draft EIR, p. 7-5) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate impacts due to the increased demand on established parks beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. No impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR page 7-5.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
30 4.17 TRANSPORTATION
Impact 4.13-1: Less than Significant Impact
The Project would be consistent with SB 375 by complying with SCAG’s Connect SoCal. The Project’s consistency analysis with SCAG’s Connect SoCal goals is further discussed in Draft EIR Table 4.10-3: Project Compatibility with SCAG’s Connect SoCal Strategies within Draft EIR Section 4.10, Land Use and Planning of this EIR. The Project would also be consistent with Riverside County’s CMP goals but not limited to, adhering to the CMP by maintaining and enhancing the performance of the multimodal transportation system near the Project site, and minimizing travel delay. The Project would also comply with the Complete Streets Act of 2008 by being consistent with the Menifee GP Circulation Element.
The Project would include improvements to Evans Road and Barnett Road that would provide access to the Project. The Project’s on-site perimeter circulation would be designed in compliance with the Menifee MC development standards. Furthermore, the Project would include improvements for Opening Year 2025 and Opening Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Project Conditions through a combination of fee payments to help establish programs, construction of specific improvements, payment of fair-share contribution toward future improvements, or a combination of these approaches.
Furthermore, the Project’s development could result in an increased demand of public transportation as employment opportunities increase. RTA, as the public transit agency for the area, would be responsible for routinely reviewing and adjusting their ridership schedules and service destinations to accommodate public demand. Thus, implementation of the Project would not conflict with local public transit services.
Overall, the Project would not conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the Project’s circulation system. Accordingly, impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.13-10 and 4.13- 17)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.13-10 and 4.13-17.
Impact 4.13-2: Less than Significant Impact
Review of Draft EIR Table 4.13-5 shows that the Project’s Employment-Based VMT land use does not exceed the City’s VMT threshold under any project scenario, based on the City’s VMT guidelines. The VMT per service population for the Project is less than the City's VMT threshold. This finding should remain consistent whether the entirety of the Project's VMT is considered, or if only the VMT within the City is considered. This is because both the Project and the rest of the City, under which the threshold was developed, will have consistent travel patterns and so the relative VMT per service population between Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
31 the project and the remainder of the City should remain consistent within the City. Therefore, it can be determined that under baseline conditions, the Project effect on VMT would be considered a less-than- significant impact on VMT within the City. Therefore, under baseline conditions, the Project’s effect on VMT would be less than significant impact on VMT within the City. In addition, the City’s VMT Guidelines state that the cumulative no project shall reflect SCAG’s adopted Connect SoCal. As such, if a project is consistent with the Connect SoCal, then the cumulative impacts would be considered less than significant.
The proposed land use is consistent with the Menifee GP; therefore, the Project’s cumulative VMT impact is considered less than significant.
The City provides Industrial Good Neighbor Policies for new industrial project sites. Although the Project’s VMT impact is considered to be less than significant, the Project would comply with the Industrial Good Neighbor Policies which require Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures for industrial uses with over 100 employees to reduce work-related vehicle trips. Overall, impacts concerning the Project’s VMT effects are less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.13-17 and 4.13-18) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts regarding conflicts with CEQA transportation guidelines beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.13-17 and 4.13-18.
Impact 4.13-3: Less than Significant Impact
The Project would not include the use of any incompatible vehicles or equipment on-site, such as farm equipment. All circulation improvements would be constructed as approved by the City’s Public Works Department. Additionally, the Project would be constructed in accordance with Menifee Municipal Code Section 9.160.050. All structures shall be located to provide safe and convenient access for servicing, fire protection and required off-street parking.” In addition, all Project driveway intersections operate at an acceptable LOS with implementation of the recommendations and would therefore not create unsafe traffic conditions at these intersections. Sight distance at Project access points would comply with applicable sight distance standards and no sharp curves are proposed as part of the Project design (Menifee Municipal Code Section 9.160.060). Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur, and no mitigation is required. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.13-18 and 4.13-19) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts from hazardous design features beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated.
Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.13-18 and 4.13-19.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
32 Impact 4.17-4: Less than Significant Impact
The Project would not result in adequate emergency access. During construction, access roads will be kept and maintained in such condition to allow for safe passage of emergency response vehicles. The Project’s compliance with applicable City laws and regulations, along with its provision of access points, will ensure that the Project’s construction impacts relating to this issue will be less than significant. Emergency access lanes would be provided around the perimeter of both buildings. Following compliance with Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD) access requirements, adequate emergency access to the Project site would be provided. Project impacts concerning emergency access would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. (Draft EIR, p. 4.13-19)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts from impaired emergency access beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated.
Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR page 4.13-19.
4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact 4.14-1: Less than Significant Impact
The City of Menifee sent letters to those interested tribes that requested notification from projects occurring within the City pursuant to Assembly Bill (AB) 52. The following are the interested tribes:
Pechanga Band of Indians;
Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians; and
Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians.
To date, no response from the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians Cultural Resources Department has been received. The Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians (RBLI) responded on March 10, 2023. Mr. Shuuluk Linton noted that the Project site is located within RBLI TUA. For this reason, the RBLI Tribal Historic Preservation Coordinator requested the receive copies of existing Project documents and to consult on the Project to learn more about potential impacts to cultural resources.
On March 15, 2023, the Pechanga Band to Indians (PBI) stated that the Project is a part of PBI’s aboriginal territory. Therefore, PBI requested to begin consultation under AB 52 for the Project and to be added to the distribution list for public notices and circulation of all documents, including environmental review documents, archaeological reports, development plans, conceptual grading plans (if available), and all other applicable documents pertaining to the Project.
Based on consultation with local tribes, Conditions of Approval (COA)’s COA-CUL-1 through COA-CUL-8 (see Draft EIR Section 4.4, Cultural Resources) would ensure that any impacts to potential tribal cultural resources would be less than significant. Additionally, if human remains are discovered during Project Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
33 construction, the Project contractor would be subject to either the State law regarding the discovery and disturbance of human remains or the Tribal burial protocol. In either circumstance all destructive activity in the immediate vicinity shall halt and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. If the remains are determined to be of Native American origin, the NAHC shall be contacted. The NAHC will determine the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) and the City and Developer would work with the designated MLD to determine the final disposition of the remains. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.14-7 and 4.14-8)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts on tribal cultural resources beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.14-7 and 4.14-8.
4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Impact 4.15-1: Less than Significant Impact
The Project site is currently substantially vacant with an existing adjacent unimproved roadway. Adjacent and nearby uses, including residential and commercial developments, are served by existing utilities, including electricity, natural gas, and wet and dry utilities but they have not been extended into the Project site. Existing utilities would be extended and upgraded as needed during construction of Project to serve the anticipated demands and to accommodate operation of the warehouse. All required improvements and extensions to existing electrical, natural gas, or telecommunications utilities would occur within the existing roadway rights-of-way adjacent to the Project site, including Evans Road and Barnett Road. All areas adjacent to the existing roadways are also disturbed and are within the overall footprint of the Project.
Water
EMWD’s available water supplies would be sufficient to meet all of the water demands of the entire customer base, including the Project, through 2045, including during single and multiple dry years. Table
4.15-1: Total Retail and Wholesale Water Supply (AFY), above, shows these values. In all cases through year 2045, even during single and multiple dry year conditions, water supplies available to EMWD would be sufficient to meet all present and future water supply requirements of the entire customer base, including the Project, for the next twenty-five years, as shown in Draft EIR Tables 4.15-3 and 4.15-4 in Section 4.15, Utilities and Service Systems. Additionally, EMWD provided a Water and Sewer Will service letter (Draft EIR Appendix L) which stated that EMWD is willingly to provide water and sewer services to the Project site from the nearest EMWD water system. As such, the Project would have sufficient water supplies. Additionally, based on the incremental increase in demand that would result from implementation of the Project, impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.15-13 and 4.15- 14)
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
34 Stormwater and Drainage
To prevent stormwater and drainage impacts, the Project would include off-site improvements which include storm drain lines running from an existing channel heading north on Evans Road toward Ethanac Road. No other off-site improvements are proposed. All other storm drain connections would be connected to existing storm drain lines. Furthermore, Project storm water and drainage facilities would be constructed and operated in accordance with applicable guidelines and regulations of the EMWD and City. In consideration of existing requirements, no significant impacts are anticipated with respect to Project storm water and drainage facilities. (Draft EIR, p. 4.15-14) Wastewater
Construction on the approximately 20.17-acre Project site would result in 398,252 square feet (SF) of warehouse, mezzanine, and office use south of Ethanac Road between Evans Road and Barnett Road.
