CC Report 9.01.09 — Riverside City Council, May 24, 2022

KVARD City Council Memorandum
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE: September 1, 2009 FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ITEM NO: 10

PLANNING DIVISION
WARD: 4
SUBJECT: PLANNING CASES P09-0141 (PM) AND P09-0173 (RZ) - IW CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. - SOUTHERLY OF CLARKE COURT, WESTERLY OF

CRYSTAL VIEW TERRACE
ISSUE:

This request is a proposal by Andrew Walcker of IW Consulting Engineers, Inc., on behalf of Raymond Gong, for a Tentative Parcel Map to further subdivide approximately 7.05 acres into three single family residential lots and to amend the Municipal Code (Title 19) to rezone approximately 0.47 acres of the subject site from the R-1-1/2 - Single Family Residential Zone to the RC - Residential Conservation Zone.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

That the City Council:

1. Determine the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment based upon the findings and mitigation measures set forth in the case record and adopt a mitigated Negative Declaration;

2. Adopt the attached Mitigation Monitoring or Reporting Program (MMRP) pursuant to Section 21081.6 of CEQA; and
• Approve Planning Cases P09-0141 and P09-0173 based on and subject to the Plannin ommission findinas and recommended conditions found in the attached staff repo and introduce the appropriate rezoning ordinance.

STAFF/PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS:

Staff recommended approval subject to the recommended conditions of approval. On July 9, 2009, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Planning Cases P09-0141 and P09-0173 by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 noes and 0 abstentions, with modifications to staff's recommended conditions.
10-1
•
P09-0141/P09-0173 • Page 2
BACKGROUND:
and are ,2009 Planning Commission sta report, recommended conditions FISCAL IMPACT:

All project costs are borne by the applicant.

Prepared by: Ken Gutierrez, Planning Director
Certified as to availability
of funds: Paul C. Sundeen, Assistant City Manager/CFO/Treasurer Approved by: Belinda J. Graham, Assistant City Manager
for Bradley J. Hudson, City Manager
Approved as to form: Gregory P. Priamos, City Attorney
Attachments:

1. City Planning Commission Recommended Conditions

2. City Planning Commission Report - July 9, 2009

3. City Planning Commission Draft Minutes - July 9, 2009 C: Public Works Department, Rob Van Zanten
10-2

CITY PLANNING COMMISSION

RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS
Case Number: P09-0141 (PM-34583) Meeting Date: July 9, 2009

CONDITIONS
* - All mitigation measures are marked with an asterisk.

Case Specific
• Planning
All applicable conditions of related Planning Case P09-0173 (Rezoning) shall apply to this case.

Prior to or concurrent with Map Recordation:

The applicant shall prepare and record Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for proposed Parcels 1, 2, and 3 subject to approval of the Planning Division and the City Attorney's Office stipulating the following:
a. Private property owners shall be responsible for the maintenance of the shared private driveway and landscaped areas on either side of the shared driveway; b. Reciprocal access shall be provided for proposed Parcels 1, 2 and 3. c. Future subdivision of any lot within this map is prohibited. d. Future development of Parcel 3 shall comply with applicable requirements of the RC Zone, including but not limited to, maximum height and stories and building setbacks for the future residence.
e. Habitable stru

3. * The final map shall be reflect that the approximately 2.54 acres southerly of the existing manufactured slopes on proposed Parcel 3 and the undisturbed areas along the westerly boundaries of proposed Parcels 1 and 2 (within "fingers" of the Prenda Arroyo) within a natural open space easement. No buildings, fencing, structures or non-native vegetation shall be permitted within the area designated as a natural open space easement. These areas shall be dedicated in fee title to an appropriate conservancy organization for purposes of long term maintenance and management. Should no organization be found, Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall be required to ensure maintenance and management of the open space area, subject to approval of the Planning Division and City Attorney's Office. Also, the CC&R's shall require that a qualified biologist be hired to submit an annual report to Planning Division staff certifying that the open space is being properly maintained.
10-3 ATTACHMENT 1

4. * No weed abatement/fuel modification areas will occur within the designated open space/preserved areas. Public access will be prohibited, except for required maintenance and monitoring.
* The preserved/open space areas will be retained as open space and will be managed for the sole purpose of wildlife conservation in perpetuity. The conservation easement will prohibit all activities that may kill, injure, or otherwise significantly disturb wildlife or adversely impact their habitat within the easement areas. These activities include, but are not limited to, recreation (hiking, biking, walking pets), agriculture, communication tower construction, gardening, dumping of garbage, off-road vehicle use, and construction of roads (other than the private road crossing described above) or other structures.

The landowner shall convey an avigation easement to the March Air Reserve Base/March Inland Port (MARB/MIP) Airport. The applicant shall contact March Joint Powers Authority at 951.656.7000 for additional information.

Prior to Precise Grading Permit Issuance:

7. Parcel Map 34583 shall be recorded.

Any future precise grading for each of the three parcels shall be limited to the area within the rough graded pads shown on Tentative Parcel Map 34583 and for the creation of the shared private driveway, subject to review and approval by the Planning Division and Public Works Department. The precise grading plan(s) shall include the following:
a. Slopes within driveways or within the common shared access driveway shall not exceed 10 percent;
Future precise grading shall comply with the Hillside/Arroyo Grading requirements of the Grading Code, including limitations on slope height and pad size;
C. Clearly indicate pad and lot drainage. Cross lot drainage covenants, if necessary, shall be subject to Public Works and City Attorney's Office for review and approval;
d.
impacts;
e. Include a note requiring the developer to contact Underground Service Alert at least 48 hours prior to any type of work;
f. Compliance with City adopted interim erosion control measures; and 10-4 ATTACHMENT 1
g. Hours of construction and grading activity are limited to between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. weekdays and 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Saturdays. construction noise is permitted on Sundays or Federal holidays.

The applicant shall be responsible for erosion and dust control during both the grading and construction phases of the project.

10. Slope landscape/irrigation plans for all manufactured slopes over 5 feet in vertical height shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division. A separate Design Review application and filing fee are required.

Prior to Building Permit Issuance

11. Tract Map 34583 shall be recorded.

12. The precise grading plan(s) shall be approved, as applicable.

13. Applicant/individual property owners) shall submit an Administrative Design Review application (including wall/fence plans) and applicable fees for the development of the parcels with a single family residence on each lot.

14. Advisory: Any lighting other than the normally associated with a residential use, such as tennis court lighting, shall be hooded and directed downward to avoid off- site spillage and shall be subject to Design Review staff approval.

Prior to Occupancy

15. The following uses shall be prohibited: (a) Any use which would direct a steady light or flashing light of red, white, green or amber colors associated with airport operations toward an aircraft engaged in an initial straight climb following takeoff or toward an aircraft engaged in a straight final approach toward a landing at an airport, other than an FAA-approved navigational signal light or visual approach an aircraft engaged in an initial straight climb following takeoff or towards an

16. The following notice shall be given to all prospective buyers or tenants of the property:
10-5 ATTACHMENT 1

NOTICE OF AIRPORT IN VICINITY
This property is presently located in the vicinity of an airport, within what is what airport annoyances, if any, are associated with the property betore you complete your purchase and determine whether they are acceptable to you Business & Profession Code 11010 12(A)
• Public Works

17. A "FINAL MAP" shall be processed with the Public Works Department and recorded with the County Recorder. The "FINAL MAP" shall be prepared by a Land Surveyor or Civil Engineer authorized to practice Land Surveying I the State of Calitornia and shall comply with the State Subdivision Map Act and Title 18 of the Riverside Municipal Code. All applicable checking and recording fees

18. A 24-foot-wide paved driveway shall be constructed to provide access to this project from Clarke Court.

19. A covenant and agreement, subject to the City Attorney's approval, shall be recorded to provide rights for access and utilities for the parcels in this subdivision prior to or concurrently with map recordation.

20. Onsite disposal system (septic tank) acceptability shall be obtained for each lot of this map, to the satisfaction of the County department of Environmental Health, prior to this map recording.
• Fire Department

21. No comments
• Public Utilities
Water

22. Project is located in area served by the Western Municipal Water District. The following are conditions of approval for this provided by Western Municipal Water District. Contact Western's Development Services Department at (951) 789-5000 for further information:
a. Compliance with water efficient landscape requirements per the City of Riverside's Ordinance
b. Western, as a member agency of Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), will enforce MWD's Plan for Water Use Guideline requirements for water conservation
10-6 ATTACHMENT 1
c. Developer's landscape architect is required to consult with Western's conservation team to review Western's landscape and irrigation requirements. Contact Western's Engineering Department for the review fee charge.
d. Developer to submit landscape plans for Western's review concurrently with the City of Riverside's submittal and Western's approval is required prior to a building permit being issued.
e. No water meter installation will be permitted unless the landscape plans have been reviewed and approved by Western.
f. Developer to submit a 24" × 36" preliminary onsite and/or onsite plan of water layout to Western before formal submittal of Water Improvement Plans.
g. Preliminary water plans shall show the following items:

1. Delude pial proposed ers and fail of materin project boundaries.

Delineate all existing utility facilities (1.e.; pipe diameter, pipe material, water meters, air/vac, blow-off, fire hydrants, valves, electrical vaults, etc.) within project boundaries
Delineate all easements within project boundaries
Delineate all proposed and existing lots, streets, and storm drains. h. Developer to submit a detailed engineer's construction cost estimate to Western for review and approval. Once approved, developer shall make a deposit for plan checking services for Water Improvement Plans. i. Water Improvement Plans shall be designed per Western's Standard Specifications. Please review Western's Commercial Plan Check Package for submittal formats and requirements.
j. Developer to submit grading plans for Western's review and approval efore grading permit is issued. All onsite and/or offsite utilities to b elocated are at Developer's expense
k. Developer to pay all costs associated with preliminary review by Western at the time of review

1. Water Improvements Plans shall not be accepted for plan checking until all items mention above are reviewed and approved by Western.

Electric

23. Project will be served by Southern California Edison. • Parks, Recreation and Community Services
The Following Park and Rec Correction to be met prior to Building Permit Issuance:
10-7 ATTACHMENT 1

24. Prior to Building Permit Issuance: Payment of all applicable park development impact fees (local, aquatic, trails, and regional/reserve fees) as mitigation for the impacts of the project on the park development, trails and open space needs of the City. For questions or concerns regarding this condition contact Principal Park Planner Robert Johnson - 826-2018.

Standard Conditions
• Planning

25. There is a thirty-six-month time limit in which to satisfy the conditions and record this map. Five subsequent one-year time extensions may be granted by the City Planning Commission upon request by the applicant. Application for a one-year time extension must be made prior to the expiration date of the map. No time extension may be granted for applications received after the expiration date of the map.

26. Within 30 days of the approval of the project by the City the developer/subdivider City of Riverside, its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul, an approval by the City's advisory agency, appeal board, or legislative The City wil
and the City will cooperate in the defense of the proceeding.

27. The applicant shall continually comply with all applicable rules and regulations in effect at the time permit is approved and exercised and which may become effective and applicable thereafter.

28. This project shall fully and continually comply with all applicable conditions of approval, State, Federal and local laws in effect at the time the permit is approved action, revocation or further legal action.
10-8 ATTACHMENT 1

CITY PLANNING COMMISSION

RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS
Case Number: P09-0173 (Rezoning) Meeting Date: July 9, 2009 CONDITIONS All mitigation measures are noted by an asterisk (*).

Case Specific

1. All applicable conditions of related Planning Case P09-0141 (Tentative Parcel Map) shall apply to this case.
• Planning

2. The RC- Residential Conservation Zone shall be applied to the highlighted area as depicted in Exhibit 5.

3. The City Attorney's Office shall be requested to prepare the appropriate ordinance to place the subject area in the RC Zone for City Council adoption upon completion of conditions of approval related to this project.

Standard Conditions
• Planning
There shall be a two-year time limit in which to satisfy the following conditions and finalize this action. Subsequent one-year time extensions may be granted by the City Council upon request by the applicant. Any extension of time beyond five years may only be granted after an advertised public hearing by the City Council.

5. Within 30 days of approval of this case by the City the developer shall execute an agreement, proved by the City Attorney's Uttice to detend, indemnity, including reimbursement, at old harmless the City of Riverside, its agents, officers and employees from any claim, actio or proceeding against the City of Riverside, its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul, an approval by the City's advisory agency, appeal board, or legislative body concerning this approval, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Section 66499.37 of the Government Code. The City will promptly notify the developer of any such claim, action or proceeding and the City will cooperate in the defense of the proceeding.

6. All necessary parcel descriptions describing the exact area to be rezoned shall be prepared, signed and sealed by a licensed Land Surveyor or Civil Engineer authorized to practice Land Surveying in the State of California for the area of the property to be rezoned. Descriptions are required to be on 8 ½ inch by 11 inch paper with the title "Attachment A" at the top.

When all of the conditions of approval have been completed, the lead agency shall initiate finalization of this rezoning.
10-9 ATTACHMENT 1
• Public Works

8. No conditions
Fire Department
No conditions
10-10 ATTACHMENT 1
Community Development Department
Planning Division
Parcel Map & Rezoning

RIVERSI
AGENDA ITEM NO.: 2
WARD: 4
NEIGHBORHOOD: Alessandro Heights
PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING DATE: July 9, 2009
I. PROJECT SUMMARY:
1) Case Number(s): P09-0141 (Tentative Parcel Map 34583) & P09-0173 (Rezoning) 2) Proposal: To further subdivide two vacant lots totaling approximately 7.05 acres into three single family residential lots in the R-1-1/2 - Single Family Residential Zone, the RC- Residential Conservation Zone and the RC-WC - Residential Conservation and Watercourse Overlay Zones and to amend the Municipal Code (Title 19) to rezone approximately 0.47 acres of the subject site from the R-1-1/2 - Single Family Residential Zone to the RC- Residential Conservation Zone.
3) Owner/ Applicant: Raymond Gong
18033 Clarke Court
Riverside, CA 92508
4) Case Planner: Kyle Smith, Associate Planner
(951) 826-5220
[email protected]
III. RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Planning Commission:

1. Determine that this proposed case will not have a significant effect on the environment based on the findings set forth in the case record and recommend to the City Council adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration;

2. RECOMMEND ADOPTION of the mitigation monitoring or reporting program pursuant to CEQA Section 21081.6; and

3. RECOMMEND APPROVAL of Planning Cases P09-0141 (PM-34583) and P09-0173 (Rezoning) based on the findings outlined in the staff report and summarized in the following and subject to the recommended conditions attached:

ATTACHMENT 2
City Planning Commission - July 9, 2009 P09-0141 & P09-0173 10-11
a. The proposed subdivision will be consistent with the purposes of the General Plan and Zoning Code requirements for the R-1-1/2-Single Family Residential RC- Residential Conservation and the RC-WC - Residential Conservation and Watercourse Overlay Zones;
b. The proposal will facilitate future infill residential development on the subject site in a manner consistent with development pattern in the immediate area. c. The proposed Rezoning is consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan;
d. The proposed Rezoning will not adversely affect surrounding properties; and e. The proposed Rezoning promotes public health, safety, and general welfare and serves the goals and purposes of the Zoning Code.

