San Jacinto City Council
June 2, 2026

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING AND TECHNICAL APPROACH
PROPOSAL FOR COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TO THE CITY’S LANDSCAPE, IRRIGATION, PARK, BASIN,

PARKWAY AND STREET TREE DESIGN STANDARDS - CITY OF SAN JACINTO APRIL 27, 2026
38 Task 9: Design Standards Manual Development
The most robust technical standards are ineffective if they are not accessible to the people who use them daily. RHA Community Works views the Design Standards Manual as the “User Interface” for San Jacinto’s landscape policy. We will synthesize the complex technical requirements gathered in previous tasks into a visually intuitive, user-friendly document that serves as a definitive resource for City staff, private developers, and residents alike.

Our manual will move away from text-heavy, academic formats in favor of a graphically driven layout.

Key features will include:
• “Checklist for Success” Sidebars: Each section will feature a summary of mandatory submittal items, allowing developers to self-audit their plans before they reach the City counter. • Visual Glossaries: Complex technical terms and state mandates (like MWELO) will be explained through clear diagrams and “Dos and Don’ts” photography to eliminate ambiguity. • Direct Code Alignment: The manual’s organizational structure will mirror the San Jacinto Municipal Code, ensuring that users can easily cross-reference design guidelines with the underlying legal requirements.

The final deliverable will be a digitally optimized PDF with a clickable Table of Contents and indexed search capabilities, ensuring that the manual is as functional in the field on a tablet as it is in a printed binder at City Hall.

Methodology Highlights
•Tiered Information Design: Organizing the manual so that broad design principles are presented first, followed by increasingly specific technical details and CAD specifications. • Maintenance-Focused Narratives: Including specific “Maintenance Expectations” for each design standard, helping the City’s Public Works team understand the long-term resource commitment for various landscape treatments.
• Public/Private Distinction: Clearly delineating standards for public rights-of-way versus private developments to ensure developers understand their specific obligations.

Relevant Experience
Our team is excited about the opportunity of taking the City of San Jacinto’s Landscape Design Guidelines we developed in 2005 with the City and transforming the framework into a beautiful masterpiece that will serve the City through 2040 and beyond.

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING AND TECHNICAL APPROACH
PROPOSAL FOR COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TO THE CITY’S LANDSCAPE, IRRIGATION, PARK, BASIN,

PARKWAY AND STREET TREE DESIGN STANDARDS - CITY OF SAN JACINTO APRIL 27, 2026
39 Task 10: CAD Standard Details
A critical component of this update is the transition from conceptual guidelines to enforceable construction standards. RHA Community Works will develop a robust, comprehensive library of AutoCAD-ready technical details designed to serve as the City’s definitive construction reference. These details will be engineered to streamline the plan check process, providing developers and contractors with a “City-stamped” toolkit that ensures consistency across all public and private improvements.

Our team will utilize a “Standardization First” philosophy, ensuring that every detail, from irrigation lateral trenching to complex playground safety surfacing, is optimized for San Jacinto’s specific soil conditions, climate, and maintenance capabilities. By providing these details in digital formats (.DWG and .PDF), we eliminate ambiguity during the development review phase, reducing the back-and-forth between City staff and applicants.

The CAD library will be categorized for intuitive navigation and will include, but not be limited to:
• Irrigation Infrastructure: Precision details for smart controller assemblies, master valves, flow sensors, and water-efficient emission devices (bubblers, rotating nozzles, and subsurface drip). • Hardscape and Site Furnishings: Standardized specifications for park benches, waste receptacles, bicycle racks, and decorative paving that align with the City’s aesthetic identity.
• Park and Basin Specifics: Specialized details for basin side-slopes, overflow structures, and park-specific amenities such as shade structures and inclusive play equipment.
• Street Trees and Parkways: Standardized tree well dimensions, root barrier installations, and parkway planting details that prioritize visibility and urban heat island mitigation.

Quality Control and Technical Integrity
To ensure the longevity and accuracy of these documents, RHA Community Works will apply our firm’s rigorous “Quality Control Program.” This internal vetting process involves a multi-tiered review by our senior technical staff and a California-licensed Landscape Architect to ensure every line and callout adheres to the latest industry standards and state mandates, such as MWELO and the California Building Code (Title 24). Our reputation for producing technically outstanding documents across hundreds of public agency projects stems from this attention to detail. We do not simply provide “typical” drawings; we provide constructible, high-performance details that have been field-tested in municipal environments. This approach minimizes the risk of change orders during construction and ensures that the City of San Jacinto receives a landscape legacy built on a foundation of technical excellence. All final deliverables will be organized and formatted to integrate seamlessly into the City’s existing engineering and planning workflows.