Prior to construction or operations of the Project, the Project applicant would comply with EMWD’s New Development Process.
The EMWD has previously used wastewater generation rates for industrial uses of approximately 1,700 gallons per day (GPD) per acre. Based on this value, wastewater generated by the Project would be approximately 15,500 GPD. This represents approximately 0.02 percent of the total daily capacity of the EMWD’s 78 Million Gallon per Day (MGD) current treatment capacity. The EMWD’s facilities currently treat an average of 50.4 MGD. The Project would therefore represent approximately 0.07 percent of the typical daily flows. Therefore, the increase in the daily wastewater generated by the Project site would be minimal and result in a less than significant impact. Improvements to facilitate service to the Project site would consist of tie-ins to the existing wastewater lines. Besides the on-site wastewater system, the Project requires an off-site connection to the existing sewer line along Evans Road. This proposed sewer line would run south on Evans Road connecting to the existing sewer line on McLaughlin Road. No other off-site wastewater system improvements would be required.
Proposed wastewater facilities would be below ground, within existing or planned roadway rights-of-way, and as such are addressed in respective Draft EIR section(s). All Project wastewater facilities would be constructed and operated in accordance with applicable guidelines and regulations of the EMWD and City and would also follow applicable EIR mitigation measures in each topical area addressed in the Draft EIR.
In consideration of existing requirements and Draft EIR mitigation measures, no significant impacts are anticipated with respect to Project wastewater facilities. Therefore, the Project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, or storm water drainage facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effect, and a less than significant impact would occur. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.15-14 and 4.15-15) Electric Power
The Project would require electricity facilities such as powerlines and other similar system components.
However, this new infrastructure would be completely underground, pursuant to the City of Menifee MC, Title 9, also referred to as the City of Menifee Development Code (Menifee Development Code) and would be installed within the proposed development areas. At most, it is anticipated that SCE would provide Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
35 more electricity to the Project compared to what is currently consumed, due to the current mostly vacant status of the Project site. No off-site electrical facilities are anticipated at this time. Therefore, the Project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded electric power which could cause significant environmental effects, and a less than significant impact would occur. Draft EIR, p.
4.15-15)
Natural Gas
As further discussed in Draft EIR Section 4.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, use of natural gas would be prohibited on-site. Therefore, the Project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded natural gas, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects, and a less than significant impact would occur. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.15-15 and 4.15-16) Telecommunications
The Project site would require telecommunication services to be provided by Frontier Communications.
Existing telecommunication lines, located within existing adjacent rights-of-way, would serve the Project.
Service to the Project site would require tying into these lines but these improvements would occur within existing areas of disturbance such as those adjacent to existing roadways. The new facilities required for the Project would be constructed within the development area and would be placed underground as per the City’s Development Code, Title 9. Therefore, construction of the Project’s telecommunication, cable and internet facilities would not create an increased impact on the environment beyond what is addressed for the overall Project, in respective EIR sections. No off-site telecommunications facilities are anticipated at this time. The Project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects, and a less than significant impact would occur. (Draft EIR, p. 4.15-16) Overall, the Project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects (Draft EIR, pp. 4.15-13 through 4.15-17)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts from the increased demand on public facilities beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated.
Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.15-13 through 4.15-17.
Impact 4.15-2: Less than Significant Impacts
The Project’s water service provider is anticipated to have adequate capacity to serve the projected demands as further discussed in Draft EIR Section 4.15, Utilities and Service Systems. Additionally, a Will Serve letter from the EMWD (Draft EIR Appendix L) stated that EMWD is willingly to provide water and Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
36 sewer services to the Project site from the nearest EMWD water system. The Project would result in less than significant impacts on services provided by the water service provider. (Draft EIR, p. 4.15-17) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts to water supplies beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR page 4.15-17.
Impact 4.15-3: Less than Significant Impact
The Project’s wastewater service provider is anticipated to have adequate capacity to treat the projected demand. The Project is anticipated to cause a less than significant impact on services provided by the wastewater service provider. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.15-14, 4.15-15, and 4.15-17) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts regarding wastewater treatment demand beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated.
Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.15-14, 4.15-15, and 4.15-17.
Impact 4.15-4: Less than Significant Impact
The Project would be served by a landfill with sufficient remaining permitted capacity to accommodate the Project’s solid waste disposal needs. According to CalRecycle’s Estimated Solid Waste Generations Rates for warehouse facilities, the Project is anticipated to produce 13.82 pounds of waste per employee per day. The estimated number of employees to operate the warehouses would be approximately 423 people That is approximately 0.02 percent of the El Sobrante Landfill’s maximum daily throughput and
0.06 percent of Badlands Sanitary Landfill’s maximum daily throughput. Therefore, the Project’s solid waste disposal needs could be accommodated at one or a combination of the disposal facilities discussed above. Operational activities would be subject to compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local statutes and regulations for solid waste, including those identified under CALGreen and Assembly Bill 939.
The Project would result in less than significant impacts concerning solid waste, and no mitigation is required.
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts regarding solid waste generation beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated.
Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
37 Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.15-17 and 4.15-18.
Impact 4.15-5: Less than Significant Impact
The Project would be constructed in compliance with Government Code Section 5.408.1, the more stringent of the code sections which requires that projects recycle and/or salvage for reuse a minimum of 65 percent of the nonhazardous construction and demolition waste in accordance with Government Code Sections 5.408.1.1, 5.408.1.2 or 5.408.1.3; or meet a local construction and demolition waste management ordinance, whichever is more stringent. As such a less than significant impact would occur.
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts due to conflicts with established solid waste policies beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.15-18 and 4.15-19.
4.20 WILDFIRE
Impact 7.6-1, 7.6-2, 7.6-3, 7.6-4: No Impact
According to Menifee GP Exhibits S-8, Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones and Public Facilities, and S-6, High Fire Hazard Areas, the Project site is not located in or near a State Responsibility Area (SRA). The Project site is located in a Local Responsibility Area (LRA). In addition, the Project site does not contain lands classified as a very high fire hazard severity zone (VHFHSZ). The closest VHFSZ/SRA to the Project site is located approximately 2.06 miles to the northeast. Therefore, no impact associated with the substantial impairment of an adopted emergency response plan would occur. Because the site is located within an urbanized area, it would not expose people or structures to significant risks as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes. Additionally, the Project would not exacerbate wildfire risks or expose Project occupants to pollutant concentrations or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire, nor would it require the installation/maintenance of infrastructure that would exacerbate fire risk. No impact would occur. (Draft EIR, pp. 7-5 and 7-6)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate impacts to the following: established emergency response or evacuation plans beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR; wildfire impacts beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR; substantial impacts due to the installation of infrastructure beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR; substantial post-fire flooding or landslide impacts beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. No impacts are anticipated. Consequently, no mitigation measures are required for this impact.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 7-5 and 7-6.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
38 5.0 FINDINGS REGARDING POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS WHICH CAN BE MITIGATED TO A
LEVEL OF LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT
The City finds, based upon the threshold criteria for significance presented in the Draft EIR, that all potentially significant environmental effects of the Project can be avoided or reduced to insignificance with feasible mitigation measures identified in the Draft EIR. No substantial evidence has been submitted to or identified by the City that indicates that the following impacts would, in fact, occur at levels that would necessitate a determination of significance.
CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126(b), requires a description of any significant environmental effects that cannot be avoided if the proposed Project is implemented.
5.1 AESTHETICS
No impacts were concluded to be potentially significant.
5.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
No impacts were concluded to be potentially significant.
5.3 AIR QUALITY
Impact 4.2-3: Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated To identify sensitive receptors, the SCAQMD recommends addressing Local Significance Thresholds (LSTs) for construction and operations. The LST methodology provided by SCAQMD is used by lead agencies to assist in the analysis of localized impacts associated with Project-specific emissions. Review of Draft EIR Tables 4.2-11 and 4.2-12 shows that the Project’s construction and operational emissions are below SCAQMD LSTs and therefore, significant impacts would not occur concerning LSTs.