IV. BACKGROUND/HISTORY:

The project site, which currently consists of two lots, is southwesterly of Clarke Court, westerly of Crystal View Terrace, and northerly of the recently vacated Ferrari Drive in an area developed with single family residences on larger lots and areas designated as open space. The project site was annexed into the City of Riverside in May 2007 as part of Annexation #97 (Planning Case PO3-0395). Prior to annexation, the property owner received a grading permit from the County of Riverside (BGR-051529), which allowed grading to occur less than 50 feet from one of the fingers of the Prenda Arroyo, contrary to the City's Grading Code (Exhibit 6). Currently, the site currently contains 4 rough graded pads that were graded in accordance with the approved County rough grading plan, ranging in size from 16,689 to 28,703 square feet. One of the existing rough graded pads is a split level pad, not intended for the development of two residences. The most southerly portion of the subject site is characterized by steep terrain with dense vegetation. A blue line stream traverses this portion of the site from east to west.

V. DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION:

The applicant is proposing to further subdivide the approximately 7.05 acre vacant site into three lots. Parcels 1 and 2 are both proposed to be 1.02 acres in size and within the R-1 - ½ Zone. Parcel 3 is proposed to be approximately 5.01 acres in area and entirely within the RC and RC-WC Zones. To facilitate this map as described, the applicant is proposing to rezone approximately 0.47 acres (the northern approximately 60 feet of proposed Parcel 3) from the R-1 - ½ to the RC Zone, such that all of Parcel 3 will be within the RC Zone (Exhibit 5). Parcels 1 and 2 will each contain one of the graded pads, while the above described split-level pad is proposed to be located on Parcel 3.

The average natural slope of Parcel 3 is 32.28% and as such, the minimum lot size requirement is 5 acres. As this lot includes a steep and densely vegetated area and an unnamed blue line stream along the southerly portion of the lot, an open space easement, approximately 2.54 acres in area, is proposed on the southerly portion of the project site. This project will not disturb the existing blue-line stream or further disturb the Prenda Arroyo to the west of the subject site, as no additional grading is proposed in conjunction with this project. No variances are proposed as a part of the subdivision map or rezoning request.

City Planning Commission - July 9, 2009 2 P09-0141 & P09-0173 10-12
Vehicular access to the three residential lots will be provided via a 24-foot wide private driveway, located over an existing 30-foot wide access easement off of Clarke Court. Landscaped areas ranging from 5 to 11 feet in width is proposed along both sides of the private driveway.

VI. LOCATION/SURROUNDING LAND USES:

Existing Land Use General Plan Designation Zoning Designation R-1-1/2- Single Family
Project Site Residential Zone, RC-
Vacant / Previously HR - Hillside Residential, Residential Conservation rough graded residential VLDR - Very Low Density Zone, and RC-WC- pads Residential & OS- Open Space Residential Conservation and Water Course
Overlay Zones
North Single Family Residence VLDR - Very Low Density R-1-1/2- Single Family Residential Residential Zone
R-1-1/2- Single Family
Residential Zone and RC-
Vacant / Prenda Arroyo VLDR - Very Low Density Residential Conservation East Vacant / Previously Residential, HR - Hillside Zone and RC-WC- graded residential pads Residential & OS- Open Space Residential Conservation and Water Course
Overlay Zones
RC-RL - Residential
South Single Family Residence HR - Hillside Residential Conservation and Rural Livestock Overlay Zones
Open Space Easement HR - Hillside Residential & RC- Residential West and Prenda Arroyo OS- Open Space Conservation Zone City Planning Commission - July 9, 2009 3 P09-0141 & P09-0173 10-13
VIl. PROJECT ANALYSIS:
• General Plan /Zoning Conformance/ Proposition R and Measure C Northerly VLDR - Very Proposed
Parcel 1 (no change)
Portion of Low Density
Parcel Residential Proposed
Parcel 2 (no change)
Southerly
Portion of HR - Hillside Proposed
Residential Parcel 3 (no change)
Parcel
Proposed
Northerly R-1-1/2 - Single Parcel 1 (no change)
Portion of Family
Parcel Residential Proposed
Parcel 2 (no change)
RC- Residential
Conservation and
Southerly R-1-1/2 - Single RC and RC-WC - Residential
Portion of Proposed
Family Conservation and Watercourse Overlay
Parcel 3
Parcel Residential Zones
(northerly 0.47
ac)
As shown above, Parcels 1 and 2 (and the northerly approximately 60 feet of Parcel 3) are designated VLDR - Very Low Density Residential per the General Plan. The VLDR General Plan provides for a maximum residential density of 2.0 dwelling units per acre. A majority of Parcel 3 is within the HR - Hillside Residential General Plan designation, which provides for a maximum residential intensity of 0.50 dwelling units per acre. As the portion of the site under the VLDR General Plan designation will have a maximum density of one unit per acre and the portion of the site under the HR General Plan designation will have a maximum density of 0.2 dwelling units per acre, the project is consistent with the General Plan.

Parcels 1 and 2 are within the R-1 - ½ Zone, which Zone requires a minimum lot area of 21,780 square feet, a minimum lot width of 125 feet and a minimum lot depth of 150 feet. With lot sizes in excess of 1 acre (43,560 square feet) and lot widths of 136 feet and lot depths of approximately 328 feet, these two lots far exceed the minimum development standards applicable to the R-1-1/2 Zone. With respect to Parcel 3, the underlying RC -Residential Conservation Zone requires a minimum lot size of 5 acres for lots with an average natural slope of 30% or greater, and minimum lot dimensions of 200 and 100 feet. This lot, with an average natural slope of approximately 32 percent, is 5.01 acres in area. Furthermore, this lot has a width of approximately 325 feet and a depth of over 650 feet.

The applicant is requesting to rezone the northernmost approximately 20,830 square-foot (0.47 acre) portion of proposed Parcel 3, such that the entirety of proposed Parcel 3 would be within the RC Zone. In doing so, Parcel 3 would exceed the minimum 5 acre size requirement for lots in the RC Zone with an average natural slope in excess of 30 percent. As this lot would be required to be developed in the future in accordance with the RC Zone development standards, the rezoning requested can be supported as proposed. Please refer to the Map Design section below for further requirements related to Parcel 3 and future development of the subdivision.

City Planning Commission - July 9, 2009 4 P09-0141 & P09-0173 10-14
• Map Design
Staff supports the Map Design as proposed, as the proposed 3-lot subdivision does not trigger any variances and the lots are compatible with surrounding large lot residential subdivisions in the immediate area. The proposed parcel map will also allow for an orderly development of the site in the future, with minor precise grading limited to the already rough graded pads.

As previously mentioned, no development is proposed at this time. However, future development of each parcel with a single family residence (including landscaping, walls and fencing) will require Administrative Design Review approval to ensure compliance with the minimum development standards of the applicable zone. Future development will be limited to the already rough graded pad areas. Also, a future residence on Parcel 3 will be limited to one- story and 20 feet in height, unless a variance is granted and findings can be made to support additional height and/or stories.

While Parcel 3 currently contains two rough graded pads, it is a purpose designed split-level pad and only one single family residence will be allowed to be constructed on this parcel. Also, the southerly portion of Parcel 3, beyond the limits of the rough graded area will be required to be placed in an open space easement. As well, small portions of Parcels 1 and 2 within fingers of the Prenda Arroyo along the westerly site boundary will also be required to be placed in open space easements. To place these undisturbed areas that are either within an arroyo or within proximity to arroyos is consistent with Proposition R and Measure C, as it promotes the preservation of open space, arroyos and wildlife areas. • Access and Circulation
Vehicular access to Parcels 1, 2 and 3 will be provided via a 24-foot wide private driveway from Clarke Court. The segment of driveway between the northeasterly corner of Parcel 1 and Clarke Court is within an existing access easement recorded in 2001. The applicant has indicated that driveways with slopes no greater then 10% are proposed for each individual lot. A recommended condition of approval will require the recordation of a covenant and agreement for shared access and maintenance of the private driveway as well as the landscaped areas on both sides of the shared driveway. No improvements to Clarke Court are required as part of this project. As proposed, staff supports the method and design of the vehicular access to serve the lots, with implementation of the recommended conditions of approval.

VIII. PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENTS
A Notice of Public Hearing for this project was mailed to all property owners within a 300-foot radius of the project site. As of the writing of this report, no written responses by the public have been received by staff.

City Planning Commission - July 9, 2009 P09-0141 & P09-0173 10-15
IX. EXHIBITS

1. Location/Zoning Map

2. General Plan Map

3. Aerial Photo

4. Proposed Parcel Map

5. Proposed Rezoning

6. Approved County Grading Plan

7. Existing Site Photos
City Planning Commission - July 9, 2009 P09-0141 & P09-0173 10-16

RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS & GENERAL INFORMATION NOTES
Case Number: P09-0141 (PM-34583) Meeting Date: July 9, 2009

CONDITIONS
* - All mitigation measures are marked with an asterisk.

Case Specific
• Planning
All applicable conditions of related Planning Case P09-0173 (Rezoning) shall apply to this case.

Prior to or concurrent with Map Recordation:

2. The applicant shall prepare and record Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for proposed Parcels 1, 2, and 3 subject to approval of the Planning Division and the City Attorney's Office stipulating the following:
a. Private property owners shall be responsible for the maintenance of the shared private driveway and landscaped areas on either side of the shared driveway; b. Reciprocal access shall be provided for proposed Parcels 1, 2 and 3. c. Future subdivision of any lot within this map is prohibited. d. Future development of Parcel 3 shall comply with applicable requirements of the RC Zone, including but not limited to, maximum height and stories and building setbacks for the future residence.
* The final map shall be reflect that the approximately 2.54 acres southerly of the existing manufactured slopes on proposed Parcel 3 and the undisturbed areas along the westerly boundaries of proposed Parcels 1 and 2 (within "fingers" of the Prenda Arroyo) within a natural open space easement. No buildings, fencing, structures or non-native vegetation shall be permitted within the area designated as a natural open space easement. These areas shall be dedicated in fee title to an appropriate conservancy organization for purposes of long term maintenance and management. Should no organization be found, Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall be required to ensure maintenance and management of the open space area, subject to approval of the Planning Division and City Attorney's Office. Also, the CC&R's shall require that a qualified biologist be hired to submit an annual report to Planning Division staff certifying that the open space is being properly maintained.

City Planning Commission - July 9, 2009 7 P09-0141 & P09-0173 10-17

4. * No weed abatement/fuel modification areas will occur within the designated open space/preserved areas. Public access will be prohibited, except for required maintenance and monitoring.
* The preserved/open space areas will be retained as open space and Will be managed for the sole purpose of wildlife conservation in perpetuity. The conservation easement will prohibit all activities that may kill, injure, or otherwise significantly disturb wildlife or adversely impact their habitat within the easement areas. These activities include, but are not limited to, recreation (hiking, biking, walking pets), agriculture, communication tower construction, gardening, dumping of garbage, off-road vehicle use, and construction of roads (other than the private road crossing described above) or other structures.

6. The landowner shall convey an avigation easement to the March Air Reserve Base/March Inland Port (MARB/MIP) Airport. The applicant shall contact March Joint Powers Authority at 951.656.7000 for additional information.

Prior to Precise Grading Permit Issuance:

Parcel Map 34583 shall be recorded.

8. Any future precise grading for each of the three parcels shall be limited to the area within the rough graded pads shown on Tentative Parcel Map 34583 and for the reation of the shared private driveway, subject to review and approval by th lanning Division and Public Works Department. The precise grading plan(s a. Slopes within driveways or within the common shared access driveway shall not exceed 10 percent;
b. Future precise grading shall comply with the Hillside/Arroyo Grading requirements of the Grading Code, including limitations on slope height c. Clearly indicate pad and lot drainage. Cross lot drainage covenants, if necessary, shall be subject to Public Works and City Attorney's Office for review and approval;
d. Clearly indicate edge conditions adjacent to existing single family residences; retaining or screen walls may be required to minimize negative impacts;
e. Include a note requiring the developer to contact Underground Service Alert at least 48 hours prior to any type of work;
f. Compliance with City adopted interim erosion control measures; and g. Hours of construction and grading activity are limited to between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. weekdays and 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Saturdays. No construction noise is permitted on Sundays or Federal holidays.

City Planning Commission - July 9, 2009 8 P09-0141 & P09-0173 10-18
The applicant shall be responsible for erosion and dust control during both the grading and construction phases of the project.

Prior to Building Permit Issuance

11. Tract Map 34583 shall be recorded.

12. The precise grading plans) shall be approved, as applicable.

13. Applicant/individual property owners) shall submit an Administrative Desig Review application (including wall/fence plans) and applicable tees for th development of the parcels with a single family residence on each lot.

14. Advisory: Any lighting other than the normally associated with a residential use, such as tennis court lighting, shall be hooded and directed downward to avoid off site spillage and shall be subject to Design Review staff approval.

Prior to Occupancy

15. The following uses shall be prohibited: (a) Any use which would direct a steady opcations onard an aircraft engaged in an initial straight climb following takeoff 1, White, green or amber colors associated with airpor or toward an aircraft engaged in a straight final approach toward a landing at an airport, other than an FAA-approved navigational signal light or visual approach slope indicator. (b) Any use which would cause sunlight to be reflected towards an aircraft engaged in an initial straight climb following takeoff or towards an aircraft engaged in a straight final approach towards a landing at an airport. (C) Any use which would generate smoke or water vapor, or which would attract large concentrations of birds, or which may otherwise affect safe air navigation within an area. (d) Any use which would generate electrical interference that may be detrimental to the operation of aircraft/or aircraft instrumentation.

16. The following notice shall be given to all prospective buyers or tenants of the property:

NOTICE OF AIRPORT IN VICINITY
This property is presently located in the vicinity of an airport, within what is known as an airport influence area. For that reason, the property may be subject to some of the annoyances or inconveniences associated with proximity to airpor operations (for example: noise, vibration, or odors). Individual sensitivities to Business & Profession Code 11010 12(A)
City Planning Commission - July 9, 2009 9 P09-0141 & P09-0173 10-19
• Public Works

17. A "FINAL MAP" shall be processed with the Public Works Department and recorded with the County Recorder. The "FINAL MAP" shall be prepared by a Land Surveyor or Civil Engineer authorized to practice Land Surveying I the State of California and shall comply with the State Subdivision Map Act and Title 18 of the Riverside Municipal Code. All applicable checking and recording fees are the responsibility of the applicant.

18. A 24-foot-wide paved driveway shall be constructed to provide access to this project from Clarke Court.

21. No comments
• Public Utilities
Water

22. Project is located in area not served by the Western Municipal Water District. The following are conditions of approval for this provided by Western Municipal Water District. Contact Western's Development Services Department at (951) 789-5000 for further information:
a. Compliance with water efficient landscape requirements per the City of Riverside's Ordinance
b. Western, as a member agency of Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), will enforce MWD's Plan for Water Use Guideline requirements for water conservation
c. Developer's landscape architect is required to consult with Western's team to review Western's landscape and irrigation
requirements. Contact Western's Engineering Department for the review d. Developer to submit landscape plans for Western's review concurrently with the City of Riverside's submittal and Western's approval is required prior to a building permit being issued.
e. No water meter installation will be permitted unless the landscape plans have been reviewed and approved by Western.