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING AND TECHNICAL APPROACH
PROPOSAL FOR COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TO THE CITY’S LANDSCAPE, IRRIGATION, PARK, BASIN,

PARKWAY AND STREET TREE DESIGN STANDARDS - CITY OF SAN JACINTO APRIL 27, 2026
40 Task 11: Prototypical Residential Designs
To bridge the gap between municipal requirements and residential implementation, RHA Community Works will develop a suite of at least four “Prototypical Residential Design Templates.” These templates are specifically designed to empower homeowners in San Jacinto to achieve beautiful, droughtresilient landscapes without the need for expensive private consultants. By providing pre-approved, professional-grade layouts, the City can ensure that residential growth contributes to the overarching goals of the General Plan 2040 while maintaining a cohesive and attractive community aesthetic.

Each prototype will be curated to reflect the local character and climate of the San Jacinto Valley, with potential themes such as the following to start:
• Inland Desert / High Desert Resilience:

Utilizing native species and rock mulches that thrive in local heat with minimal irrigation. This design prioritizes highperformance, heat-adapted vegetation to ensure a lush aesthetic that remains sustainable even during the most intense San Jacinto summers.
• Modern Mediterranean:

Focusing on structural plants, olive trees, and lavender for a sophisticated, low-water look that aligns with existing regional architecture. By utilizing silver-foliaged plants and evergreen structures, this prototype maintains a cool, refreshing atmosphere that enhances the curb appeal of local stucco and tile-roofed homes.
• Pollinator/Habitat Friendly:

A selection of flowering natives designed to support local biodiversity and “Living Landscapes.” This landscape transforms your yard into a vital ecological corridor, inviting hummingbirds, butterflies, and beneficial insects to thrive among a colorful tapestry of seasonal blooms.
• Heritage Ranch:

Drawing inspiration from the region’s agricultural roots with hardy, traditional plantings that require modern, efficient water management. By integrating rustic hardscaping with drought-resistant fruit trees and ornamental grasses, this design preserves the timeless charm of the valley’s rural past while utilizing smart technology to significantly reduce water consumption.

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING AND TECHNICAL APPROACH
PROPOSAL FOR COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TO THE CITY’S LANDSCAPE, IRRIGATION, PARK, BASIN,

PARKWAY AND STREET TREE DESIGN STANDARDS - CITY OF SAN JACINTO APRIL 27, 2026
41 PROJECT UNDERSTANDING AND TECHNICAL APPROACH
Regulatory Streamlining and MWELO Compliance
A primary objective of this task is to reduce the administrative burden on City staff. Each design template will be pre-calculated for compliance with the California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO). By including pre-verified Hydrozone tables and Maximum Applied Water Allowance (MAWA) calculations within the templates, the City can offer an “Over-the-Counter” approval process for standard residential landscape permits. This “Plug-and-Play” approach ensures that even “non-professional” applicants submit plans that meet all state and local mandates on the first try, significantly reducing the volume of revisions and plan-check corrections.

Community Empowerment through Consensus Building
Leveraging our firm’s deep experience in Consensus Building and Program Development, we will ensure these tools are truly accessible to the general public. We move beyond technical jargon to provide clear, illustrative “Step-by-Step” guides that include:
• User-Friendly Plant Palettes:

Photorealistic or highly illustrative plant keys that help homeowners visualize the mature state of their garden.
• Simplified Installation Guides:

Basic instructions for soil preparation, mulch application, and efficient irrigation setup. • Maintenance Schedules:

Seasonal care instructions to ensure the long-term health and beauty of the new landscapes.

By applying our expertise in inclusive design and public outreach, RHA Community Works will deliver a program that transforms a complex regulatory requirement into a community benefit—fostering a sense of pride and stewardship among San Jacinto’s residents while effectively managing the City’s precious water resources.