A Health Risk Assessment (Draft EIR Appendix A) was conducted based on the SCAQMD Health Risk Assessment Guidance for Analyzing Cancer Mobile Source Diesel Idling Emissions for CEQA Air Quality Analysis and the SCAQMD Risk Assessment Procedures and the guidance from OEHHA. For carcinogenic risk, the Project’s combined construction and operational unmitigated impacts would result in a maximum cancer risk of 30.08 in one million at the nearest residential receptors; 11.74 in one million at the nearest park receptors; and 1.91 in one million at the nearest worker receptors. Therefore, the SCAQMD threshold of 10 in one million would be exceeded at the nearest residential and park receptors. The Project would be required to comply with MM GHG-2, which requires the use of zero emission cargo handling equipment during operations. With implementation of MM GHG-2, the Project’s cancer risk would be reduced to
1.73 in one million at the nearest residential receptors; 0.54 in one million at the nearest par receptors; and 0.10 in one million at the nearest worker receptors. As such, impacts associated with carcinogenic risk would be less than significance with implementation of MM GHG-2.
For chronic non-carcinogenic impacts, the highest maximum chronic hazard index associated with unmitigated diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions from the Project would be 0.012; a chronic hazard Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
39 index of 1.0 is considered individually significant. With mitigation, the chronic hazard would be reduced to 0.002. Therefore, even without mitigation, non-carcinogenic hazards are calculated to be within acceptable limits and a less than significant impact would occur.
Overall, implementation with MM GHG-2 would ensure that impacts concerning cancer risk would be reduced to a less than significant level. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.2-26 through 4.2-35) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect on the environment to below a level of significance with MM GHG-2.
Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Draft EIR Section 4.2: Air Quality, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following MM GHG-2 is feasible and is made binding through the MMRP. Imposition of these mitigation measures will reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant.
MM GHG-2All outdoor cargo handling equipment (such as yard trucks, hostlers, yard goats, pallet jacks, and forklifts) shall be zero emission (i.e., powered by electricity or other alternative fuel). The warehouse buildings shall include the necessary charging stations for cargo handling equipment. The building manager or their designee shall be responsible for enforcing these requirements:
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.2-26 through 4.2-35.
5.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impact 4.3-1: Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated There are 24 special-status plant species that have been previously recorded in the Romoland and Perris quadrangles. No special-status plant species were observed on the Project site during field investigation.
The Project site and surrounding area have been subject to decades of anthropogenic disturbances which have removed native plant communities that historically occurred. The Habitat Assessment and Western Riverside County MSHCP Consistency Analysis (Draft EIR Appendix C1) determined that the site does not have potential to support anu of the other special-status plant species known to occur in the vicinity of the site an all are presumed to be absent. The CNDDB lists two special-status habitats as being identified within the Romoland and Perris quadrangles: Southern Coast Live Oak Riparian Forest and Southern Cottonwood Willow Riparian Forest, which do not occur on the Project site. No CDFW special-status plant communities occur within the boundaries of the Project site.
According to the CNDDB, 77 special-status wildlife species have been reported in the Romoland and Perris quadrangles. Two special-status species were observed during the field investigation, Costa’s hummingbird and killdeer, the latter of which was not included in the CNDDB for the Romoland and Perris quadrangles. Based on habitat requirements for specific species and the availability and quality of on-site habitats, it was determined that the Project site has a high potential to support Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
40 cooperii), sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus), northern harrier (Circus hudsonius), and California horned lark (Eremophila alpestris actia); and a low potential to support great egret (Ardea alba), great blue heron (Ardea herodias), burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), snowy egret (Egretta thula), and loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus). It was concluded that the Project site does not have the potential to support any other special-status wildlife species known to occur in the vicinity of the Project site and all are presumed to be absent.
None of the aforementioned species are federally or state listed as threatened or endangered. In addition, Cooper’s hawk, sharp-shinned hawk, great blue heron, burrowing owl, norther harrier, California horned lark, and loggerhead shrike are covered species under the MSHCP. Of the aforementioned species, only burrowing owl and California horned lark might be expected to nest on-site. Sharp-shinned hawk are no expected to nest on-site since this species do not nest in the region; and Cooper’s hawk, northern harrier, and loggerhead shrike are not expected to nest on-site due to the lack of suitable nesting habitat/opportunities.
A focused burrowing owl survey (Draft EIR Appendix C2) was conducted to confirm the presence of individual burrowing owls, nests, and suitable burrowing owl habitat. No burrowing owls or signs (pellets, feathers, castings, or whitewash) were observed on or within 500 feet, where accessible, of the Project site during the field investigation. However, based on a review of CDFW’s CNDDB, 22 burrowing owl observations have been recorded within five miles of the Project site in previous years. Portions of the Project site are vegetated with a variety of low-growing plant species that allow for minimal line-of-sigh observation favored by burrowing owls. Further, small mammal burrows that have the potential to provide suitable burrowing owl nesting habitat (>4 inches in diameter) were observed throughout the Project site. However, otherwise suitable burrows in the western portion of the site are unlikely to support nesting burrowing owls due to the presence of free roaming dogs and cats associated with neighboring properties to the west and otherwise suitable burrows in the southern portion of the site are unlikely to support nesting burrowing owls due to the perching opportunities for predators of burrowing owl (i.e., red-tailed hawk) that are present within the adjacent high-voltage transmission easement. Burrows in the northeastern portion of the site and adjacent flood control channel provide suitable roosting and nesting opportunities for burrowing owl. Pursuant to MM BIO-2, the Project Applicant would retain a qualified biologist to conduct a 30-day preconstruction survey for burrowing owl. The survey results would be submitted to the City prior to obtaining a grading permit to ensure that burrowing owls are not impacted.
Additionally, to ensure impacts to the aforementioned avian species do not occur from Project implementation, MM BIO-1 would require that a pre-construction nesting bird clearance survey be conducted prior top ground disturbance. Therefore, with implementation of MMs BIO-1 and BIO-2, the Project’s impact on species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species would be reduced to a less than significant level. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.3-12 through 4.3-16) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
41 or substantially lessen the significant effect on the environment to below a level of significance with MMs BIO-1 and BIO-2.
Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Draft EIR Section 4.3: Biological Resources, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following MMs BIO-1 and BIO-2 are feasible and are made binding through the MMRP. Imposition of these mitigation measures will reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant.
MM BIO-1: If grading or construction activities, including vegetation removal, occurs between February 1st and August 31 st, a pre-construction clearance survey for nesting birds shall be conducted within three (3) days of the start of any vegetation removal or ground disturbing activities to ensure that no nesting birds will be disturbed during construction.
The results of the survey shall be submitted to the City prior to obtaining a grading permit.
The Project Applicant shall ensure that impacts to nesting bird species at the project site are avoided through the implementation of preconstruction surveys, ongoing monitoring, and if necessary, establishment of minimization measures. The Project Applicant shall adhere to the following:
a) The Project Applicant shall designate a biologist (Designated Biologist) experienced in: identifying local and migratory bird species of special concern; conducting bird surveys using appropriate survey methodology; nesting surveying techniques, recognizing breeding and nesting behaviors, locating nests and breeding territories, and identifying nesting stages and nest success; determining/establishing appropriate avoidance and minimization measures; and monitoring the efficacy of implemented avoidance and minimization measures. b) Surveys shall be conducted by the Designated Biologist at the appropriate time of day/night, during appropriate weather conditions, no more than 3 days prior to the initiation of project activities. Surveys shall encompass all suitable areas including trees, shrubs, bare ground, burrows, cavities, and structures. Survey duration shall take into consideration the size of the project site; density, and complexity of the habitat; number of survey participants; survey techniques employed; and shall be sufficient to ensure the data collected is complete and accurate. If a nest is suspected, but not confirmed, the Designated Biologist shall establish a disturbance-free buffer until additional surveys can be completed, or until the location can be inferred based on observations. If a nest is observed, but thought to be inactive, the Designated Biologist shall monitor the nest for one hour (four hours for raptors during the non-breeding season) prior to approaching the nest to determine status. The Designated Biologist shall use their best professional judgement regarding the monitoring period and whether approaching the nest is appropriate.
c) If an active avian nest is confirmed, the Designated Biologist shall immediately establish a conservative avoidance buffer surrounding the nest based on their best Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
42 professional judgement and experience. The Designated Biologist shall monitor the nest at the onset of Project activities, and at the onset of any changes in such Project activities (e.g., increase in number or type of equipment, change in equipment usage, etc.) to determine the efficacy of the buffer. If the Designated Biologist determines that such project activities may be causing an adverse reaction, the Designated Biologist shall adjust the buffer accordingly or implement alternative avoidance and minimization measures, such as redirecting or rescheduling construction or erecting sound barriers. All work within these buffers will be halted until the nesting effort is finished (i.e., the juveniles are surviving independent from the nest). The onsite qualified biologist will review and verify compliance with these nesting avoidance buffers and will verify the nesting effort has finished. Work can resume within these avoidance areas when no other active nests are found. Upon completion of the survey and nesting bird monitoring, a report shall be prepared and submitted to County for mitigation monitoring compliance record keeping.