City Planning Commission - July 9, 2009 10 P09-0141 & P09-0173 10-20
f. Developer to submit a 24" x 36" preliminary onsite and/or onsite plan of water layout to Western before formal submittal of Water Improvement Plans.
g. Preliminary water plans shall show the following items:

1. Delineate all proposed water facilities within project boundaries.

Include pipeline diameters and type of material.

Delineate all existing utility facilities (i.e.; pipe diameter, pipe material, water meters, air/vac, blow-off, fire hydrants, valves, electrical vaults, etc.) within project boundaries

3. Delineate all easements within project boundaries

4. Delineate all proposed and existing lots, streets, and storm drains.

Developer to submit a detailed engineer's construction cost estimate to Western for review and approval. Once approved, developer shall make a deposit for plan checking services for Water Improvement Plans. i. Water Improvement Plans shall be designed per Western's Standard Specifications. Please review Western's Commercial Plan Check Package for submittal formats and requirements.
j. Developer to submit grading plans for Western's review and approval before grading permit is issued. All onsite and/or offsite utilities to be relocated are at Developer's expense.

Developer to pay all costs associated with preliminary review by Western at the time of review

1. Water Improvements Plans shall not be accepted for plan checking unt ill items mention above are reviewed and approved by Westerr Electric

23. Project will be served by Southern California Edison. • Parks, Recreation and Community Services
The Following Park and Rec Correction to be met prior to Building Permit Issuance:

City Planning Commission - July 9, 2009 11 P09-0141 & P09-0173 10-21
Standard Conditions
• Planning

25. There is a thirty-six-month time limit in which to satisfy the conditions and record

26. Within 30 days of the approval of the project by the City the developer/subdivider hall execute an agreement, approved by the City Attorney's Uttice, to detenc ndemnify, including reimbursement, and hold harmless the City of Riverside, it agents, officers and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the

27. The applicant shall continually comply with all applicable rules and regulations in effect at the time permit is approved and exercised and which may become effective and applicable thereafter.

28. This project shall fully and continually comply with all applicable conditions of approval, State, Federal and local laws in effect at the time the permit is approved and exercised and which may become effective and applicable thereafter, and in accordance with the terms contained within the staff report and all testimony regarding this case. Failure to do so will be grounds for Code Enforcement

GENERAL INFORMATION NOTES
Appeal Information
a. Actions by the City Planning Commission, including any environmental finding, may be appealed to the City Council within fifteen calendar days after the decision.

Appeal filing and processing information may be obtained from the Community Development Department, Planning Division, Public Information Section, 3rd Floor, City Hall.

City Planning Commission - July 9, 2009 12 P09-0141 & P09-0173 10-22

RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS & GENERAL INFORMATION NOTES
Case Number: P09-0173 (Rezoning) Meeting Date: July 9, 2009 CONDITIONS All mitigation measures are noted by an asterisk (*).

Case Specific

1. All applicable conditions of related Planning Case P09-0141 (Tentative Parcel Map) shall apply to this case.
• Planning

2. The RC- Residential Conservation Zone shall be applied to the highlighted area as depicted in Exhibit 5.

Within 30 days of approval of this case by the City the developer shall execute an agreement, approved by the City Attorney's Office to defend, indemnify, including reimbursement, and hold harmless the City of Riverside, its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Riverside, its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul, an approval by the City's advisory agency, appeal board, or legislative body concerning this approval, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Section 66499.37 of the Government Code. The City will promptly notify the developer of any such claim, action or proceeding and the City will cooperate in the defense of the proceeding.

When all of the conditions of approval have been completed, the lead agency shall initiate finalization of this rezoning.

City Planning Commission - July 9, 2009 13 P09-0141 & P09-0173 10-23
Public Works
No conditions
• Fire Department

9. No conditions

GENERAL INFORMATION NOTES
Appeal Information
a. Actions by the City Planning Commission, including any environmental finding, may be appealed to the City Council within ten calendar days after the decision. b. Appeal filing and processing information may be obtained from the Community Development Department, Planning Division, Public Information Section, 3rd Floor, City City Planning Commission - July 9, 2009 P09-0141 & P09-0173 10-24

EAK GWY
R-1-.

CT
1/2 acre
E
R.%. MOSS RO
R-1-
1/2 -1/2 acre
acre
R-1-
1/2
acre

RINGTON RD
CRI
ISAI
RC
9Z-0L

FERRARI DR

DAUCHY AV
R-1-1/2 acre
RC

SUNRISE VICTOR

HUGO DR
P09-0141/0173, Exhibit 1 - Zoning 250 500
NORTH Feet

VLDR GWY
LONE
GRE
VLDR
VLDRE
OS
CLARKE
HR
10-26

FERRARIOR
HR

VLDR DAUCH
RIGH
HR
VL
09 VLDR
HR

VICTORHUGO
DR
P09-0141/0173, Exhibit 2 - General Plan 250 500
NORTH Feet
CLÄRKE CT.

CACTUS AV
18121
10-27
FERRAR

RUSTY RD
100 200
P09-0141/0173, Exhibit 3 - 2008 Aerial Photo
NORTH Feet
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 34583

CITY OF RIVERSIDE
MAY 2009

CHICAGO AVENUE VICINITY MAP
QuE - DA 7N.9-7 1203 (0CN)

LEGAL DESCRIPTION LEGEND
N.A.P
CONDSUOUS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.

M: 27-010-040 d AP.X: 278-040-00

OWNER/APPLICANT

REPRESENTATIVE
siC S.01 ACRES PARCEL 2 PARCEL 1

1.02 ACRES 1.02 ACRES
э2T07 UTILTY PURVEYORS
090-3/2 :827 15-1267X ENSING RESOENCE WATER -
MesSs8s8e5zk

SANCE EASERENT SCHOOL DISTRICT

AMASO UNETO SONDO DISTRICT
10-28 ACREAGE

PATO BAT PROPOSEO SEVER VAN HOLE

DOSING AC PAIN

RENA CAREN
An 275-9058 SECTION, TOWNSHIP & RANGE
ZOWE: RC IN ONUT
DETRAL PLAN. ZONING/GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
APt 275 019-QVE MAN 275-010-207 I APN 275 010 040 1 - 2-1-1/2 & AC CAL CAN TR CONE. R-i--1/2 PONE R-1-12: CLARKE COURT SANE ONE ME ZONE MONES MORNERY 210-000-0/3 Nop 3 ENGE CENE PAN Y00R GENRAL PLAN. VLOR

GENERAL NOTES
NO OPEN CHANNELS PROPOSCO - LAMOSCAPE PLANS TO BE OUTCARED.

ZON C 07 DE 100 R COUSINTY-PANE MA DESO A20 8 MAD ANILO MAY 17, 1995

CASING ASSOENO
NOT SIR CEO RODO MALAO, MENONTON OR CADETOR S INOUS EROSS MUR CORRIES AXES CONSON.

CASING PESDERE
CHARANTY FAQUIDES DISTACT - NONE.

STE IS NO: MINEN A GEOLOCIO MAZARO AREA OR SUBEC TO COUNTAGION CA A SECA STRAS 20A3.

PAGECT BEL DE SERVED BY SEPTE SISTE
11103060
- CRYSTAL VIEN, TERRACE
• CHICA TENUE ALL CRADA DONE UMOCE DAE COUNTY CE RENSEE MEADOTIED BY BOR-OS1S28

NO PROPOSED CRACIC ACMURES AT DOS TUE

AVERAGE NATURAL SLOPE INPORMATION
FROM: R-1-1/2-
TO: RC . 00 100 /5.01.00.10 : CLARKE COURT

GALORA LOT SUMMARY TABLE

PARCEL SA PARCE ROSES PARCEL NOON PARCE DOPEN
02 lor
102 ADRES
248,127 SS.
7 CITY OF RIVERSIDE
PROPOSED CHANGE OF ZONE TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 34583
PRIVATE DRIVEWAY IF Coarniting Bagineezs, lac.

MI Engineering
P09-0171/0173, Exhibit 4
TRACT 27824 -
M.B. 404/54-60

OPEN SPACE EASEMENT
13 VACATED 02-89/002 g; 0786Z

CHICAGO AVENUE
N 00°10'20" W 689.84' N 00°11'51" H
EXISTING ZONE: RC 327.48'
P.M. 15599 N 89°32'30" E 25550= FROM: R-1-1/2 N 89 '45'24" E 327.57' P.M.B. 105/70 TO: RC $ EXISTING ZONE: R-1-112
VACATED 1 N 00°27'30" 89°44 ' 10"

60.00'

FERRARI DRIVE
N
130"30'| N 06 82'48" E 633.23
- 500039 331.23"
P.M. 32443\ CLARKE
X.M.B. 221/05-07 TRACT м. B. | COURT
PAR. 3 \PAR. 2 PAR. 1

PROPOSED CHANGE OF ZONE
SCALE: 1"=150'
P09-0171/0173, Exhibit 5
090-005

CHICAGO AVENI
PLAN
FALL N.A.P.

REINFORCING DETAIL
'R.25219
MB301/63-66

PERRARI DR
276-240-045
R-A -1
AND USE: VIDR-RO

DISTURBED AREA BOLNONRI

ELEVATION
276-040-002
R-A-V
APN: 275-010-048 APN. 275-010-047
ZONE: R-Á-1 ZONE: R-A-/
MALAND USE: VLDR-RO LAND USE: VLDR-RC COURT
OE-OL 1 APN: 276-010-0454
ZONE: R-A- /
¡ LAND USE: VLOR-RCENE LARKE SECTION A-A
SIST. ANTAL PRONO

CRISTING HAS
SECTION 1-1
Lismi DETAIL, "C"-HEADWALL
40%
DIST. MARAK ONLO
DETAIL "D" REARYARD DETAIL
SECTION B-B CONSTRUCTION NOTES: SCALE: I°=40°

NOT MONSOON TO NO SEE THAN SI I INSTALL RIT-RUE PAO PER OCTAL MERCH SALR
I CONSTACI HEADUL POX CETAIL T" HEREON.

DETAIL "B"-BERMO IYPICAL SECTION CLARKE COURT
DETAIL "A" RIP-RAP PARO NICE ALERT
WDID # 8 33C337912
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE IN Coareltiag Espiseers, lae. BENCHMARK APN: 276-240-040 HE CO CAN HAS PRASS BUILDING AND SAFETY Engresens COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE APPROVED BY: 18022 FERRARI DRIVE
CRADING PERMIT HAS BEEN SLED. AS-BUILT
ELEV. 1526.00 ROUGH/PRECISE GRADING PLAN
RCE. NS._60820
SCALE 1°-40° OR: RAYMOND CONC (MO. 289.001 - 051529
ONTY DATE 10/0/62
P09-0171/0173, Exhibit 6 - Approved County Grading Plan Existing Graded Pad (looking southerly)
Existing manufactured slope (westerly side of proposed parcel 1) P09-0141/0173, Exhibit 7
Existing Site Photos
10-31
Looking northerly from proposed parcel 3
Looking southerly from Clarke Court (location of proposed private driveway) P09-0141/0173, Exhibit 7
Existing Site Photos
10-32
.......

Looking southerly from Clarke Court
Manufactured slope (southerly side of proposed parcel 3) P09-0141/0173, Exhibit 7
Existing Site Photos
10-33
Proposed private driveway (adjacent to proposed parcels 2 & 3) View of proposed Open Space area southerly of manufactures slopes (Proposed Parcel 3)
P09-0141/0173, Exhibit 7
Existing Site Photos
10-34
Community Development Department
Planning Division
RIVERSIDI Draft Negative Declaration
WARD: 4

1. Case Number: P09-0141 (Tentative Parcel Map 34583) & P09-0173 (Rezoning)

2. Project Title: Parcel Map and Rezoning

3. Hearing Date: July 9, 2009

4. Lead Agency: City of Riverside
Community Development Department
Planning Divisior
3900 Main Street, 3rd Floor
Riverside. CA 92522

5. Contact Person: Kyle Smith, Associate Planner
Phone Number: (951) 826-5220
Email: [email protected]

6. Project Location: Southwesterly of Clarke Court and westerly of Crystal View Terrace

7. Project Applicant/Project Sponsor's Name and Address:

Owner / Applicant Engineer
Raymond Gong IW Consulting Engineers, Inc.
18033 Clarke Court Andrew Walcker
Riverside, CA 92508 3544 University Avenue
Riverside, CA 92501

8. General Plan Designation: VLDR- Very Low density Residential, HR- Hillside Residential, OS- Open Space/ Natural Resources

9. Zoning: R-1-1/2- Single Family Residential, RC- Residential Conservation, and RC-WC- Residential Conservation and Water Course Overlay Zones

10. Description of Project:

The applicant is proposing to further subdivide an approximately 7.05 acre vacant site, currently consisting of two lots, into three lots. Proposed Parcels 1 and 2 are to be 1.02 acres in size each and both within the R- 1 - ½ Zone. Proposed Parcel 3 is approximately 5.01 acres in area and entirely within the RC and RC-WC Zones. To facilitate this map as described, the applicant is proposing to rezone approximately 0.47 acres (the northern approximately 60 feet of proposed Parcel 3) from the R-1 - ½ to the RC Zone, such that all of Parcel 3 will be within the RC Zone. Parcels 1 and 2 will each contain an existing rough graded pad described below, while an existing split-level pad is proposed to be located on Parcel 3, as described below.

Draft Negative Declaration 15 P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-35
The average natural slope of Parcel 3 is 32.28% and as such, the minimum lot size requirement is 5 acres.

As this lot includes a steep and densely vegetated area and an unnamed blue line stream along the southerly portion of the lot, an open space easement, approximately 2.54 acres in area, is proposed on the southerly portion ot the project site. This project will not disturb the existing blue-line stream or further disturb the Prenda Arroyo to the west of the subject site, as no additional grading is proposed in conjunction with this project. No variances are proposed as a part of the subdivision map or rezoning request.

Vehicular access to the three residential lots will be provided via a 24-foot wide private driveway, located over an existing 30-foot wide access easement off of Clarke Court. Landscaped areas ranging from 5 to 11 feet in width is proposed along both sides of the private driveway.

11. Existing Land Use and Setting
The project site, which again currently consists of two lots, is southwesterly of Clarke Court, westerly of Crystal View Terrace, and northerly of the recently vacated Ferrari Drive in an area developed with single family residences on larger lots and areas designated as open space. The project site was annexed into the City of Riverside in May 2007 as part of Annexation #97 (Planning Case P03-0395). Prior to annexation, the property owner received a grading permit from the County of Riverside (BGR-051529), which allowed grading to occur less than 50 feet from one of the fingers of the Prenda Arroyo, contrary to the City's Grading Code. Currently, the site currently contains 4 rough graded pads that were graded in accordance with the approved County rough grading plan, ranging in size from 16,689 to 28,703 square feet. One of the existing rough graded pads is a split level pad, not intended for the development of two residences. The most southerly portion of the subject site is characterized by steep terrain with dense vegetation. A blue line stream traverses this portion of the site from east to west.

12. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings:

13. Other Public Agencies whose Approval is Required (eg., permits, financial approval, participation agreement.):

None

14. Other Environmental Reviews Referenced in this Review:
a. General Plan 2025
b. GP 2025 FPEIR
c. Grading Permit BGR-051529 issued by the County of Riverside, January 2006

15. Acronyms
AICUZ - Air Installation Compatible Use Zone Study
AQMP - Air Quality Management Plan
AUSD - Alvord Unified School District
CDG - Citywide Design Guidelines
CEQA - California Environmental Quality Act
EMWD - Eastern Municipal Water District
EOP - Emergency Operations Plan
FEMA - Federal Emergency Management Agency
FPEIR - GP 2025 Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report GIS - Geographic Information System
GP 2025 - General Plan 2025
LHMP - Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
MARB/MIP - March Air Reserve Base/March Inland Port
MJPA-JLUS - March Joint Powers Authority - Joint Land Use Study MSHCP - Multiple-Species Habitat Conservation Plan
MVUSD - Moreno Valley Unified School District
NCCP - Natural Communities Conservation Plan
OEM - Office of Emergency Services
RCALUC - Riverside County Airport Land Use Commissio
RCALUCP - Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Pla RCP - Regional Comprehensive Plan
RMC - Riverside Municipal Code
RPD - Riverside Police Department
RPU -
RPW -
RTP - egional Transportation Pla
RUSD - iverside Unified School Distric
SCAG - Southern California Association of Governments

SCAQMD -

SKR-HCP -

SWPPP -
USGS - United States Geologic Survey
WMWD - Zestern Municipal Water Distri
WQMP - ater Ouality Management Pla
Draft Negative Declaration 17 P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-37
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:

The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

LAesthetics Agriculture Resources DAir Quality
•Biological Resources Cultural Resources •Geology/Soils Hazards & Hazardous Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning Materials
Mineral Resources •Noise Population/Housing
L Public Services •Recreation Transportation/Traffic
•Utilities/Service Systems Mandatory Findings of
Significance
DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation which reflects the independent judgment of the City of Riverside, it is recommended that:

The City of Riverside finds that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, • and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to X The City of Riverside finds that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

The City of Riverside finds that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

The City of Riverside finds that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed ir an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measure: • based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

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

Signature Fine Carmen Date_ 7|23/04
Printed Name & Title Fun CondER For _ City of Riverside Negative Declaration 18 P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-38
Community Development Department
Planning Division
RIVERSIDI Environmental Initial Study
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis.
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.

Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly Analyses," as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:

Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were with in the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal tandards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on th arlier analysis
C. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measure which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.

Environmental Initial Study 1 P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-39
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a. the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b. the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.

ISSUES (AND SUPPORTING Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact
INFORMATION SOURCES): Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated

1. AESTHETICS.

Would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? • • la. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Figure CCM-4 - Master Plan of Roadways, General Plan 2025 FPEIR Figure 5.1-1 - Scenic and Special Boulevards and Parkways, Table 5.1-A - Scenic and Special Boulevards, and Table 5.1-B - Scenic Parkways)
While the current project consists of a parcel map and rezoning with no development proposed, any future development of the subject site with single family residences will be carefully reviewed for aesthetic impacts since the site is located within proximity/view of the Prenda Arroyo and land designated by the General Plan as HR-Hillside Residential with an average natural slope in excess of 20%. Any future development of the project site will be subject to the Citywide Design Guidelines and the Design Review process. The Residential Conservation Zone (RC) is intended to protect prominent ridges and hillsides, slopes, arroyos, ravines and canyons, and other areas with high visibility or unique topographic conditions from adverse development practices for consistency with General Plan objectives and voter-approved initiatives. Residences in the RC Zone are limited to one story unless a variance is granted. Although this project does not propose to disturb fingers of the Prenda Arroyo and the steep portions of the site, future residences will be required to be subject to Design Review approval to ensure that aesthetic impacts from scenic vistas will be less than significant impact directly, indirectly and Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
Ib. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Figure CCM-4 - Master Plan of Roadways, General Plan 2025 FPEIR gure 5.1-1 - Scenic and Special Boulevards, Parkways, Table 5.1-A - Scenic and Special Boulevards, Tab I-B - Scenic Parkways, the City's Urban Forest Tree Policy Manual, & Title 19 - Article V - Chapter 19.100 Residential Zones - RC Zone, Project description)
Based on the project description, there are no scenic highways within the City that could potentially be impacted. In addition, the proposed project is not located along or within view of a scenic boulevard, parkway or special boulevard a designated by the City's General Plan 2025 and therefore will not have any effect on any scenic resource within a scenic ruadway. The RC Zone is intended to protect prominent ridges and hillsides, slopes, arroyos, ravines and canyons, and other eas with high visibility or unique topographic conditions from adverse development practices for consistency with Gener an objectives and voter-approved initiatives. The existing rough graded residential pads are located entirely outside of t Prenda Arroyo, and no additional rough grading is proposed as part of this project. Therefore, any potential adverse direct, indirect or cumulative impacts to scenic resources from this project will be less than significant impact. c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or • quality of the site and its surroundings?
Environmental Initial Study 2 P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-40
ISSUES (AND SUPPORTING Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact
INFORMATION SOURCES): Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
1c. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025, General Plan 2025 FPEIR, Zoning Code, Citywide Design and Sign Guidelines)
The current project consists of a parcel map and rezoning with no development proposed. Furthermore, future development of the subject site with single family residences will be subject to Design Review approval consistent with established Citywide Design and Sign Guidelines. Therefore direct, indirect and cumulative impacts on the visual character and quality of the area are less than significant impacts.

Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 1d. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025, General Plan 2025 FPEIR Figure 5.1-2 - Mount Palomar Lighting Area, Title 19 - Article VIII - Chapter 19.556 - Lighting, Citywide Design and Sign Guidelines) The site is not within the Mount Palomar Lighting Area. Future development of the parcels with single family residence:
will be consistent with the existing development pattern and would not result significant impacts directly, indirectly o cumulatively will occur which would adversely affect day or nighttime views.

2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES:

In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project:
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the mand Farmland Mapping Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,
to non-agricultural use?
2a. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 - Figure OS-2 - Agricultural Suitability) A review of Figure OS-2 - Agricultural Suitability of the General Plan 2025 reveals that the project site is not designated as indirectly or cumulatively to agricultural uses.
b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a 2b. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 - Figure OS-3 - Williamson Act Preserves, General Plan 2025 FPEIR - Figure 5.2-4 - Proposed Zones Permitting Agricultural Uses, & Title 19) impacts will occur from this project directly, indirectly or cumulatively.

Involve other changes in the existing environment which, • • • due to their location or nature, could result in conversion off Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
2c. Response: (Source: General Plan - Figure OS-2 - Agricultural Suitability, Figure OS-3 -- Williamson Act Preserves, & Title 19 - Article V - Chapter 19.100 - Residential Zones - RC Zone & RA-5 Zone) The project is located on a previously disturbed site which does not support agricultural resources or operations. The project will not result in the conversion of designated farmland to non-agricultural uses. Also, there are no agricultural resources o1 operations, including farmlands within proximity of the subject site. Therefore, no impacts will occur from this project directly, indirectly or cumulatively to conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use.

Environmental Initial Study 3 P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-41
ISSUES (AND SUPPORTING Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Impact
INFORMATION SOURCES): Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated

3. AIR QUALITY.

Where available, the significance criteria
applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project:
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable X air quality plan? L
3a. Response: (Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District's 2003 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP))
Projects that are consistent with the projections of employment and population forecasts identified by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) are considered consistent with the AQMP growth projections, since these forecast numbers were used by SCAG's modeling section to forecast travel demand and air quality for planning activities such as the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), the SCAQMD's AQMP, Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), and the Regional Housing Plan. This project is consistent with the projections of employment and population forecasts identified by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) which are consistent with the General Plan 2025 "Typical Growth Scenario." Since the project is consistent with the General Plan 2025 it is also consistent with the AQMP. The project will have a less than significant impact directly, indirectly and cumulatively to the implementation of an air quality plan.

Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially existing or projected air quality violation, or
contribute substantially to an increase in Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions?
3b. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 FPEIR Table 5.3-B SCAQMD CEQA Regional Significance Thresholds, South Coast Air Quality Management District's 2003 AQMP, URBEMIS 2007 Model, EMFAC 2007 An Air Quality Model was conducted using Urbemis 2007 and proposed Green House Gas (GHG) emissions were calculated using Urbemis 2007 9.2.2. The results of the air quality and GHG emissions models showed that the proposed project would generate emissions far lower than the SCAQMD thresholds for significance for air quality and the GHG emissions were determined to be less than significant. Due to the limited scope of the project and the results of the air quality and GHG emissions models conducted, the project will not violate any air quality violation. As well the project will not significantly contribute to GHG emissions. The project's has a less than significant impact directly, indirectly and cumulatively to ambient air quality, to contributing to an existing air quality violation or to increasing GHG emissions.

Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any • criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality bandard induding foressing prisons which
3c. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 FPEIR Table 5.3-B SCAQMD CEQA Regional Significance Thresholds, South Coast Air Quality Management District's 2003 Air Quality Management Plan, URBEMIS 2007 Model, EMFAC 2007 Model)
The portion of the Basin within which the City is located is designated as a non-attainment area for ozone, PM-10 and PM- Environmental Initial Study 4 P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-42
ISSUES (AND SUPPORTING Potentially Potentially Less Than No significan Significant Significant Impact
INFORMATION SOURCES): трас Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated

2.5 under State standards, and as a non-attainment area for ozone, carbon monoxide, PM-10, and PM-2.5 under Federal standards.
n accordance with CEQA, impacts that are less than significant individually, but cumulatively considerable, may b gnificant. Although there is no standard directly applicable to adoption and implementation of the General Plan 202:
umulative emissions resulting from build out in 2025 will contribute criteria pollutants and global warming gases to the Basin. Therefore, the General Plan 2025 FPEIR determined that implementation of the General Plan 2025 would result in a cumulatively significant net increase of criteria pollutants and global warming gases. As such, a statement of overriding Because the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan 2025, cumulative impacts related to criteria pollutants and greenhouse gas as a result of the project were previously evaluated as part of the cumulative analysis of build out anticipated under the General Plan 2025 Program. As a result the proposed project does not result in any new significant impacts tha vere not previously evaluated and for which a statement of overriding considerations was adopted as part of the Genera Plan 2025 FPEIR. Therefore, cumulative air quality and greenhouse gas emissions impacts are less than significant impacts.
d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant • concentrations?
3d. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 FPEIR Table 5.3-B SCAQMD CEQA Regional Significance Thresholds, South Coast Air Quality Management District's 2003 Air Quality Management Plan, URBEMIS 2007 Model, EMFAC 2007 Model)
Short-term impacts associated with construction from General Plan 2025 typical build out will result in increased air emissions from grading, earthmoving, and construction activities. Mitigation Measures of the General Plan 2025 FPEIR requires individual development to employ construction approaches that minimize pollutant emissions. In conformance with the General Plan 2025 FPEIR an URBEMIS computer model analyzed short-term construction and long-term operational related impacts of the project and determined that the proposed project would not exceed SCAOMD thresholds for short- term construction and long-term operational impacts. Therefore, the project will not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations and a less than significant impact will occur directly, indirectly or cumulatively from this project.
e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number • of people?
3e. Response:

The project would not expose a substantial number of people to objectionable odors because no odors are anticipated to be generated by the future development of the lots with single family residences. Therefore, no impact to creating objectionable odors will occur directly, indirectly or cumulatively.

4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.

Would the project:
• •
habitat modifications, on any species identified as
candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
4a. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 - Figure OS-6 - Stephen's Kangaroo Rat (SKR) Core Reserve and Other Habitat Conservation Plans (HCP), Figure OS-7 - MSHCP Cores and Linkages, Figure OS-8 - MSHCP Cell Areas, General Plan 2025 FPEIR Figure 5.4-2 - MSHCP Area Plans, Figure 5.4-4 - MSHCP Criteria Cells and Subunit Areas, Figure 5.4-6 - MSHCP Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Area, Figure 5.4-7 - MSHCP Environmental Initial Study P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-43
ISSUES (AND SUPPORTING Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact
INFORMATION SOURCES): Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
grading to occur less than 50 feet from one of the fingers of the Prenda Arroyo. However, areas on the southerly approximately 2.47 acres of the site, where the most sensitive habitat and a blue line stream exist, were not graded Additional precise grading may be necessary prior to the development of single family residences, however any future precise grading must be limited to the area within the existing rough graded pads. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure MMBIO1, the potentially significant impacts related to future disturbance of raw or undisturbed land will be reduced by the placement of the approximately 2.54 acres southerly of the existing manufactured slopes on proposed Parcel 3 and the undisturbed areas along the westerly boundaries of proposed Parcels 1 and 2 (within "fingers" of the Prenda Arroyo) into a natural open space easement. No buildings, fencing, structures or non-native vegetation shall be permitted within the area designated as a natural open space easement. These areas shall be dedicated in fee title to an appropriate conservancy organization for purposes of long term maintenance and management. Should no organization be found, Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall be required to ensure maintenance and management of the open space area, subject to approval of the Planning Division and City Attorney's Office. Also, the CC&R's shall require that a qualified biologist be hired to submit an annual report to Planning Division staff certifying that the open space is being properly maintained.

Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
4b. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 - Figure OS-6 - Stephen's Kangaroo Rat (SKR) Core Reserve and Other Habitat Conservation Plans (HCP), Figure OS-7 - MSHCP Cores and Linkages, Figure OS-8 - MSHCP Cell Areas, General Plan 2025 FPEIR Figure 5.4-2 - MSHCP Area Plans, Figure 5.4-4 - MSHCP Criteria Cells and Subunit Areas, Figure 5.4-6 - MSHCP Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Area, Figure 5.4-7 - MSHCP Criteria Area Species Survey Area, Figure 5.4-8 - MSHCP Burrowing Owl Survey Area, MSHCP Section 6.1.2 - Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools) No wetland or riparian vegetation exists on the graded portions of the project site, previously approved by the County of Riverside. Furthermore, an open space easement is proposed to protect the sensitive portion of the site consisting of dense vegetation, steep terrain and a blue line stream. The project site is generally surrounded by rural single family residential development on multi-acre lots in which construction and land disturbance occurred outside of the sensitive portions of the lots. With implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO1, there will be a less than significant impact to any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service directly, indirectly and cumulatively. c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected • wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
4c. Response: (Source: City of Riverside GIS/CADME USS Quad Map Layer) Portions of the project site has been previously disturbed and graded in accordance with a grading permit issued by the County of Riverside and is adjacent to existing residential development. The project will not have a substantial adverse filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native • • resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
4d. Response: (Source: MSHCP, General Plan 2025 - Figure OS-7 - MSHCP Cores and Linkage) The project site is not located within any MSHCP Criteria Cells, Cores, or Linkages. However, the proposed open space Environmental Initial Study 6 P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-44
ISSUES (AND SUPPORTING Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact
INFORMATION SOURCES): Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
easement portion of the project site is intended to remain undisturbed and could facilitate wildlife habitat and migration. As construction or disturbance,
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy oi ordinance?
4e. Response: (Source: MSHCP, Title 16 Section 16.72.040 - Establishing the Western Riverside County MSHCP Mitigation Fee, Title 16 Section 16.40.040 - Establishing a Threatened and Endangered Species Fees, City of Riverside Urban Forest Tree Policy Manual)
The project does not consist of any development. However, any future construction is subject to MSHCP mitigation fees, City of Riverside landscaping design standards and all applicable regional, State and Federal conservation, endangered and threatened species mitigation fees. In addition, the General Plan 2025 includes policies to ensure that future development would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, including tree preservation polices.