MM BIO-2: The Project Developer shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a 30-day preconstruction survey for burrowing owl. The results of the single one-day survey shall be submitted to the City prior to obtaining a grading permit. If at any time there is a lapse of Project activities for 30 days or more, another burrowing owl survey shall be conducted and submitted to the City.
If burrowing owl are not detected during the pre-construction survey, no further mitigation is required. If active burrowing owl burrows are detected during the breeding season, the on-site biologist will review and establish a conservative avoidance buffer surrounding the nest based on their best professional judgment and experience and verify compliance with this buffer and will verify the nesting effort has finished. Work can resume when no other active burrowing owl nesting efforts are observed. If active burrowing owl burrows are detected outside the breeding season, then passive and/or active relocation pursuant to a Burrowing Owl Plan that shall be prepared by the Applicant and approved by the City in consultation with CDFW, or the Project Developer shall stop construction activities within the buffer zone established around the active nest and shall not resume construction activities until the nest is no longer active. The Burrowing Owl Plan shall be prepared in accordance with guidelines in the MSHCP. Burrowing owl burrows shall be excavated with hand tools by a qualified biologist when determined to be unoccupied and backfilled to ensure that animals do not reenter the holes/dens.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.3-12 through 4.3-16.
Impact 4.3-6: Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The Project site is located in the City of Menifee within the Sun City/Menifee Valley Area Plan of the MSHCP. No jurisdictional drainages, riparian/riverine and/or wetland features were observed within the Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
43 Project site. Development of the Project would not result in impacts to riparian/riverine habitats and a DBESP would not be required for the loss of riparian/riverine habitat from development of the Project.
Additionally, the Project site does not provide suitable habitat for any of the Narrow Endemic Plant Species. Project site and off-site improvement areas are not located within or in close proximity of any Criteria Cells or designated conservation areas. Therefore, the Project would not need to comply with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines.
Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP, Guidelines Pertaining to Urban/Wildlands Interface, is intended to address indirect effects associated with development in proximity to MSHCP Conservation Areas. The Project site is not located within or in close proximity of any Criteria Cells or designated conservation areas. Therefore, the Project would not need to comply with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines.
In accordance with Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP, Additional Survey Needs and Procedures, additional surveys may be needed for certain species in order to achieve coverage for these species. In compliance with the conservation goals of Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP, a Part B-Focused burrowing owl survey was conducted during the breeding season. Pursuant to MM BIO-2, a pre-construction burrowing owl clearance survey would be required to ensure that the burrowing owl remains absent from the Project site.
The Project is located within the Mitigation Fee Area of the SKR HCP but is not located within or adjacent to any of the Core Reserve Areas. Since the Project is not located within or adjacent to any of the Core Reserve Areas, no focused SKR surveys or on-site mitigation would be required. On-site mitigation is only recommended in Ordinance 663.10 when a site is located within or adjacent to a Core Reserve Area. As a result, the applicant would only be required to pay the SKR HCP Mitigation Fee prior to development of the Project site. With completion of recommendations provided above and payment of the applicable MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee ($19,615/acre)1 for industrial developments (last updated July 1, 2024) and SKR HCP Mitigation fees, and implementation of MMs BIO-1 and BIO-2, development of the Project site would be fully consistent with the MSHCP. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.3-19 through 4.3-21) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
The City hereby finds that the Project would not generate substantial impacts due to conflicts with established conservation plans beyond those concluded in the Draft EIR. Less than significant impacts are anticipated with implementation of MM BIO-1 and BIO-2.
Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Draft EIR Section 4.3, Biological Resources, which is incorporated herein by reference, MMs BIO-1 and BIO-2 are feasible and are made binding through the MMRP. Imposition of these mitigation measures will reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.3-19 through 4.3-21. 1 Regional Conservation Authority. (2024). MSHCP Fees. Available at https://www.wrc-rca.org/development-applications/permits-and-fees/ (accessed October 2024).
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
44 5.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
No impacts were concluded to be potentially significant.
5.6 ENERGY
No impacts were concluded to be potentially significant.
5.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Impact 4.6-7: Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Expansive soils are soils that expand and contract depending on their moisture level. This change can occur seasonally as water levels and precipitation changes throughout the year. These soils normally occur within the first five feet below the surface. Expansive soils can lead to structural damage as their compositions and volume changes dramatically. The Geotechnical Investigation conducted for the Project (Draft EIR Appendix F) concluded that encountered near-surface soils consisted mostly of silty sand to sandy silt that was dry to moist and medium dense to very dense or stiff to hard in-place and scattered discontinuous beds of sandy clay and clayey sand, along with lenses of poorly graded sand. Based on the results of laboratory testing conducted during the Geotechnical investigation, the Project site soils were anticipated to have “Very Low” to “Low” expansion potential. Although grading activities would likely involve relatively significant mixing and blending of the site materials and a reduction of the overall expansion potential of the fill soils, sandy silt soils of low expansion index would still remain beneath the fill in most areas. The Project would implement the design recommendations listed in the geotechnical reports and 2022 CBC design standards, and MM GEO-1 to reduce impacts from expansive soils.
Additionally, the Project would comply with City standard conditions of approval requiring compliance with the design recommendations listed in the geotechnical reports. Therefore, implementation of MM GEO-1 would ensure that the on-site soils would not be liable to significant expansion and a less than significant impact would occur. (Draft EIR, p. 4.6-13)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect on the environment to below a level of significance with implementation of MM GEO-1.
Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Draft EIR Section 4.6: Geology and Soils, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following MM GEO-1 is feasible and is made binding through the MMRP. Imposition of this mitigation measure will reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant.
MM GEO-1 During construction activity, special care shall be given to moisture conditioning of all slab subgrade to 100 percent of optimum moisture content to a minimum depth of 12 inches prior to trenching.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR page 4.6-13.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
45 Impact 4.6-9: Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The geologic units underlying the Project area are mapped primarily as old alluvial sand and gravel from the Pleistocene epoch, which is considered to be of high paleontological sensitivity. The Pleistocene alluvial deposits are considered to be highly paleontologically sensitive. Based on these results, MM GEO- 2 would be implemented which requires that the Applicant/Developer retain a qualified paleontologist to create and implement a Paleontological Resource Mitigation Program (PRIMP). With implementation of MM GEO-2, impacts would be reduced to less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.6-14 and 4.6-15) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect on the environment to below a level of significance with implementation of MM GEO-2.
Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Draft EIR Section 4.6, Geology and Soils, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following MM GEO-2 is feasible and is made binding through the MMRP. Imposition of this mitigation measure will reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant.
MM GEO-2Prior to issuance of grading permits, the Applicant/Developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to create and implement a Paleontological Resource Mitigation Program (PRIMP). The project paleontologist would review the grading plan and conduct any pre- construction work necessary to render appropriate monitoring and mitigation requirements, to be documented in the PRIMP. The PRIMP would be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit. Information contained in the PRIMP shall minimally include:
1. Description of the project site and proposed grading operations.
2. Description of the level of monitoring required for earth-moving activities.
3. Identification and qualifications of the paleontological monitor to be employed during earth moving.
4. Identification of personnel with authority to temporarily halt or divert grading to allow recovery of large specimens.
5. Direction for fossil discoveries to be reported to the developer and the City.
6. Means and methods to be employed by the paleontological monitor to quickly salvage fossils to minimize construction delays.
7. Sampling methods for sediments that are likely to contain small fossil remains, if any.
8. Procedures and protocol for collecting and processing of samples and specimens, as necessary.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
46 9. Fossil identification cataloged and curated into the permanent collections of a scientific institution.
10. Identification of the repository to receive fossil material.
11. All pertinent maps and exhibits.
12. Procedures for reporting of findings.
13. Acknowledgment of the developer for content of the PRIMP and acceptance of financial responsibility for monitoring, reporting, and curation.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.6-14 and 4.6-15.
5.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Impact 4.7-1: Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Review of Draft EIR Table 4.7-2 concluded that the Project would result approximately 1,078 MTCO2e total construction emissions. Construction GHG emissions are typically summed and amortized over a 30-year period and then added to the operational emissions. The Project’s amortized construction emissions would be 36 MTCO2e. Once construction is complete, the generation of these GHG emissions would cease.
GHG emissions associated with the Project are summarized in Draft EIR Table 4.7-3 which concluded that the Project’s unmitigated GHG emissions would be approximately 3,378 MTCO 2e annually from both construction and operations and would exceed the SCAQMD 3,000 MTCO 2e per year threshold. The majority of the GHG emissions (approximately 54 percent unmitigated and 63 percent mitigated) are associated with non-construction related mobile sources. Emissions of motor vehicles are controlled by State and Federal standards, and neither the Project applicant nor the City has control over these standards.
The Project would be required to comply with several Laws, Ordinances, and Regulations (LORs) and mitigation measures to reduce operational GHG emissions. LOR-4 through LOR-6 require water efficient irrigation systems, and compliance with Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards and the CALGreen Code.
Additionally, the Project would be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 2305 (refer to LOR-7) which would directly reduce emissions or to otherwise facilitate emissions reductions. Alternatively, warehouse operators can choose to pay a mitigation fee. Funds from the mitigation fee will be used to incentivize the purchase of cleaner trucks and charging/fueling infrastructure in communities nearby. Although Rule 2305 focuses on air quality pollutant emissions, the rule would facilitate cleaner vehicles and supporting infrastructure that would also result in GHG benefits. Furthermore, the Project would also implement MMs GHG-1 and GHG-2 to further reduce emissions.
As shown in Draft EIR Table 4.7-3, the Project adherence with relevant LORs and implementation of MMs GHG-1 and GHG-2 would reduce Project GHG emissions by approximately 14 percent and total mitigated emissions (2,696 MTCO2e per year) would not exceed the SCAQMD threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year.
Therefore, GHG emissions associated with the Project would be less than significant with implementation Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
47 of MMs GHG-1 and GHG-2 and compliance with LOR-1 through LOR-8. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.7-19 through 4.7- 23)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect on the environment to below a level of significance with implementation of MMs GHG-1 and GHG-2.
Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Draft EIR Section 4.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following MMs GHG-1 and GHG-2 are feasible and are made binding through the MMRP. Imposition of these mitigation measures will reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant.
MM GHG-1 Prior to the issuance of a building permit or tenant occupancy permits, the City of Menifee Building and Safety Division shall confirm that the Project does not include conveyance of natural gas utility lines. The purpose of this mitigation measure is to reduce GHG emissions from natural gas.
MM GHG-2All outdoor cargo handling equipment (such as yard trucks, hostlers, yard goats, pallet jacks, and forklifts) shall be zero emission (i.e., powered by electricity or other alternative fuels). The warehouse buildings shall include the necessary charging stations for cargo handling equipment. The building manager or their designee shall be responsible for enforcing these requirements.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.7-19 through 4.6-23.
Impact 4.7-2: Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated As further discussed in Draft EIR Section 4.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, the Project does not conflict with the applicable plans such as the City of Menifee GP, SCAG Connect SoCal, 2022 CARB Scoping Plan, and other relevant laws and regulations. Therefore, with respect to this particular threshold, the Project does not have a significant impact. As discussed in Impact 4.7-1, with adherence with LORs-1 through LOR- 8 and implementation of MMs GHG-1 and GHG-2, the Project’s long-term GHG emissions would not exceed SCAQMD’s 3,000 MTCO 2e per year threshold. Accordingly, the Project would not impede California’s statewide GHG reduction goals for 2030 and 2050. Impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.7-23 through 4.7-27).
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect on the environment to below a level of significance with implementation of MMs GHG-1 and GHG-2.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
48 Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Draft EIR Section 4.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, which is incorporated herein by reference, the MMs GHG-1 and GHG-2 are feasible and are made binding through the MMRP. Imposition of these mitigation measures will reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.7-23 through 4.7-27.
5.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Impact 4.8-1: Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Project construction would involve the general use, storage, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials. Construction activities would include the use of materials such as fuels, lubricants, and greases in construction equipment and coatings. Compliance with applicable laws and regulations concerning hazardous materials would ensure that all potentially hazardous materials are used and handled in an appropriate manner and would minimize the potential for safety impacts.
A Phase I ESA (Draft EIR Appendix H) was conducted for the Project to assess the Project site’s potential hazardous impacts on human health and the environment due to exposure to hazardous materials or conditions associated with the Project site. There is no concern of possible past use and storage of chemicals and petroleum products at the site associated with these past uses. However, the Project site parcels were historically used for agricultural purposes and the Phase I ESA determined that agricultural related chemicals such as pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers, may have been used on-site. Consequently, it is possible that residual concentrations of agricultural chemicals may be present in soil and potentially groundwater. However, if residual concentrations of these chemicals are present, it is unlikely that they would be the subject of regulatory scrutiny in the context of a non-residential land use scenario. As such, these findings would be considered as a de minimis condition (i.e., De minimis conditions are those that do not represent a material risk of harm to public health or the environment and that generally would not be the subject of enforcement action if brought to the attention of appropriate governmental agencies), provided the future site use will be industrial/commercial and the site is not re-zoned for residential use.
In the event that any contaminated soils and substances are encountered during ground disturbing activities such as grading, MM HAZ-1 would be implemented that would proper handling of the potentially found contaminated soils and substances. Therefore, hazards to the public or the environment arising from the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials during Project construction would be reduced to a less than significant level.
During operations, Operation of the Project would involve the use of small amounts of hazardous materials, such as industrial cleansers, greases, and oils for cleaning and maintenance purposes. The Project may also involve transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials; the specific substances and quantities of such materials are presently unknown. The use, storage, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials would be governed by existing regulations of several agencies, including the U.S. EPA, U.S. DOT, California OSHA, and the Riverside County Fire Protection District. Compliance with applicable laws and regulations governing the use, storage, transportation, and disposal of hazardous materials would ensure Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
49 that all potentially hazardous materials are used and handled in an appropriate manner and would minimize the potential for safety impacts. Additionally, the Project would also be operated with strict adherence to all emergency response plan requirements set forth by the Riverside County Fire Protection District. Compliance with applicable laws and regulations concerning hazardous materials would ensure that all potentially hazardous materials during the Project’s operational phase are used and handled in an appropriate manner and would minimize the potential for significant hazards to the public or the environment. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.8-22 through 4.8-24)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect on the environment to below a level of significance with implementation of MM HAZ-1.
Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Draft EIR Section 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following MM HAZ-1 is feasible and is made binding through the MMRP. Imposition of this mitigation measure will reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant.
MM HAZ-1 Soil Management Plan (SMP). Prior to issuance of a grading permit or trenching or subsurface excavation for utilities or roadway infrastructure, the Master Developer, or Site Developer shall retain a qualified environmental professional to prepare a SMP that details procedures and protocols for on-site management of soils containing potentially hazardous materials. The purpose of the SMP is to outline protocol for ensuring the proper handling and/or disposal of impacted soil and/or subsurface features of concern that may be encountered during site development. The SMP shall be submitted to the City’s (Engineering Department) for review and approval prior to commencement of trenching or subsurface excavation for utilities or roadway infrastructure.
The SMP shall include, but not be limited to:
Land use history, including description and locations of known contamination; The nature and extent of previous investigations and remediation at the site; Identified areas of concern at the site, in relation to proposed activities; A listing and description of institutional controls, such as applicable City ordinances and other local, state, and federal regulations and laws that would apply to the project;
Names and positions of individuals involved with soils management and their specific role;
An earthwork schedule;
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
50 Requirements for site-specific Health and Safety Plans (HSPs) to be prepared by all contractors at the project site. The HSP should be prepared by a Certified Industrial Hygienist and would protect on-site workers by including engineering controls, personal protective equipment, monitoring, and security to prevent unauthorized entry and to reduce construction related hazards. The HSP should address the possibility of encountering subsurface hazards including hazardous waste contamination and include procedures to protect workers and the public; Hazardous waste determination and disposal procedures for known and previously unidentified contamination, including those associated with any soil export activities, if applicable;
Requirements for site specific techniques at the site to minimize dust, manage stockpiles, run on and run-off controls, waste disposal procedures, etc.; and Copies of relevant permits or closures from regulatory agencies.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.8-22 through 4.8-24.