This project has been reviewed against these policies and found to be in compliance with the policies. Additionally, these policies will be reviewed again under the Design Review process to insure that future development is in compliance with all policies relating to grading and development in areas adjacent to potentially sensitive biological areas. For these reasons, the project will have no impact directly, indirectly and cumulatively local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat X Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
4f. Response: (Source: MSHCP, General Plan 2025 - Figure OS-6 - Stephen's Kangaroo Rat (SKR) Core Reserve and Other Habitat Conservation Plans (HCP), Stephens' Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan, Lake Mathews Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan & Natural Community Conservation Plan, & El Sobrante Landfill Habitat Conservation Plan)
Portions of the project site has been previously disturbed and graded in accordance with a grading permit issued by the County of Riverside and is adjacent to existing residential development. As the project does not involve any rough grading, and any future precise grading must occur within the confines of the existing rough graded area, no additional land disturbances will occur, and the project will not impact an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan directly, indirectly and cumulatively.

Therefore, the project Will have no impact on the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan.

5. CULTURAL RESOURCES.

Would the project:
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5?
Sa. Response: (Source: GP 2025 FPEIR Table 5.5-A Historical Districts and Neighborhood Conservation Areas & Appendix D, Title 20 of the Riverside Municipal Code)
Portions of the project site have been previously disturbed and graded, and no earthwork, building demolition, or grading or disturbance or previously undisturbed areas is proposed as part of this project. As such, the project will have no impact directly, indirectly and cumulatively on historical resources as defined in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
5b. Response: (Source: GP 2025 FPEIR Figure 5.5-1 - Archaeological Sensitivity and Figure 5.5-2 - Prehistoric Cultural Resources Sensitivity, Appendix D - Cultural Resources Study) While the project site is within an area identified by the General Plan as having a high archaeological sensitivity, portions of the project site where future development of single family residences will occur have been previously disturbed and graded, Environmental Initial Study 7 P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-45
ISSUES (AND SUPPORTING Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significan Significant Impact
INFORMATION SOURCES): Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
and no earthwork, building demolition, or grading is proposed as part of this project. Therefore, the project will have no impact directly, indirectly and cumulatively to an archeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the CEQA c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Sc. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Policy HP-1.3) Portions of the project site has been previously disturbed and graded, and no earthwork, building demolition, or grading or disturbance or previously undisturbed areas is proposed as part of this project. Therefore, the project will have no impact directly or indirectly to destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred X outside of formal cemeteries?
5d. Response: (Source: GP 2025 FPEIR Figure S.5-1 - Archaeological Sensitivity and Figure 5.5-2 - Prehistoric Cultural Resources Sensitivity)
While the project site is within an area identified by the General Plan as having a high archaeological sensitivity, the project ite has been previously disturbed and graded, and no earthwork, building demolition, or grading is proposed as part of this roject. Therefore, the project will have no impact directly, indirectly or cumulatively to disturb any human remains including those interred outside of formal cemeteries.

6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS.

Would the project:
a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on • the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication

42. бi. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Figure PS-1 - Regional Fault Zones & General Plan 2025 FPEIR Appendix E- Geotechnical Report)
The proposed project is not located in an area subject to Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault. In the City of Riverside and in the Sphere of Influence, there are no known Alquist-Priolo Zones.

Compliance with the California Building Code regulations will ensure that impacts related to strong seismic ground shaking are reduced to less than significant impact levels directly, indirectly and cumulatively. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? •
бii. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 FPEIR Appendix E - Geotechnical Report) The San Jacinto Fault Zone located in the northeastern portion of the City or the Elsinore Fault Zone, located in the southern portion of the City's Sphere of Influence, have the potential to cause moderate to large earthquakes that would cause intense ground shaking. Because the future development of the site with single family homes will be required to comply with the California Building Code regulations, impacts associated with strong seismic ground shaking are reduced to less than significant impact levels directly, indirectly and cumulatively. ili. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefication? óili. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Figure PS-1 - Regional Fault Zones, Figure PS-2 - Liquefaction Zones, General Plan 2025 FPEIR Figure PS-3 - Soils with High Shrink-Swell Potential, & Appendix E - Geotechnical Report)
The project site is located in an area with very low potential for liquefaction as depicted in the General Plan 2025 Liquefaction Zones Map - Figure PS-2. Compliance with the California Building Code regulations will ensure that impacts related to seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction are reduced to less than significant impact levels directly, Environmental Initial Study 8 P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-46
ISSUES (AND SUPPORTING Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact
INFORMATION SOURCES): Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
indirectly and cumulatively.
iv. Landslides?
6iv. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 FPEIR Figure 5.6-1 - Areas Underlain by Steep Slope, Appendix E - Geotechnical Report, Title 18 - Subdivision Code, Title 17 - Grading Code) The project site is in an area where the possibility of unstable slope conditions could occur due to the slope in excess of 34% adjacent to the project area. Landsliding may occur from heavy rainfall, erosion, and removal of vegetation, seismic activity or other factors. Slope stability depends on many factors and their interrelationships. As the project area has been previously disturbed and graded, no additional rough grading activities are proposed as part of this project, and that the existing rough graded pads are located away from the portions of the project area that can be characterized as steep slopes, there will be a less than significant impact related to landslides directly, indirectly and cumulatively. b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 6b. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 FPEIR Figure 5.6-1 - Areas Underlain by Steep Slope, Figure 5.6-4 - Soils, Table 5.6-B - Soil Types, Title 18 - Subdivision Code, Title 17 - Grading Code) The project does not involve development, grading activities, or structures that would result in soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. As such, the project will have no impact resulting in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil directly, indirectly or cumulatively.
c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that • X would become unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
6c. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Figure PS-1 - Regional Fault Zones, Figure PS-2 - Liquefaction Zones, General Plan 2025 FPEIR Figure PS-3 - Soils with High Shrink-Swell Potential, Figure 5.6-1 - Areas Underlain by Steep Slope, Figure 5.6-4 - Soils, Table 5.6-B - Soil Types, & Appendix E - Geotechnical Report) The project is not located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable and will not cause soil to become unstable as the project does not involve development, grading activities, or structures. As such, the project will have no impact resulting in a geologic unit or soil becoming unstable resulting in an in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse either directly, indirectly or cumulatively. d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial
risks to life or property?
i. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 FPEIR Figure 5.6-4 - Soils, Figure 5.6-4 - Soils, Table 5.6-B - So pes, rigure 5.6-5 - Soils with High Shrink-Swell Potential, Appendix E - Geotechnical Report, & Californ Building Code as adopted by the City of Riverside)
The project is not located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable and will not cause soil to become unstable as the project does not involve development, grading activities, or structures. The soil type of the subject site is Cieneba (See Figure 5.6-4 - Soils of the General Plan 2025 Program Final PEIR). The project does not involve any construction activities, grading or new structures such that expansive soil would pose risk to life or property. Any future residential development will be subject to compliance with the City's Subdivision Code - Title 18 and the California Building Code with regard to soil hazards related to the expansive soils. Impacts will be a less than significant impact level for this project directly, indirectly and cumulatively.
e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of • septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
бе. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 FPEIR Figure 5.6-4 - Soils, Table 5.6-B - Soil Types) While no development is proposed as a part of this project, any future development may be served by a septic tank in lieu of a sewer connection. All new development proposing to use septic systems must be accompanied by a percolation report, conducted by a registered hydrologist and geotechnical or soils engineer that addresses the site's suitability for septic systems and its impact to groundwater supplies. Additionally, any residential lot proposing to utilize a septic system must be at least one acre in size. All three lots proposed for this project exceed one acre. The compliance of the project design with the Percolation Report recommendations and the approval of the County of Riverside Environmental Health Department and Environmental Initial Study 9 P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-47
ISSUES (AND SUPPORTING Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact
INFORMATION SOURCES): Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
the State Water Quality Control Board will ensure that soils are capable of supporting the use of a septic system and theretore, impacts will be a less than significant impact directly, indirectly and cumulatively.

7. HAZARDS & HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.

Would the project:
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment • through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Ta. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Public Safety Element, GP 2025 FPEIR, California Health and Safety Code, Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, California Building Code, Riverside Fire Department EOP, 2002 and Riverside Operational Area - Multi-Jurisdictional LHMP, 2004 Part 1, OEM's Strategic Plan) The proposed project as previously described does not involve the transport, use, or disposal of any hazardous material. As such, the project will have no impact related to the transport, use, or disposal of any hazardous material either directly, indirectly and cumulatively.

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?
7b. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Public Safety Element, GP 2025 FPEIR Tables 5.7 A - D, California Health and Sajety Code, Tille 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, California Building Code, City o) Riverside's EOP, 2002 and Riverside Operational Area - Multi-Jurisdictional LHMP, 2004 Part 1, OEM's Strategic Plan)
The proposed project as previously described does not involve the use of any hazardous materials. As such the project will have no impact directly, indirectly or cumulatively for creating a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.

C. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-
quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
7c. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Public Safety and Education Elements, GP 2025 FPEIR Table 5.7-D - CalARP RMP Facilities in the Project Area, Figure 5.13-2 - RUSD Boundaries, Table 5.13-D RUSD Schools, Figure 5.13-3 AUSD Boundaries, Table 5.13-E AUSD Schools, Figure 5.13-4 - Other School District Boundaries, California Health and Safety Code, Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, California Building The proposed project as previously described does not involve any emission or handling of any hazardous materials, Ibstances or waste. Also, the subject site is located approximately 1.2 miles from the nearest existing or proposed schoc herefore, the project will have no impact regarding emitting hazardous emissions or handling hazardous or acute hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school directly, indirectly or d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment?
7d. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Figure PS-5 - Hazardous Waste Sites, GP 2025 FPEIR Tables 5.7-A - CERCLIS Facility Information, Figure 5.7-B - Regulated Facilities in TRI Information and 5.7-C - DTSC EnviroStor Database Listed Sites)
A review of hazardous materials site lists compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 found that the project site is not included on any such lists. Therefore, the project would have no impact to creating any significant hazard to the public or environment directly, indirectly or cumulatively. e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, • T • where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project Environmental Initial Study 10 P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-48
ISSUES (AND SUPPORTING Potentially Less Than No
Significant Impact
INFORMATION SOURCES): Impact
Incorporated
result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
Te. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Figure PS-6 - Airport Safety Zones and Influence Areas, RCALUCP The project lies within the 60-65 dB noise zone of the AICUZ Study. The proposed project is consistent with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Guidelines, as it will not exceed the maximum density permitted nor propose any use more intense than what was intended by the Plan. As such, an executed avigation easement will be required to be conveyed to the March Air Reserve Base. As such, the project will not result in a safety hazard for people working or residing in the project area and less than significant impact is expected.
the project within a sty hazard for people resting orl
working in the project area?
7f. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Figure PS-6 - Airport Safety Zones and Influence Areas, RCALUCP, March Air Reserve Base/March Inland Port Comprehensive Land Use Plan (1999)and Air Installation Compatible Use Zone Study for March Air Reserve Base (August 2005)) There are no private airstrips within the City and the project is not within the influence area of Flabob Airport just outside the City. Therefore, the project will have no impact resulting in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area directly, indirectly or cumulatively.
g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Tg. Response: (Source: GP 2025 FPEIR Chapter 7.5.7 - Hazards & Hazardous Materials, City of Riverside's EOP, 2002 and Riverside Operational Area - Multi-Jurisdictional LHMP, 2004 Part I, and OEM's Strategic Plan) The City of Riverside has developed an extensive Emergency Operations Plan, created by the Emergency Management Office. The City's Fire Department promotes a high level of multi-jurisdictional cooperation and communication for emergency planning and response management through activation of the Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) as well as establishing emergency evacuation routes. The General Plan also provides policies to identify methods of implementing the emergency plan. With continued use of the SEMS and because the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan 2025 and consistent with General Plan policies enforcing compliance with the Emergency Operations Plan impacts to emergency response/evacuation plans will be less than significant.

Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
7h. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Figure PS-7 - Fire Hazard Areas, City of Riverside's EOP, 2002, Riverside Operational Area - Multi-Jurisdictional LHMP, 2004 Part 1/Part 2 and OEM's Strategic Plan) The project has provided the required access roads around the proposed structures, meeting the minimum roadway widths of Title 18 (Subdivision Code) and the City's Fire Code Section 503 (California Fire Code 2007). Clearance around the proposed structures has been reviewed by the Fire Department and determined to be adequate.

The level of hazard to life and property is affected not only by a fire, but also by road access for evacuation, the number of available firefighters, vegetation clearance around property, availability of water and water pressure and the effectiveness of building/fire Codes and inspection of developments in areas of higher fire hazard. Riverside reduces the destructive protection and fire hazard education. The Uniform Fire Code also reduces structural fire hazards, including but not limited to, the requirement for fire sprinklers in structures.

In summary, with implementation of General Plan policies, compliance with existing codes and standards, and through City Fire Department practices, impacts from wildland fires are less than significant.

Environmental Initial Study 11 P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-49
ISSUES (AND SUPPORTING Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Impact
INFORMATION SOURCES): Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.