5.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Impact 4.9-1: Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Clearing, grading, excavation, and construction activities associated with Project buildout may impact water quality due to sheet erosion of exposed soils and subsequent deposition of particulates in nearby drainages. Pursuant to MM HYD-1, the Project is required to comply with the NPDES Construction General Permit, the water quality policies of the City GP and the Riverside County DAMP, all which require the preparation and implementation of a SWPPP in order to obtain grading and building permits. The SWPPP would identify site-specific construction BMPs to reduce or eliminate sediment and other pollutants in stormwater and non-stormwater runoff from the Project site. In addition, the Santa Ana MS4 Permit requires the preparation of a project-specific WQMP for all development projects and, as such, a project- specific WQMP has been prepared for the Project. The Project-Specific WQMP (see Appendix I1) has incorporated combined LID treatment, hydrologic control BMPs, and sediment supply BMPs to capture runoff during operations pursuant to MM HYD-2. A final WQMP will be required to address BMP sizing and O&M plan. Overall, the Project would not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements with implementation of MMs HYD-1 and HYD-2. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.9-15 through 4.9-19).
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect on the environment to below a level of significance with implementation of MMs HYD-1 and HYD-2.
Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Draft EIR Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following MMs HYD-1 and HYD-2 are feasible and Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
51 are made binding through the MMRP. Imposition of these mitigation measures will reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant.
MM HYD-1Prior to commencing grading, the Project Applicant shall comply with applicable construction water quality regulations including the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Permit, which shall be obtained from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). This process requires that the applicant electronically submit Permit Registration Documents (PRDs) prior to commencement of construction activities in the Storm Water Multiple Application and Report Tracking System (SMARTS). PRDs consist of the Notice of Intent, Risk Assessment, Post-Construction Calculations, a Site Map, the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), a signed certification statement by the Legally Responsible Person, and the first annual fee.
The required SWPPP must be submitted to the City of Menifee Engineering Department for review and approval, identifying specific actions and Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent stormwater pollution during construction activities. The SWPPP shall identify a practical sequence for BMP implementation, site restoration, contingency measures, responsible parties, and agency contacts. The SWPPP shall include but not be limited to the following elements:
A. Compliance with the requirements of the State of California’s most current Construction Stormwater Permit.
B. Temporary erosion control measures shall be implemented on all disturbed areas.
C. Disturbed surfaces shall be treated with erosion control measures during the October 15 to April 15 rainy season.
D. Sediment shall be retained on-site by a system of sediment basins, traps, or other BMPs.
E. The construction contractor shall prepare Standard Operating Procedures for the handling of hazardous materials on the construction site to eliminate discharge of materials to storm drains.
F. BMP performance and effectiveness shall be determined either by visual means where applicable (e.g., observation of above-normal sediment release), or by actual water sampling in cases where verification of contaminant reduction or elimination (such as inadvertent petroleum release) is required by the Santa Ana RWQCB to determine adequacy of the measure.
G. In the event of significant construction delays or delays in final landscape installation, native grasses or other appropriate vegetative cover shall be established on the construction site as soon as possible after disturbance, as an interim erosion control measure throughout the duration of construction.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
52 H. Prior to the issuance of the first grading permit, the Project Applicant shall submit the Final Tentative Parcel Map that includes the water quality BMPs for approval by the City of Menifee Engineer. The City of Menifee Engineer shall ensure that all applicable water quality standards are met before approving the SWPPP.
MM HYD-2The Project Applicant shall prepare a Final Project-Specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) with operations and maintenance (O&M) Plan for submittal together with the associated grading and improvement plans which must be approved prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit. These documents shall be prepared in accordance with applicable City (Menifee) and County (Riverside) water quality requirements, for review and approval by the City of Menifee Engineering Department, including the following:
Site Design Best Management Practices (BMPs)
Source Control BMPs
Treatment Control BMPs
BMP Sizing
Equivalent Treatment Control Alternatives
Regionally-Based Treatment Control BMPs
O&M Responsibility for Treatment Control BMPs
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.9-15 through 4.9-19.
Impact 4.9-3: Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated The Project would generate on-site and off-site flows. With implementation of the Project, the northerly portion of Building 1 and the northerly drive aisle would drain to catch basins located in the northerly drive aisle. An on-site storm drain system would capture and convey flows southerly around the proposed building to the southerly drive aisle. Flows from the Building 1 truck yard would confluence in the proposed system in the easterly drive aisle. Flows continue southerly to the proposed 10 foot by 6 foot reinforced concrete box structure that ultimately discharges in the MDP channel. The northerly portion of Building 2, northerly truck yard, and northerly driveway would drain to catch basins located in the northerly truck yard. A separate on-site storm drain system conveys flows northerly to the proposed reinforced concrete box structure and discharges at the same location as the flows from the north.
Therefore, development of the Project would alter the existing drainage pattern of the site since the existing site is predominately undeveloped with little existing impervious surfaces.
The Project Applicant would obtain a NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit and implement a SWPPP to minimize soil erosion and siltation on and off the site; see MM HYD-1. BMPs as outlined in the WQMP would also be implemented during construction and operation of the site to minimize erosion and sedimentation; see MM HYD-2. In addition to the SWPPP and WQMP, the Project would comply with other applicable local and regional water quality requirements. Overall drainage patterns would be captured through the proposed drainage systems, with flows directed to the Santa Ana Watershed Region Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
53 and with water quality measures applicable to the respective watershed. In consideration of existing regulations, and with implementation of MM HYD 1 and MM HYD-2, impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.9-20 and 4.9-21)
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect on the environment to below a level of significance with implementation of MMs HYD-1 and HYD-2.
Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Draft EIR Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, which is incorporated herein by reference, MMs HYD-1 and HYD-2 are feasible and are made binding through the MMRP. Imposition of these mitigation measures will reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.9-20 and 4.9-21.
Impact 4.9-4: Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Development of the Project would introduce more impervious surfaces on the site; therefore, increasing the amount and rate of surface runoff. The Preliminary Hydrology Calculations (Draft EIR Appendix I2) conduced for the Project concluded that the Project’s drainage system would be designed to provide on- site underground detention systems and proprietary biotreatment units, combined with comprehensive storm drainage. The drainage design recommendations are included in the Project design plans and have been designed to ensure that all on- and off-site drainage and storm drain facilities would be adequately sized for the 100-year storm event. Additionally, the Project would implement MM HYD-1, Additionally, an NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit would be obtained and a SWPPP would be implemented to minimize soil erosion and siltation on and off the site (see MM HYD-1). BMPs, as outlined in the WQMP would also be implemented during construction and operation of the site to minimize erosion and sedimentation. Therefore, the Project would not significantly increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding, and run-off water would not exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems. Finally, the Project Applicant would be required to submit all final grading plans, erosion control plans, and drainage plans prior issuance of grading permit.
All plans would be reviewed by the City to ensure that the Project would not increase flows on- or off-site or substantially exceed the existing drainage facilities pursuant to MM HYD-2. Therefore, with implementation of MMs HYD-1 and HYD-2 and compliance with applicable City regulations (including Menifee MC Chapter 8.26: Grading Regulations), the Project would not cause additional flooding, exceed the capacity of existing drainage facilities, or impede or redirect flood flows such that on-site or off-site areas are significantly impacted. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.9-21 and 4.9-22) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
54 or substantially lessen the significant effect on the environment to below a level of significance with implementation of MMs HYD-1 and HYD-2.
Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Draft EIR Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, which is incorporated herein by reference, MMs HYD-1 and HYD-2 are feasible and is made binding through the MMRP. Imposition of these mitigation measures will reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.9-21 and 4.9-22.
Impact 4.9-5: Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated The Project is inland and is not at risk for inundation due to a tsunami since it is more than 30 miles from the Pacific Ocean. However, the Project site lies within the dam breach inundation area for the Lake Perris Main Dam. In 2005, DWR determined that there were potential seismic safety concerns with the Lake Perris dam’s foundation if a magnitude 7.5 or larger earthquake struck the area. As a result, the DWR has commenced the Perris Dam Modernization Project that includes the Perris Dam Remediation Project, the Outlet Tower Improvements Project, and the Emergency Release Facility Project. The Perris Dam Remediation Project was completed in April 2018 and included several seismic retrofit upgrades such as strengthening the dam’s foundation and embankment. The Outlet Tower Improvements Project, part of the Perris Dam seismic retrofit projects, is planned for completion by 2026 and would ensure safe and reliable release of water during normal and emergency operations. Finally, the Emergency Release Facility Project is planned for construction between 2024 and 2026 and would safely route the flow of water in an emergency that requires the rapid lowering of Lake Perris. At project completion, flows would be directed by levees into a channel that would ultimately flow into the Perris Valley Storm Drain. Therefore, the Project is not anticipated to be at a significant risk for inundation due to dam failure from the Lake Perris Main Dam,
According to maps published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA; refer to Draft EIR Exhibit 4.9-1), the westerly portion of the Project site is located within Flood Zone X (shaded), which indicates that this portion of the Project site has an annual flood risk that is between a 1-percent annual chance (100-year) flood event and a 0.2-percent annual chance (500-year) food event. The easterly portion of the Project site is located within Flood Zone X (unshaded), which indicates that this portion of the Project site is within an area of minimal flood hazard. The Preliminary Hydrology Calculations concluded that the proposed drainage improvements, catch basins, and detention basins and off-site drainage improvement have been designed appropriately to provide flood protection for the 100-year storm event. As such, the Project would implement BMP’s and efficient design measures pursuant to the Project’s SWPPP and WQMP (MM HYD-1 and HYD-2), that includes, but is not limited to, the pretreatment of runoff through the proposed bioretention basins. Therefore, the Project’s impacts regarding the risk of pollutants would be reduced to less than significant levels. (Draft EIR. pp. 4.9-22 and 4.9-23) Finding: The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
55 or substantially lessen the significant effect on the environment to below a level of significance with implementation of MMs HYD-1 and HYD-2.
Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Draft EIR Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, which is incorporated herein by reference, MMs HYD-1 and HYD-2 are feasible and is made binding through the MMRP. Imposition of these mitigation measures will reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to Draft EIR pages 4.9-22 and 4.9-23.
5.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
No impacts were concluded to be potentially significant.
5.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
No impacts were concluded to be potentially significant.
5.13 NOISE
No impacts were concluded to be potentially significant.
5.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
No impacts were concluded to be potentially significant.
5.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
No impacts were concluded to be potentially significant.
5.16 RECREATION
No impacts were concluded to be potentially significant.
5.17 TRANSPORTATION
No impacts were concluded to be potentially significant.
5.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
No impacts were concluded to be potentially significant.
5.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
No impacts were concluded to be potentially significant.
5.20 WILDFIRE
No impacts were concluded to be potentially significant.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
56 6.0 FINDINGS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS WHICH CANNOT BE MITIGATED
TO A LEVEL OF LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT
6.1 AESTHETICS
No impacts were concluded to be significant and unavoidable.
6.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
No impacts were concluded to be and significant and unavoidable.
6.3 AIR QUALITY
No impacts were concluded to be and significant and unavoidable.
6.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
No impacts were concluded to be and significant and unavoidable.
6.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
No impacts were concluded to be and significant and unavoidable.
6.6 ENERGY
No impacts were concluded to be and significant and unavoidable.
6.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
No impacts were concluded to be and significant and unavoidable.
6.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
No impacts were concluded to be and significant and unavoidable.
6.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
No impacts were concluded to be and significant and unavoidable.
6.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
No impacts were concluded to be and significant and unavoidable.
6.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
No impacts were concluded to be and significant and unavoidable.
6.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
57 No impacts were concluded to be and significant and unavoidable.
6.13 NOISE
No impacts were concluded to be and significant and unavoidable.
6.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
No impacts were concluded to be and significant and unavoidable.
6.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
No impacts were concluded to be and significant and unavoidable.
6.16 RECREATION
No impacts were concluded to be and significant and unavoidable.
6.17 TRANSPORTATION
No impacts were concluded to be and significant and unavoidable.
6.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
No impacts were concluded to be and significant and unavoidable.
6.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYTEMS
No impacts were concluded to be and significant and unavoidable.
6.20 WILDFIRE
No impacts were concluded to be and significant and unavoidable.
7.0 FINDINGS REGARDING GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d) requires that an EIR:
“Discuss the ways in which the proposed project could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment.”
Under State CEQA Guidelines section 15126.2(e), a project would be considered to have a growth- inducing effect if it would result in any of the following effects:
Directly or indirectly foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing in the surrounding environment;
Remove obstacles to population growth (e.g., construction of an infrastructure expansion to allow for more construction in service areas);
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
58 Tax existing community service facilities, requiring the construction of new facilities that could cause significant environmental effects; or
Encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment, either individually or cumulatively.
Discussed herein, the Project would not result in significant growth-inducing impacts.
First, the Project would not directly foster population growth as the Project does not involve the construction of residential uses, nor does the site zoning allow for residential development. The Project would generate employment, but the existing unemployment for Riverside County 6 (4.5 percent) and the City of Menifee7 (4.2 percent) suggests that there is a need for local employment opportunities which are anticipated to be filled by locals. Additionally, based on data from the Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University found that approximately 13 percent of Americans move each year, and of those 21 percent move for job-related reasons. 13 percent of 692 is 90 people and 21 percent of 90 people is 19 people. Therefore, the Project could potentially generate approximately 19 new residents in the City Menifee which represents approximately 0.07 percent and 0.003 percent of the City’s and County’s population growth forecast of 129,800 people, and 2,927,000 people, respectfully, by 2045. For these reasons, Project construction would not directly or indirectly induce substantial, unplanned population growth in the City. (Draft EIR, p. 5-4)
Second, the Project would not remove obstacles to population growth. The Project’s development is localized to the Project site. The Project would not amend the Land Use Element or increase density on the parcels adjacent to the Project site. While the development of the Project would involve the expansion and updating of utility facilities such as electricity and water connections and the improvement of existing roadways, these improvements would serve the existing residences and businesses in the City and would improve services to these facilities and City connectivity. Substantial upgrades to the roadway system outside of the general Project area, which would promote further development, are not included as components of the Project. All infrastructure improvements associated with the Project are required of the Project itself, and do not contemplate future development in the area. Similar to the Project, all future projects in the general area would be subject to provide similar roadway and utility improvements to serve each project, as necessary. (Draft EIR, p. 5-4)
Third, the Project would not significantly induce population growth that would result in the taxation of existing community service facilities nor require the construction of new or expanded facilities that could cause significant environmental effects. As stated above, the Project would include infrastructure improvements and connections of wet and dry utilities and roadway improvements to serve the anticipated needs of the Project. Additionally, the Project would not require the expansion of utility facilities such as water treatment plants or landfills. (Draft EIR, pp. 5-4 and 5-5) Finally, the Project would not encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment, either individually or cumulatively. The Project would not encourage or facilitate other development such as the construction of new housing or other developments that could potentially have a significant effect on the environment. (Draft EIR, p. 5-5) Finding – The City adopts CEQA Finding 1.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
59 The City hereby finds that the Project does not directly result in any significant growth-inducing impacts.
The Project involves the creation of opportunities for industrial development.
Supportive Evidence – Please refer to Draft EIR pages 5-4 and 5-5.
8.0 FINDINGS REGARDING PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
The following alternatives were addressed in the Draft EIR:
1) The No Project Alternative
2) Reduced Building Intensity Alternative
3) Building Modification of two Building Site Plan to one Building with Additional Auto and Trailer Parking
8.1 NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE (ALTERNATIVE 1)
Description: State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6, requires an evaluation of the “No Project” alternative for decision-makers to compare the impacts of approving a project with the impacts of not approving it. Alternative 1: No Project Alternative (Alternative 1) assumes that the Project site would not be developed, which means there would be no warehousing facilities, landscape improvements, or surface lot improvements developed on the Project site or off-site.
Although this alternative assumes “No Development” (as required by CEQA), this is considered a speculative assumption as the land is assumed to remain in private ownership (as there are no offers to purchase the land for public open space use). It is more likely that, eventually, the land could be developed with some form of industrial development in keeping with the City’s General Plan land use, Economic Development Corridor – Northern Gateway, and zoning designation.
Finding – The City adopts Finding 3.
The City finds that Alternative 1 would not meet any of the Project objectives, as identified above as the Project site would remain in its existing vacant and undeveloped condition. The Project site would not provide employment opportunities, would not facilitate the movement of goods, would not develop an industrial project/warehouse facility that is Class A and that would attract high-end tenants to increase the City’s tax base.
Supporting Evidence – Please see Draft EIR Pages 6-5 through 6-9.
8.2 REDUCED BUILDING INTENSITY (15% REDUCTION) (ALTERNATIVE 2) Description: Alternative 2 assumes the proposed Project would undergo a 15 percent reduction in the overall square footage of the proposed warehouse building, removing approximately 59,800 SF of total warehouse space. Alternative 2 would minimize overall impacts related to the scale of the Project by 15 percent in square feet of proposed buildings.
Finding – The City adopts Finding 3.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
60 The City finds that Alternative 2 would likely lead to reduced impacts in air quality, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, transportation, and utilities and service systems. A smaller building size would still be consistent with land use designations for the Project site. Utility demand would be decreased due to the 15 percent reduction of internal warehouse space as well.
Alternative 2 would meet all of the Project Objectives. However, Alternative 2 does not maximize the City’s benefits realized or achievement of the Project Objectives when compared to the Project due to the reduced building square footage (59,800 SF) of interior warehouse.
Supporting Evidence – Please see Draft EIR Pages 6-9 through 6-13.
8.3 MODIFICATION OF TWO BUILDING SITE PLAN
TO ONE BUILDING WITH ADDITIONAL AUTO
AND TRAILER PARKING (ALTERNATIVE 3)
Description: Alternative 3 assumes that Building 2 would continue to be constructed in its original location, including the same office and mezzanine space, but the Building 1 portion of the site totaling
5.30 acres of land would be utilized for trailer storage and vehicle parking consisting of 91 automobile parking stalls and 120 trailer parking stalls. The additional trailer parking would be used by the building’s tenant for storage purposes and would not be used as a truck terminal. Building site coverage would be reduced from 45.3 percent to 33.3 percent from the Project to Alternative 3.
Finding – The City adopts Finding 3.
Alternative 3 would result in less intensive impacts concerning air quality, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, transportation, and utilities and service impacts than the Project due to shorter construction timeline and a smaller building footprint. Additionally, Alternative 3 would meet all of the Project Objectives. Alternative 3 does not maximize the City’s benefits realized or achievement of the Project Objectives when compared to the Project due to the elimination of Building 1, totaling 105,537 SF.
Supporting Evidence – Please see Draft EIR Pages 6-14 through 6-18.
9.0 FINDINGS REGARDING THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM
Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code requires that when making findings required by Section 21081(a) of the Public Resources Code, the Lead Agency approving a project shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes to the project which it has adopted or made a condition of project approval, in order to ensure compliance with project implementation and to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The City hereby finds that:
1) A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared for the Project, and the mitigation measures therein. The MMRP is incorporated herein by reference and is considered part of the record of proceedings for the Project.
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
61 2) The MMRP designates responsibility for implementation and monitoring of proposed mitigation measures. The City’s Community Development Director will serve as the overall Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
61 MMRP coordinator and will be primarily responsible for ensuring that all mitigation measures are complied with.
3) The MMRP prepared for the Project has been adopted concurrently with these Findings. The MMRP meets the requirements of Section 21021.6 of the Public Resources Code. The City will use the MMRP to track compliance with mitigation measures. The MMRP will remain available for public review during the compliance period.
10.0 OTHER FINDINGS
The City hereby finds as follows:
1) The foregoing statements are true and correct;
2) The City is the “Lead Agency” for the Project evaluated in the CEQA Documents and independently reviewed and analyzed in the Draft EIR and Final EIR for the Project; 3) The Notice of Preparation of the Draft EIR was circulated for public review. It requested that responsible agencies respond as to the scope and content of the environmental information germane to that agency’s specific responsibilities;
4) The public review period for the Draft EIR was for 45 days between June 6, 2024, and July 22, 2024. The Draft EIR and appendices were available for public review during that time. A Notice of Completion and copies of the Draft EIR were sent to the State Clearinghouse, and notices of availability of the Draft EIR were published by the City. The Draft EIR was available for review on the City’s website. Physical copies of the environmental documents are available at the City of Menifee Community Development Department, Sun City Library, and the Menifee Library; 5) The CEQA Documents were completed in compliance with CEQA; 6) The CEQA Documents reflect the City’s independent judgment; 7) The City evaluated comments on environmental issues received from persons who reviewed the Draft EIR. In accordance with CEQA, the City prepared written responses describing the disposition of significant environmental issues raised. The Final EIR provided adequate, good faith and reasoned responses to the comments. The City reviewed the comments received and responses thereto and has determined that neither the comments received nor the responses to such comments add significant new information to the Draft EIR regarding adverse environmental impacts. The City has based its actions on full appraisal of all viewpoints, including all comments received up to the date of adoption of these Findings, concerning the environmental impacts identified and analyzed in the Final EIR; 8) The City finds that the CEQA Documents, as amended, provide objective information to assist the decision-makers and the public at large in their consideration of the environmental consequences of the Project. The public review period provided all interested jurisdictions, agencies, private organizations, and individuals the opportunity to submit all comments made during the public review period;
Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
62 9) The CEQA Documents evaluated the following impacts: (1) aesthetics; (2) agriculture and forestry; (3) air quality; (4) biological resources; (5) cultural resources; (6) energy; (7) geology and soils; (8) greenhouse gas emissions; (9) hazards and hazardous materials; (10) hydrology and water quality; (11) land use and planning; (12) mineral resources; (13) noise; (14) population and housing; (15) public services; (16) recreation; (17) transportation and circulation; (18) tribal cultural resources; (19) utilities and service systems; (20) wildfire.
Additionally, the CEQA Documents considered, in separate sections, significant irreversible environmental changes and growth-inducing impacts of the Project as well as a reasonable range of project alternatives. No significant environmental impacts were identified in the CEQA Documents;
10) The MMRP includes all of the mitigation measures identified in the CEQA Documents and has been designed to ensure compliance during implementation of the Project. The MMRP provides the steps necessary to ensure that the mitigation measures are fully enforceable; 11) The MMRP designates responsibility and anticipated timing for the implementation of mitigation; the City’s Community Development Director will serve as the MMRP Coordinator; 12) In determining whether the Project may have a significant impact on the environment, and in adopting these Findings pursuant to Section 21081 of CEQA, the City has complied with CEQA Sections 21081.5 and 21082.2;
13) The impacts of the Project have been analyzed to the extent feasible at the time of certification of the CEQA Documents;
14) The City made no decisions related to approval of the Project prior to the initial recommendation of certification of the CEQA Documents. The City also did not commit to a definite course of action with respect to the Project prior to the initial consideration of the CEQA Documents. 15) Copies of all the documents incorporated by reference in the CEQA Documents are and have been available upon request at all times at the offices of the City of Menifee Community Development Department, the custodian of record for such documents or other materials; 16) The responses to the comments on the Draft EIR, which are contained in the Final EIR, clarify and amplify the analysis in the Draft EIR;
17) Having reviewed the information contained in the CEQA Documents and in the administrative record, the City finds that there is no new significant information regarding adverse environmental impacts of the Project in the Final EIR; and 18) Having received, reviewed and considered all information in the CEQA Documents, as well as all other information in the record of proceedings on this matter, these Findings are hereby adopted by the City in its capacity as the CEQA Lead Agency.
11.0 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(b), and CEQA Guidelines Section15093(a) and (b), the decision-making agency is required to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or Northern Gateway Logistics Center
Final Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Menifee November 2024
63 other benefits of the project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve a project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, those effects may be considered “acceptable” (14 C.C.R. § 15093 (a)). CEQA requires the agency to support, in writing, the specific reasons for considering a project acceptable when significant impacts are not avoided or substantially lessened. Those reasons must be based on substantial evidence in the FEIR or elsewhere in the administrative record (14 C.C.R. § 15093(b)).
Courts have upheld overriding considerations that were based on a variety of policy considerations including, but not limited to, new jobs, stronger tax base, and implementation of an agency’s economic development goals, growth management policies, redevelopment plans, the need for housing and employment, conformity to community plan, and provision of construction jobs; see Towards Responsibility in Planning v. City Council (1988) 200 Cal App. 3d 671; Dusek v. Redevelopment Agency (1985) 173 Cal App. 3d 1029; City of Poway v City of San Diego (1984) 155 Cal App. 3d 1037; and Markley v. City Council (1982) 131 Cal App.3d 656.
The EIR determined that the proposed Project would not have any significant and unavoidable environmental impacts. As such, a Statement of Overriding Considerations is not required.
12.0 CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL EIR
The Planning Commission certifies that the Final EIR was prepared in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines and that the Planning Commission has complied with CEQA’s procedural and substantive requirements.
The Planning Commission further certifies that it has reviewed and considered the EIR in evaluation of the Project and that the EIR reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission further finds that no new significant information as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5, has been received by the Planning Commission after the circulation of the Draft EIR that would require further recirculation.
Accordingly, the Planning Commission certifies the Final EIR for the Northern Gateway Logistics Center Project.
As the decision-making body for approval, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Findings and supporting documentation. The Planning Commission determines that the Findings contain a complete and accurate reporting of the Project’s environmental impacts and benefits of the Project as detailed in the Statement of Overriding Considerations.