Would the project:
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
The proposed project is located within the Santa Ana River Watershed. The project will not directly or indirectly result in physical alterations to the project site (i.e. grading, ground disturbance, structures or paving) and does not involve any use that would have any effect on water quality or be affected by water quality standards or waste discharge requirements because the project constitutes a parcel map and rezoning with no development proposed. Therefore, the project will have no impact directly, indirectly or cumulatively to any water quality standards or waste discharge. Any future development b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)?
8b. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Table PF-1 - RU Projected Domestic Water Supply (AC-FT/YR), Table PF-2 - RPU Projected Water Demand, Table PF-3 - Western Municipal Water District Projected Domestic Water Supply (AC-FI/YR), RPU Map of Water Supply Basins, RPU Urban Water Management Plan WMWD Urban Water Management Plan)
The proposed project is located within the Riverside South Water Supply Basin. The project will not directly or indirectly deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level as no physical alterations to the project site (i.e. grading, ground disturbance, structures or paving) are proposed because the project involves a parcel map and rezoning with no development proposed. Therefore, the project will have no impact directly, indirectly or cumulatively to groundwater supplies.
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site • or area, including through the alteration of the course of a in a manner which would result in
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
8c. Response:

The project will not directly or indirectly result in significant physical alterations to the project site (i.e. through rough grading, ground disturbance, structures or paving) that would alter the existing drainage patterns of the site because the project consists of a parcel map and rezoning with no development proposed. Therefore no significant additional erosion or siltation on- or off-site will occur. Any future development would be subject to the City's Grading Code and Public Works specifications related to erosion control. Therefore, the project will have no impact directly, indirectly or cumulatively to d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site • or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in
flooding on- or off-site?
8d. Response:

The project as previously described will not directly or indirectly result in any activity or physical alteration of the site or surrounding area, (i.e. through grading, ground disturbance, structures or additional paving) that would alter the existing drainage pattern of the site, alter of the course of stream or river, or increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or off-site because the project consists of a parcel map and rezoning with no development proposed. Furthermore, the site is adjacent to single family residences on relatively large lots and the future development of the subject site with single family residences would not increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which Environmental Initial Study 12 P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-50
ISSUES (AND SUPPORTING Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact
INFORMATION SOURCES): Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
youid result in lucine. Therefuse no roading an or of sie as a resol of the progert will recur and there wil be mul impact directly, indirectly or cumulatively.

Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the of existing or planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
8e. Response: (Source: Preliminary Grading Plan)
The project will not directly or indirectly result in any activity or physical alteration of the site or surrounding area, (i.e. through grading, ground disturbance, structures or additional paving) that would create or contribute runoff water which would exceed capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of exceed the capacity of existing planned stormwater drainage systems. Therefore, the project will result in no impact directly, indirectly or cumulatively.
f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X
8f. Response:

The project as previously described will not directly or indirectly result in any activity or significant physical alteration of the site or surrounding area, (i.e. through additional rough grading, ground disturbance, structures or additional paving) that would create or contribute runoff water which would substantially degrade water quality because the project consists of a parcel map and rezoning with no development proposed. Furthermore, the site has been previously rough graded and is surrounded by single family residences and the future development of the subject site with single family residences would not substantially degrade water quality. Therefore, the project will result in no impact directly, indirectly or cumulatively. g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? 8g. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Figure PS-4 - Flood Hazard Areas, and FEMA Flood Hazard Map) A review of National Flood Insurance Rate Map (Community Panel Number 06065C0740G dated 8/28/08) and Figure 5.8-2 -- Flood Hazard Areas of the General Plan Program FPEIR, shows that the project is not located within or near a 100-year flood hazard area. There will be no impact caused by this project directly, indirectly or cumulatively as it will not place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area.

Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows?
Sh. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Figure PS-4 - Flood Hazard Areas, and FEMA Flood Hazard Maps) The project site is not located within or near a 100-year flood hazard area as depicted on General Plan 2025 Program FPEIR Figure 5.8-2 - Flood Hazard Areas and the National Flood Insurance Rate Map (Community Panel Number 06065C0740G dated 8/28/08). Therefore, the project will not place a structure within a 100-year flood hazard area that would impede or redirect flood flows and no impact will occur directly, indirectly or cumulatively. i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
8i. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Figure PS-4 - Flood Hazard Areas, and FEMA Flood Hazard Maps) The project site is not located within or near a flood hazard area as depicted on General Plan 2025 Program FPEIR Figure

5.8-2 - Flood Hazard Areas and the National Flood Insurance Rate Map (Community Panel Number 06065C0740G dated 8/28/08) or subject to dam inundation as depicted on General Plan 2025 Program FPEIR Figure 5.8-2 - Flood Hazard Areas.

Therefore, the project will not place a structure within a flood hazard or dam inundation area that would expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam and therefore no impact directly, indirectly or cumulatively will occur. j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
8j. Response: (Source: GP 2025 FPEIR Chapter 7.5.8 - Hydrology and Water Quality) Environmental Initial Study P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-51
ISSUES (AND SUPPORTING Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significan Significant Impact
INFORMATION SOURCES): Impact Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
I sunamıs are large waves that occur in coastal areas. Since the City is not located in a coastal area, no impacts due to

9. LAND USE AND PLANNING:

Would the project:
• Physically divide an established community?

9. Responde (ScA: emeral Pyars 2025 Land Use and Urban Design Elemen, Project site plan, City of The proposed project has been designed to be consistent with and fit into the pattern of development of the surrounding area providing adequate access, circulation and connectivity consistent with the General Plan 2025, and in compliance with the requirements of the Zoning and Subdivision Codes. Design Review approval will be required for any future development on this site. Therefore, the project will result in no impacts. b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? 9b. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025, General Plan 2025 Figure LU-10 - Land Use Policy Map, Table LU-5 - Zoning/General Plan Consistency Matrix, Figure LU-7 - Redevelopment Areas, Title 19 - Zoning Code, Title 18 - Subdivision Code, Title 7 - Noise Code, Title 17 - Grading Code, Title 20 - Cultural Resources Code, Title 16 - Buildings and Construction and Citywide Design and Sign Guidelines) The project site is located in an urbanizing area of the City and governed by the provisions of the City of Riverside General Plan and Zoning Code. The project site is not located within a specific plan area, and is located in excess of 50 miles from the nearest local coastal program area. Therefore, there are no such Specific Plan or Coastal Program provisions applicable to the project and no conflicts to those provisions are expected The subject site has General Plan Land Use Designations of Very Low Density Residential (VLDR) which permits a density Of -2.O dwelling us per are da, and Hillside Residential (HR), which permits a density of 0.63 du/ac and OS - Open Space which is intended to preserve natural features. The proposed subdivision has a density of 0.43 du/ac. This density is consistent with the General Plan. The subject site has a zoning designation of R-1-1/2- Single Family Residential, RC- Residential Conservation, and RC-WC - Residential Conservation and Water Course Overlay Zones. The R-1-1/2 Zone requires a minimum lot size of ½ acre, and the two proposed lots in the R-1-1/2 zone are proposed to be 1.02 acres.

Additionally, the RC-Zone requires lots to be a minimum of 5 acres if the average natural slope if 30% or greater. Part of this project involved rezoning approximately 20,830 square feet (the northerly approximately 60 feet of proposed Parcel 3) from the R-1-1/2 Zone to the RC Zone. The lot in the RC Zone is proposed to be 5.01 acres and have an average natural slope of 32.28%, such that it's creation complies with the Zoning Code. No dwellings units have been proposed for development at this time. However, it is reasonably foreseeable that the construction of 3 dwellings will be facilitated by this map, one dwelling per each lot. All lots meet or exceed the minimum development standards, and no variances are required as part of this project. Additionally, as mentioned in response 4a, the approximately 2.54 acres southerly of the existing manufactured slopes on proposed Parcel 3 and the undisturbed areas along the westerly boundaries of proposed Parcels 1 and 2 (within "fingers" of the Prenda Arroyo) into a natural open space easement. No buildings, fencing, structures or non- native vegetation shall be permitted within the area designated as a natural open space easement. All construction will be required to occur on the previously rough graded pad areas.

Based upon the above discussion, proper implementation of the conditions of approval and recommended mitigation measures, the proposed project is not expected to conflict with the General Plan or Zoning Code, therefore impacts are less then significant.

Environmental Initial Study 14 P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-52
ISSUES (AND SUPPORTING Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant significant Significant Impact
INFORMATION SOURCES): Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan?
9c. Response: (Source: MSHCP, General Plan 2025 - Figure OS-6 - Stephen's Kangaroo Rat (SKR) Core Reserve and Other Habitat Conservation Plans (HCP), Stephens' Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan, Lake Mathews Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan & Natural Community Conservation Plan, & El Sobrante Landfill Habitat Conservation Plan)
See Response 4f above. Portions of the site have been previously rough graded and disturbed consistent with a previously approved rough grading permit issued by the County of Riverside. As the project does not involve any rough grading, and any future precise grading must occur within the confines of the existing rough graded area, no further significant land disturbances will occur, and as such, the project will not impact an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan directly, indirectly and cumulatively Therefore, the project will have no impact on the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Communit Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan.

10. MINERAL RESOURCES.

Would the project:
a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral • resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
10a. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Figure - OS-1 - Mineral Resources) The project site is located in the MRZ-4 area on the Mineral Resources map. The General Plan determined that areas located in the MRZ-4 are unlikely to have significant mineral deposits. Since no evidence of previous mineral resource excavation or availability exists on the site, the project will have a less than significant impact on mineral resources.

Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
10b. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Figure - OS-1 - Mineral Resources) See response 10a, above.

11. NOISE.

Would the project result in:
a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in • excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? 11a. Response: (Source: General Plan Figure N-1 - 2003 Roadway Noise, Figure N-2 - 2003 Freeway Noise, Figure N-3 - 2003 Railway Noise, Figure N-4 - 2025 Roadway Noise, Figure N-6 - 2025 Freeway Noise, Figure N-7 - 2025 Railroad Noise, Figure N-8 - Riverside and Flabob Airport Noise Contours, Figure N-9 - March ARB Noise Contours, Figure N-10 - Noise/Land Use Noise Compatibility Criteria,) FPEIR Table 5.11-J — Existing and Future Noise Contour Comparison, Table 5.11-E - Interior and Exterior Noise Standards, Appendix G - Noise Existing Conditions Report, Title 7 - Noise Code) The proposed project as previously described does not involve uses or activities that would increase ambient noise levels as the project involves a parcel map and rezoning of the subject site. Future development of the site with single family residences will not result in significant noise levels. Development of the site will be required to comply with the City's Noise Code, which limits construction noise to occur between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on weekdays and to 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. No construction is permitted on Sundays or federal holidays. Noises associated with the future single family residences will be similar to the existing noise levels found in the immediate surrounding area, which is also developed with single family residences. Additionally, the proposal includes building pads away from the sensitive area, situated along the most southerly portion of the property. This proposal is consistent with the existing development pattern Environmental Initial Study 15 P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-53
ISSUES (AND SUPPORTING Potentially Potentially Less Than No significant Significant Significant Impact
INFORMATION SOURCES): Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
in the neighborhood and like the adjacent properties is proposing to include the southerly portion of the site within an open space easement. Therefore, no impacts are expected as a result of this project. b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
11b. Response: (Source: General Plan Figure N-1 - 2003 Roadway Noise, Figure N-2 - 2003 Freeway Noise, Figure N-3 - 2003 Railway Noise, Figure N-4 - 2025 Roadway Noise, Figure N-6 - 2025 Freeway Noise, Figure N-/ - 2025 Railroad Noise, Figure N-8 - Riverside and Flabob Airport Noise Contours, Figure N-9 - March ARB Noise Contours, FPEIR Table S.11-G - Vibration Source Levels For Construction Equipment, Appendix G - Noise Existing Conditions Report)
See Response 11a above.
c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the
project?
11c. Response: (Source: General Plan Figure N-1 - 2003 Roadway Noise, Figure N-2 - 2003 Freeway Noise, Figure N-3 - 2003 Railway Noise, Figure N-4 - 2025 Roadway Noise, Figure N-6 - 2025 Freeway Noise, Figure ARB Noise Contours, Figure N-10 - Noise/Land Use Noise Compatibility Criteria, FPEIR Table 5.11-1 - Existing and Future Noise Contour Comparison, Table 5.11-E - Interior and Exterior Noise Standards, Appendix G- Noise Existing Conditions Report, Title 7- Noise Code) The proposed project does not involve uses or activities that would result in a substantial permanent increase ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project because the project consists of a parcel map and rezoning only. Future uses would be residential, which would not result in substantial permanent increase ambient noise.

Therefore, no impacts are expected as a result of this project.

A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
Ild. Response: (Source: FPEIR Table 5.I1-J - Construction Equipment Noise Levels, Appendix G - Noise Existing Conditions Report)
The project does not result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project, because the project does not involve activities such as construction, or other related temporary noise generating activities where temporary or periodic increases in noise would occur. Nevertheless, future development of the site with single family residences could potential result in temporary increases in ambient noise levels.

Development of the site will be required to comply with the City's Noise Code, which limits construction noise to 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on weekdays and to 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. No construction is permitted on Sundays or federal holidays.
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, • where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Ile. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Figure N-8 - Riverside and Flabob Airport Noise Contours, Figure N-9 - March ARB Noise Contour, Figure N-10 - Noise/Land Use Noise Compatibility Criteria, RCALUCP, March Air Reserve Base/March inland Port Comprehensive Land Use Plan (1999), Air Installation Compatible Use Zone Study for March Air Reserve Base (August 2005))
The project lies within the 60-65 dB noise zone of the AICUZ Study. The proposed project is consistent with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Guidelines, as it will not exceed the maximum density permitted nor propose any use more intense than what was intended by the Plan. Additionally, an executed avigation easement will be required to be conveyed to the March Air Reserve Base. Therefore, the project will not result in a safety hazard for people working or residing in the project area and less than significant impact is expected.

For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would • • the project expose people residing or working in the project Environmental Initial Study 16 P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-54
ISSUES (AND SUPPORTING Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact
INFORMATION SOURCES): Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
area to excessive noise levels?
11f. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Figure PS-6 - Airport Safety Zones and Influence Areas, RCALUCP March Air Reserve Base/March Inland Port Comprehensive Land Use Plan (1999)and Air Installation Compatible Use Zone Study for March Air Reserve Base (August 2005)) Per the GP 2025 FPEIR, there are no private airstrips within the City that would expose people working or residing in the

12. POPULATION AND HOUSING.

Would the project:
a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure?
12a. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Table LU-3 - Land Use Designations, FPEIR Table 5.12-A - SCAG Population and Households Forecast, Table 5.12-B - General Plan Population and Employment Projections- 2025, Table 5.12-C - 2025 General Plan and SCAG Comparisons, Table 5.12-D - General Plan Housing Projections 2025, Capital Improvement Program and SCAG's RCP & RTP) The proposal involves a parcel map to subdivide the subject site into 3 lots and rezoning of approximately 20,830 square feet of land from the R-1-1/2 Zone to the RC Zone. No development is proposed at this time. However, the project could facilitate the construction of up to three single family residences on the project site and will involve extending existing additional infrastructure to the site. The project is consistent with the land use designation established under the General Plan 2025 Program and density allowed under the Zoning Code. The General Plan 2025 Final PEIR determined that Citywide, future development anticipated under the General Plan 2025 would have significant population growth impacts, however, a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for population impacts as part of the General Plan 2025 Program Final Because the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan 2025, population growth impacts were previously evaluated in the GP 2025 FPEIR, a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted, and the project does not result in new impacts beyond those previously evaluated in the GP 2025 FPEIR, impacts will be less than significant. substantial numbers of existing housing.
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
12b. Response: (Source: CADME Land Use 2003 Layer)
The project will not displace existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere because the preced by in proposed precio. No impact are expeded as a result of this a moe iting housing that could be removed or c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating th onstruction of replacement housing elsewhere
2c. Response: (Source: CADME Land Use 2003 Layer
rect sic is proposed on previously grated fut never evelope and that has no eating housing that cout e remove or affected by the proposed project. No impacts are expected as a result of this project Environmental Initial Study 17 P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-55
ISSUES (AND SUPPORTING Less Than No
Significant Impact
INFORMATION SOURCES): Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated

13. PUBLIC SERVICES.

Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in
acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
a. Fire protection?
13a. Response: (Source: FPEIR Table 5.13-B - Fire Station Locations, Table 5.13-C - Riverside Fire Department Statistics and Ordinance 5948 § 1)
The City of Riverside Fire Department (RFD) operates 14 fire stations throughout the City. The project site is located less than 2.2 miles from Fire Station 9(6674 Alessandro Boulevard) and 2.6 miles from Fire Station 11(19595 Orange Terrace Parkway), which serves the Canyon Crest and Orange Crest areas. The Fire Department currently serves the exiting residential dwellings surrounding the project site; therefore the addition of up to 3 single family dwellings will not represent a significant increase in the number of residences requiring service. In addition, prior to the issuance of building permits all construction documents will be reviewed and approved by the City of Riverside Fire Department and found to be consistent with the Uniform Fire Code. The subdivision will be required to provide fully operational fire suppression equipment including hydrants prior to the arrival of any building material being delivered to the project site. The RFD and the City continually assess the need for additional fire and emergency service resources and facilities, the construction of up to 3 new single family residences do not necessitate the need for new fire facilities in and of itself, however, it does contribute to the pay impact fees which can go toward purchasing land and construction of new fire facilities. Therefore, the addition of up to 3 single family dwellings to an area surrounded by previously developed single family residences will not create a significant effect upon or result in a need for new or altered fire service and a less than significant is expected b. Police protection? X
13b. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Figure PS-8 - Neighborhood Policing Centers) In an effort to decentralize policing operations the City of Riverside Police Department (RPD) operates from three major facilities to deliver services to the community residences, based upon four geographical service areas called Neighborhood Policing Center (NPC). The project site is located within the East NPC. As of 2007, RPD employed 394 sworn officers and 236 civilian personnel. The RPD does not use a formula for calculating the number of officers per capita. Instead, staffing for the department is based on the business and residential growth and evaluated on a project by project basis. Residential staffing is based on dwellings per development and business staffing is based on square footage of the business, type of business and type of police services required. As a result, RPD estimates its staffing projections through 2025 are 110 additional sworn officers and 55 additional non-sworn personnel above present levels. According to General Plan Policy PS-

7.5, RPD will endeavor to respond to Priority 1 calls within 7 minutes, and to respond to Priority 2 calls within 12 minutes.

As the proposed project is consistent with the maximum unit density permitted by the General Plan Land Use designation for the area, the addition of 3 single family residences within the exiting neighborhood will have a less than significant effect upon or will result in a less than significant need for new or altered police service. c. Schools?
13c. Response: (Source: FPEIR Figure 5.13-2 - RUSD Boundaries, Table 5.13-D - RUSD, Figure 5.13-3 - AUSD Boundaries, Table 5.13-E - AUSD, Table 5.13-G - Student Generation for RUSD and AUSD By Education Level, and Figure 5.13-4 - Other School District Boundaries) The project involves a parcel map and rezoning which will result in an incremental additional demand for school services, however, the project is consistent with the City's General Plan. Land uses established under the General Plan (including areas planned for residential which are anticipated to increase demand on school facilities) were evaluated under the GP 2025 FPEIR.

The GP 2025 FPEIR determined that through implementation of proposition IA (SB 50) payment of fees to the affected school district and adherence to the policies contained in the General Plan would reduce impacts related to the provision of [new educational facilities to less than significant levels. Because the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan Environmental Initial Study 18 P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-56
ISSUES (AND SUPPORTING Potentially Potentially ess That No Significant Significan Impact
INFORMATION SOURCES): Impact sibili Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
and policies related to provision of school facilities, the project impacts will be less than significant. d. Parks?
13d. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Figure PR-1 - Parks, Open Spaces and Trails, Table PR-4 - Park and Recreation Facilities, Parks Master Plan 2003, GP 2025 FPEIR Table 5.14-A - Park and Recreation Facility Types, and Table 5.14-C- Park and Recreation Facilities Funded in the Riverside Renaissance Initiative) The project could will not in a significant additional demand for parks as the proposal, which will facilitate the development of the site with a maximum of 3 residences, is consistent with the densities allowed under the General Plan 2025 and zoning.

Therefore, a less than significant impact on parks is expected. e. Other public facilities? •
13e. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Figure LU-8 - Community Facilities, FPEIR Figure 5.13-5 - Library Facilities, Figure 5.13-6 - Community Centers, Table 5.3-F - Riverside Community Centers, Table 5.13-H - The project will not result in an significant additional demand for public facility services. The GP 2025 FPEIR determined that increase in development and population generated by the proposed land uses will result in additional demand for community centers over time in the City. However, the project is consistent with the adopted General Plan which contains policies such as PF-10.1, PF-10.4 with regard to providing adequate community centers to ensure the adequate provision of recreational facilities. Policy PF-1.2 ensures the distribution of recreational facilities equally throughout Riverside's neighborhoods. Therefore, impacts to public facilities (including community centers and other parks and recreational facilities) will be less than significant.

14. RECREATION.
a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
14a. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Figure PR-1 - Parks, Open Spaces and Trails, Table PR-4 - Park and Recreation Facilities, Figure CCM-6 - Master plan of Trails and Bikeways, Parks Master Plan 2003, FPEIR Table 5.14-A - Park and Recreation Facility Types, and Table 5.14-C - Park and Recreation Facilities Funded in the Riverside Renaissance Initiative, Table 5.14-D - Inventory of Existing Community Centers, Riverside Municipal Code Chapter 16.60 - Local Park Development Fees, Bicycle Master Plan May 2007)
The project will not result in a significant incremental additional demand for recreation facilities. The project is consistent with the adopted General Plan 2025 at typical buildout levels. Projects consistent with the General Plan 2025 are required to rovide developed parks as part of their project approvals at the discretion of the City Parks, Recreation and Communit ervices Department, or pay applicable Park Development Impact Fees to the City of Riverside Parks. Recreation an Community Services Department. Therefore, less than significant impacts are expected as a result of this proiect. b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the l The project will not include new recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities.

See response 14 a above.

Environmental Initial Study 19 P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-57
ISSUES (AND SUPPORTING Potentially Potentially Less Than No ignificar Significant Significant Impact
INFORMATION SOURCES): mpac Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated

15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC.

Would the project:

Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation • • • to the existing tratfic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)?
15a. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Figure CCM-4 - Master Plan of Roadways, FPEIR Figure 5.15-4 - Volume to Capacity (C) Ratio and Level of Service (LOS) (Typical 2025), Table 5.15-D - Existing and Future Trip Generation Estimates, Table 5.15-H - Existing and Typical Density Scenario Intersection Levels of Service, Table 5.15-1 - Conceptual General Plan Intersection Improvement Recommendations, Table 5.15-J - Current Status of Roadways Projected to Operate at LOS E or F in 2025, Table 5.15.-K - Freeway Analysis Proposed General Plan, Appendix H - Circulation Element Traffic Study and Traffic Study Appendix, SCAG's RTP)
The proposed project does not include any development; however, future development of the project site into three single family residences could generate approximately 10 trips per day, per residence. Therefore, it is anticipated that approximately 30 trips per day will be generated by this project and thereby affect roadways in the area. This project includes a subdivision to create 3 residential lots and thus will not result in a significant number of vehicle trips or an increase in vehicle trips above what was considered under the City's General Plan 2025. Also, since this proposal will not generate a significant number of additional vehicle trips, it is not anticipated that the LOS of any nearby intersection will be affected. Therefore, no significant change to the levels of service of nearby intersections and only an incremental increase of traffic load or capacity are expected with implementation of this project and the project's individual or cumulative impact to traffic will be less than significant.
b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways?
15b. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Figure CCM-4 - Master Plan of Roadways, FPEIR Figure 5.15-4 - Volume to Capacity (V/C) Ratio and Level of Service (LOS) (Typical 2025), Table 5.15-D - Existing and Future Trip Generation Estimates, Table 5.15-H- Existing and Typical Density Scenario Intersection Levels of Service, Table 5.15-1 - Conceptual General Plan Intersection Improvement Recommendations, Table 5.15-J - Current Status of Roadways Projected to Operate at LOSE or F in 2025, Table 5.15.-K- Freeway Analysis Proposed General Plan, Appendix H - Circulation Element Traffic Study and Traffic Study Appendix, SCAG's RTP)
See Response 15a, above. The Congestion Management Program (CMP) was first established in 1990 under Proposition I1l. Proposition I11 established a process for each metropolitan county in California to designate a Congestion Management Agency (CMA) that would be responsible for development and implementation of the CMP within county boundaries. The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCT) was designated as the CMA in 1990, and therefore, prepares the CMP updates in consultation with the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), which consists of local agencies, the County of Riverside, transit agencies, and sub regional agencies. The intent of the CMP is to more directly link land use. transportation, and air quality, thereby prompting reasonable growth management programs that will effectively utilize new transportation funds, alleviate traffic congestion and related impacts, and improve air quality. The future development of the subject site with three single family residences will not generate a significant number of additional vehicle trips, nor is it anticipated that the LOS of any nearby intersection will be affected. Therefore, as the project will not cause exceedance either individually or cumulatively a level of service standard established by the CMP and a less than significant impact is expected.
c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an • increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?
Environmental Initial Study 20 P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-58
ISSUES (AND SUPPORTING Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant signifest Significant Impact
INFORMATION SOURCES): Impact Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
15c. Response: Source: General Plan 2025 Figure PS-6 - Airport Safety Zones and Influence Areas, RCALUCP, The project lies within the 60-65 dB noise zone of the AICUZ Study. The proposed project is consistent with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Guidelines, as it will not exceed the maximum density permitted nor propose any use more intense than what was intended by the Plan. Additionally, an executed avigation easement will be required to be conveyed to the March Air Reserve Base. Therefore, the project will not result in a safety hazard for people working or residing in the d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
15d. Response: (Source: Project Site Plans, Lane Striping and Signing Plans) The proposed project has been designed in conformance with Policies CCM - 1.1-1.4, and 7.1 of the Circulation Element of the General Plan 2025 which provide for maintaining and enhancing existing roadways, increasing safety of roadways, and balancing safety, quality of life and efficiency in the design of circulation and access. These policies of the proposed General Plan will help reduce hazards due to design features. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. e. Result in inadequate emergency access?
15e. Response: (Source: California Department of Transportation Highway Design Manual, Municipal Code, and Fire Code )
The project has been developed in compliance with Title 18, Section 18.210.030 and the City's Fire Code Section 503 (California Fire Code 2007). Thus emergency access will not be affected by this project. f. Result in inadequate parking capacity?
15f. Response: (Source: Chapter 19.580 of the Zoning Code) While this project does not involve any development, future development of each lot with a single family residence will be facilitated by this project. At time of development each residence will be required to provide a minimum of two parking spaces within a private garage for compliance with the Zoning Code. Required garages must be utilized for vehicle parking and not for household storage. Additionally, the Plan Check process will ensure that the required on-site parking will be provided when each residence is built. No impact is expected as the project will not result in inadequate parking capacity.

Conflict with adopted policies, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
15g. Response: (Source: FPEIR, General Plan 2025 Land Use and Urban Design, Circulation and Community Mobility and Education Elements, Bicycle Master Plan, School Safety Program - Walk Safe! - Drive Safe!) The project, as designed, does not create conflicts with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks), as the project is not located along a major thoroughfare

16. UTILITIES AND SYSTEM SERVICES.

Would the project:
a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable • Regional Water Quality Control Board?
16а. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Figure PF-2 - Sewer Facilities Map, FPEIR Figure 5.16-5 - Sewer Service Areas, Table 5.16-K - Estimated Future Wastewater Generation for the City of Riverside's Sewer Service Area, Table 5.16-L - Estimated Future Wastewater Generation for the Planning Area Served by WMWD, and Figure 5.8-1 - Watersheds)
This project site has been previously disturbed and graded pursuant to Grading Permit BGR-051529, issued by the County of Riverside, the former jurisdiction for the project site. All review in accordance with water quality management would have occurred prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Any new development facilitated by this project is required to comply with all provisions of the NPDES program and the City's Municipal Separate Sewer Permit (MS4), as enforced by the RWQCB. Therefore, the proposed project would not exceed applicable wastewater treatment requirements of the RWQCB with respect to discharges to the sewer system or stormwater system within the City. The General Plan 2025 specifies Environmental Initial Study 21 P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-59
ISSUES (AND SUPPORTING Potentially No
Significant Impact
INFORMATION SOURCES): Impact
retired to are to are quali fre and conceiven a a a policy 1024, Because to proposed are et required to adhere to the above regulations and is consistent with applicable General Plan policies related to wastewater treatment, less than significant impacts are anticipated.

Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?
16b. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 Table PF-1 - RPU PROJECTED DOMESTIC WATER Supply (AC-FT/YR), Table PF-2 - RPU Projected Water Demand, Table PF-3 - Western Municipal Water District Projected Domestic Water Supply (AC-FT/YR), RPU, FPEIR Table 5.16-G- General Plan Projected Water Demand for RPO Including Water Reliability for 2025, Table 5.16-1 - Current and Projected Water Use WMWD, Table 5.16- J- General Plan Projected Water Demand for WMWD Including Water Reliability 2025, Table 5.16-K - Estimated Future Wastewater Generation for the City of Riverside's Sewer Service Area & Table 5.16-L - Estimated Future Wastewater Generation for the Planning Area Served by WMWD, Figure 5.16-4 - Water Facilities and Figure 5.16-6 - Sewer Infrastructure.)
The project will not result in the construction of new or expanded water or wastewater treatment facilities. The project is consistent with the General Plan 2025 where future water and wastewater generation was determined to be adequate (see Tables 5.16-E, 5.16-F, 5.16-G, 5.16-H, 5.16-1, 5.16-J and 5.16-K of the General Plan 2025 Final PEIR). As part of the General Plan 2025 Program, to mitigate potential impacts related to the need for expanded entitlements for water and wastewater treatment plant capacity if population growth exceeds the Typical Project level, the City will review population and development trends with respect to water sources and supply and wastewater treatment plant capacity in 2015 and 2020 to assure growth is occurring as expected under the Typical Project development scenario. c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?
16c. Response: (Source: FPEIR Figure 5.16-2 - Drainage Facilities) The project is located on a previously graded/disturbed site within an urbanized area where no increase in impervious surfaces will occur that would require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities.

Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
16d. Response: (Source: FPEIR Figure 5.16-3 - Water Service Areas, Figure 5.16-4 - Water Facilities, Table 5.16- E - RPU Projected Domestic Water Supply (AC-FT/YR, Table 5.16-F - Projected Water Demand, Table 5.16-G - General Plan Projected Water Demand for RPU including Water Reliability for 2025, Table 5.16-H - Current and Projected Domestic Water Supply (acre-ft/year) WMWD Table 5.16-1 Current and Projected Water Use WMWD, Table 5.16-J - General Plan Projected Water Demand for WMWD Including Water Reliability 2025, RPU Master Plan, EMWD Master Plan, WMWD Master Plan, and Highgrove Water District Master Plan) Potable drinking water supplies are provided to the City and to limited areas of the Sphere by the City of Riverside Public Utilities (RPU). In addition to water service by the RPU, approximately 9 square miles within the southeast portion of the City of Riverside are served by Western Municipal Water District (WMWD) 0.9 square miles are served by the Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) and the majority of the northern sphere area is served by Riverside Highland Water Company (RHWC). The project site is within the WMWD service area for the provision of water. Provided that RPU's calculation for residential water usage is 0.8 acre-feet per meter per unit and the project could facilitate up to 3 single family residences, the project will likely result in 2.4 acre-feet. Since the project is consistent with the land use and density prescribed by the General Plan for the site, sufficient water supplies will be expected to be available to serve the project from existing infrastructure and no new or expanded infrastructure will be necessary. Therefore, a less than significant impact is expected
e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment • • provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
Environmental Initial Study 22 P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-60
ISSUES (AND SUPPORTING Potentially Potentially Less Than No significan Significant Significant Impact
impact Unless Impact
INFORMATION SOURCES): Mitigation
Incorporated
16e. Response: (Source: FPEIR Figure 5.16-5 - Sewer Service Areas, Figure 5.16-6 -Sewer Infrastructure, Table

5.16-K - Estimated Future Wastewater Generation for the City of Riverside's Sewer Service Area, Table 5.16-L - Estimated Future Wastewater Generation for the Planning Area Served by WMWD) According to the GP 2025 FPEIR, the City's RWQCP has a maximum capacity of 40 mgd with plans to upgrade the RWCOP to 52.2 mgd. This upgrade will serve the needs of the areas served within the City of Riverside's sewer area over the 20-year build-out period under the GP 2025 Typical build-out scenario. Thus, development anticipated under the GP 2025 would not result in a determination that inadequate capacity exists to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments. Therefore, impacts associated with the Typical level of Project development are considered less than significant.
f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
16f. Response: (Source: FPEIR Table 5.16-A - Existing Landfills and Table 5.16-M - Estimated Future Solid Waste Generation from the Planning Area
Per the GP 2025 FPEIR, the "Typical Build-out" under the General Plan will contribute only about 8% of projected capacity.

Based on this fact, and because landfill capacity is expected to increase, because of the City's excellent record and current policies and standards related to waste reduction programs and diversion from landfills, the GP 2025 PFEIR determined that project specific impacts would be less than significant

8. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
16g. Response: (Source: California Integrated Waste Management Board 2002 Landfill Facility Compliance Study) The California Integrated Waste Management Act under the Public Resource Code requires that local jurisdictions divert at least 50% of all solid waste generated by January 1, 2000. The City is currently achieving a 60% diversion rate, well above state requirements (Based on GP 2025 FPEIR at the time of its adoption). The City remains committed to continuing its existing waste reduction and minimization efforts with the programs that are available through the City. As such, the proposed project would not conflict with any Federal, State, or local regulations related to solid waste as the project is consistent with the General Plan 2025. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.

17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE.
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of • the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or of a rare or an endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
17a. Response: (Source: General Plan 2025 - Figure OS-6 - Stephen's Kangaroo Rat (SKR) Core Reserve and Other Habitat Conservation Plans (HCP), Figure OS-7 - MSHCP Cores and Linkages, Figure OS-8 - MSHCP Cell Areas, General Plan 2025 FPEIR Figure 5.4-2 - MSHCP Area Plans, Figure 5.4-4 - MSHCP Criteria Cells and Subunit Areas, Figure 5.4-6 - MSHCP Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Area, Figure 5.4-7 - MSHCP Criteria Area Species Survey Area, Figure 5.4-8 - MSHCP Burrowing Owl Survey Area, MSHCP Section 6.1.2 - Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools, FPEIR Table 5.5-A Historical Districts and Neighborhood Conservation Areas, Figure 5.5-1 - Archaeological Sensitivity, Figure 5.5-2 - Prehistoric Cultural Resources Sensitivity, Appendix D, Title 20 of the Riverside Municipal Code) See responses in Sections 4 (Biological Resources) and 5 (Cultural Resources). Information contained in this Initial Study supports the conclusion that the proposed project will not result in the degradation of environmental resources, with implementation of the recommended mitigation measures contained in Section 4. Therefore no significant impacts will result from this project.
b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, • cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
Environmental Initial Study 23 P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-61
•
ISSUES (AND SUPPORTING Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact
INFORMATION SOURCES): Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? 17b. Response: (Source: FPEIR Section 6 - Long-Term Effects/ Cumulative Impacts for the General Plan 2025 No adverse cumulative impacts were identified in the initial analysis. c. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
17c. Response: (Source: FPEIR Section 5 - Environmental Impact Analysis for the General Plan 2025 Program) See responses in Sections 7 (Hazards and Hazardous Materials). No significant impacts were identified in the initial Note: Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21087, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21080(c), 21080.1, 21080.3, 21082.1, 21083, 21083.3, 21093, 21094, 21151, Public Resources Code; Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino, 202 Cal.App.3d 296 (1988); Leonoff v. Monterey Board of Supervisors, 222 Cal. App.3d 1337 (1990).

Environmental Initial Study P09-0141 & P09-0173
10-62
Staff Recommended Mitigation Measures
Impact Mitigation Measures Implementation Timing Responsible Monitoring Monitoring/Reporting Method Category Party1
Biology Mitre distance of raly or unistried and wid te Prior to or concurrent with Planning Division & Public Final map review map recordation Works Department
reduced compliance with the following prior to or
concurrent with map recordation:
* The final map shall be reflect that the approximately 2.54 ares sed Parcel of and exis indistanbed ared alone te
westerly boundaries of proposed Parcels 1 and 2 (within "fingers" of the Prenda Arroyo) within a natural open space easement. No buildings, fencing, structures or non-native vegetation shall be permitted within the area designated as a 1 natural open space easement. These areas shall be dedicated 0 in fee title to an appropriate conservancy organization for -6 purposes of long term maintenance and management.

Should no organization be found, Covenants, Conditions
and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall be required to ensure
maintenance and management of the open space area,
subject to approval of the Planning Division and City
Attorney's Office. Also, the CC&R's shall require that a qualified biologist be hired to submit an annual report to Planning Division staff certifying that the open space is being properly maintained.
* No weed abatement/fuel modification areas will occur
within the designated open space/preserved areas. Public access will be prohibited, except for required maintenance and monitoring.
* The preserved/open space areas will be retained as open space and will be managed for the sole purpose of wildlife conserv ail in peres that May kil, ire, or her wise
significantly disturb wildlife or adversely impact their 1 All agencies are City of Riverside Departments/Divisions unless otherwise noted.

Environmental Initial Study 25 P09-0141 & P09-0173
Impact Responsible Monitoring Monitoring/Reporting Method Category: Mitigation Measures Implementation Timing
Partv1
habitat within the easement areas. These activities include, but are not limited to, recreation (hiking, biking, walking agriculture, communication tower construction,
gardening, dumping of garbage, off-road vehicle use, and construction of roads (other than the private road crossing described above) or other structures.
10-64
Environmental Initial Study 26 P09-0141 & P09-0173
DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JULY 9, 2009
PLANNING CASES P09-0141 & P09-0173: Proposal by Andrew Walcker of IW Consulting Engineers, Inc., on behalf of Raymond Gong, for Tentative Parcel Map 34583, to further subdivide two vacant parcels totaling approximately 7.05 acres into three single family residential lots and to amend the Municipal Code (Title 19) to rezone approximately 0.47 acres of the subject site from the R-1-1/2 - Single Family Residential Zone to the RC- Residential Conservation Zone, situated southerly of Clarke Court and westerly of Crystal View Terrace, in the R-1-1/2 - Single Family Residential, RC - Residential Conservation and RC-WC - Residential Conservation and Water Course Overlay Zones, in Ward 4. Contact Planner: Kyle Smith (951) 826-5220 [email protected]
Commissioners W.B. Allen, Riggle and Maloney disclosed that they work with IW Consulting Engineers on a regular basis, but have no relation to this case.

Kyle Smith, Associate Planner, presented the staff report Jeff Barnes, 3544 University Avenue, IW Consulting Engineers, stated that he has no problems with the conditions presented, but he would like to request a modification to Condition 2C, which states that future subdivision within this lot is prohibited. He stated that he has had discussions with staff and have decided to add at the end of that sentence,"...without due process". He explained that Lots 1 and 2 actually exceed the minimum area requirement for the zone that they are within.

Chairman Comer asked why the condition is just not deleted.

Mr. Barnes said that that works for him, too, as he wants to keep it as simple as possible.

Mr. Smith said the reason that condition was put in there is because there would be due process required to further sub-divide, but there's a pretty good chance that would not be feasible in the future because the one acre minimum lot size for septic in the RC Zone is unlikely to change. He stated that while it can be looked at, it is not likely to be feasible. He explained that the City cannot preclude them from applying for a future subdivision, but as it stands today, unless there are some major changes if sewer is brought in to area, we can most certainly look at a sub-division at that time.

Chairman Comer confirmed that staff agrees with the applicant's request to add the words, "...without due process."
Steve Hayes, Principal Planner, stated that staff would actually discourage this, but there are due process rights for processing.

Len Nunny, 4477 Picacho Drive, representing The Friends of Riverside Hills, stated that this is an interesting project that illustrates the apparent lack of serious communication between the County and the City. He stated that there is a memorandum of understanding that is supposed to prevent this sort of situation that we have here. He states that the staff has done a good job with a very difficult situation; he thinks that open space provisions actually are good ones. Also, he thinks that Condition 2C should stay because it intrudes into the Arroyo's setbacks in a very serious manner, on several locations, on all three lots. The primary concern is that it seems to be a violation of Measure C, and the reason for that is that on Lot 3 we actually have 50,000 square feet of graded pad and the maximum allowed is 18,000 square feet under Code. He also recommended that no building should be allowed on the lower of these two split pads on Lot 3. He noted that this would still give them 21,000+ feet on the upper lot which is still an City Planning Commission DRAFT Minutes July 9, 2009
ATTACHMENT 3
10-65
excess of the 18,000 that is allowed under Code. He stated in the spirit of comprise, he would argue that as a very minimum some very weak way they should try and conform with the voter approved measure C. He believes that the manufactured slope shown should go back to being restored to natural vegetation and any fire setbacks should be at the top of that slope. As is, it is a huge increase in what is allowed in the Code. There was massive grading that has occurred under permit from the County, but that is not relevant. The point is that there is supposed to be collaboration between the City and the County in these areas prior to approval. He believes nobody is taking this seriously and they should, so because of that he very strongly objects to this project going on as approved.

There was no one else in the audience wishing to speak on the matter; the public hearing was officially closed.

Commissioner Riggle asked if the statement about the grading pattern size exceeding is accurate.

Mr. Smith stated yes. He explained that as the grading exists it would not be in compliance with the Grading Ordinance; it is disturbed.

Commissioner Riggle inquired as what would be the thought on restoring it.

Mr. Smith said that it is currently disturbed, but the City could work with the applicant if the Commission felt that was appropriate.

Commissioner L. E. Allen noted that this is an issue that should really be directed at the County.

Commissioner Brown asked to what extent they would work with the County.

Ken Gutierrez, Planning Director, stated that the City is required to receive all notices on all developments. The City routinely responds to them if there is a lot that is in violation of Measure C and Prop R; the City has responded and will continue to do so. He noted that Mr. Smith said it very well; this got graded in spite of the City's objections, and it exists today. The goal of this is to take that northerly lot and divide it into two pieces, without doing any additional grading impacts to the Arroyo. It meets all the other requirements of the zone including the lot area requirements. That is why they support it because there is no additional grading. They even have a condition that requires that there be no additional grading to make this occur. So they do not see the value in taking anything back, they could have the lot developed as it stands today.

Commissioner Riggle inquired as to how big the lot is.

Mr. Smith stated as proposed it is just over five acres Commissioner Riggle pointed out that half of that has already been graded.

Mr. Smith stated he would say less than half and the proposed open space is going to be just over two acres.

Mr. Barnes said that he thinks there would be opposition to that restriction.

Commissioner Riggle asked what mitigation he could propose.

City Planning Commission DRAFT Minutes July 9, 2009
ATTACHMENT 3
10-66
Mr. Barnes stated that he thinks the design review process could address the impacts of the development in that portion of the lot. He explained that they do not know what a home builder would be doing there. So deferring it to that time would be better, because, if they build something that is inappropriate for the neighborhood the design review process should weed that out. He thought at that point it seemed overly restrictive given that this work had already been done.

MOTION MADE by Commissioner Riggle, SECONDED by Commissioner W. B. Allen, TO DETERMINE that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment, TO RECOMMEND adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, and TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL of Planning Cases P09-0141 and P09- 0173, subject to the findings and recommendations of staff, WITH MODIFICATION to Condition 2c to add the language, ...without due process." And the amendment that the buildable area be limited to 18,000 square feet and that the area outside of that be limited to what is currently there with no further impacts to be resolved during design review time.

Commissioner Maloney confirmed that Commissioner Riggle's motion would restrict the applicant from ever putting in a tennis court, RV garage or swimming pool. He expressed his disagreement with that.

SUBSTITUTE MOTION MADE by Commissioner Maloney, SECONDED by Commissioner Wade, TO DETERMINE that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment, TO RECOMMEND adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, and TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL of Planning Cases P09-0141 and P09-0173, subject to the findings and recommendations of staff.

Commissioner Maloney explained why he was opposed by saying that they would not be able to put a garden, orange groves, swimming pool, etc. He explained that he has not problem with the applicant being restricted to only building structures on the northerly pad and the southerly pad could be used for landscaping, pool, etc., but no habitable structures.

The Commission agreed.

The motion was re-stated as follows:

SUBSTITUTE MOTION MADE by Commissioner Maloney, SECONDED by Commissioner Wade, TO DETERMINE that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment, TO RECOMMEND adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, and TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL of Planning Cases P09-0141 and P09- 0173, subject to the findings and recommendations of staff, WITH MODIFICATION to add a caveat that the second graded pad area is not to be used for habitable structures.

MOTION CARRIED unanimously.

AYES: L.E. Allen, W.B. Allen, Brown, Comer, Maloney, Riggle, Wade NOES: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

ABSTAINED: None
ABSENT: Lock-Dawson, Tavaglione
Chairman Comer advised of the appeal procedure.

City Planning Commission DRAFT Minutes July 9,2009
ATTACHMENT 3
10-67
RECE
Del MiCHe
i he
WIS
jurisdiction the among
We
in line with tie ROss
mç know if you have at It tor you
Respectiully sobmille
TW Consular B
CC: Mayor/
City Council V
City Manager V 8/26/09 44t
City Attorney/
Community Development V

Riverside City CouncilMay 24, 2022

Riverside City Council
May 24, 2022