PROPOSAL FOR COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TO THE CITY’S LANDSCAPE, IRRIGATION, PARK, BASIN,

PARKWAY AND STREET TREE DESIGN STANDARDS - CITY OF SAN JACINTO APRIL 27, 2026
42 Task 12: Public Outreach & Adoption Support
To bridge the gap between municipal requirements and residential implementation, RHA Community Works will develop a suite of at least four “Prototypical Residential Design Templates.” These templates are specifically designed to empower homeowners in San Jacinto to achieve beautiful, drought-resilient landscapes without the need for expensive private consultants. By providing preapproved, professional-grade layouts, the City can ensure that residential growth contributes to the overarching goals of the General Plan 2040 while maintaining a cohesive and attractive community aesthetic.

Each prototype will be curated to reflect the local character and climate of the San Jacinto Valley, with potential themes outlined in Task 11 such as:
• Inland Desert / High Desert Resilience: Utilizing native species and rock mulches that thrive in local heat with minimal irrigation.
• Modern Mediterranean: Focusing on structural plants, olive trees, and lavender for a sophisticated, low-water look that aligns with existing regional architecture. • Pollinator/Habitat Friendly: A selection of flowering natives designed to support local biodiversity and “Living Landscapes.”
• Heritage Ranch: Drawing inspiration from the region’s agricultural roots with hardy, traditional plantings that require modern, efficient water management.

Regulatory Streamlining and MWELO Compliance
A primary objective of this task is to reduce the administrative burden on City staff. Each design template will be pre-calculated for compliance with the California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO). By including pre-verified Hydrozone tables and Maximum Applied Water Allowance (MAWA) calculations within the templates, the City can offer an “Over-the-Counter” approval process for standard residential landscape permits. This “Plug-and-Play” approach ensures that even “non-professional” applicants submit plans that meet all state and local mandates on the first try, significantly reducing the volume of revisions and plan-check corrections.

Community Empowerment through Consensus Building
Leveraging our firm’s deep experience in Consensus Building and Program Development, we will ensure these tools are truly accessible to the general public. Our team offers a dedicated in-house Director of Community Engagement who has worked on both sides of the fence. Analicia Escobar-Gomez, served as the Riverside County Regional Park and Open-Space District’s Senior Park Planner for nearly 5 years, in addition, she is a Certified Park and Recreation Professional.

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING AND TECHNICAL APPROACH
PROPOSAL FOR COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TO THE CITY’S LANDSCAPE, IRRIGATION, PARK, BASIN,

PARKWAY AND STREET TREE DESIGN STANDARDS - CITY OF SAN JACINTO APRIL 27, 2026
43 PROJECT UNDERSTANDING AND TECHNICAL APPROACH
We move beyond technical jargon to provide clear, illustrative “Step-by-Step” guides that include:
• User-Friendly Plant Palettes: Photorealistic or highly illustrative plant keys that help homeowners visualize the mature state of their garden.
• Simplified Installation Guides: Basic instructions for soil preparation, mulch application, and efficient irrigation setup.
• Maintenance Schedules: Seasonal care instructions to ensure the long-term health and beauty of the new landscapes.

By applying our expertise in inclusive design and public outreach, RHA+CW will deliver a program that transforms a complex regulatory requirement into a community benefit—fostering a sense of pride and stewardship among San Jacinto’s residents while effectively managing the City’s precious water resources.

Final Deliverables
S E C T I O N 0 1 · P R O G R A M M A N A G E M E N T D E S I G N S TA N D A R D S M A N U A L · D E L I V E R A B L E S

P R O G R A M D E L I V E R Y F R A M E W O R K

1.3 Deliverables Register
This register defines the eleven (11) contract deliverables for the Design Standards Manual project, organized by delivery phase and matched to the schedule in § 1.2. Each entry specifies scope, key components, and required file formats for submission.

I D D E L I V E R A B L E C AT E G O R Y
Scope of work

D E S C R I P T I O N & K E Y C O M P O N E N T S
Required content

F O R M AT ( S )
Submission file types
P H A S E 1 Initiation & Audit
D1 Project Work Plan & Schedule

TIMELINE & OPERATIONS
Detailed Gantt chart, milestones, stakeholder list, meeting schedule, and coordination procedures. PDF MS Project
D2
Existing Conditions & Best Practices
Summary

AUDIT & BENCHMARKING
Technical memo reviewing legacy City plans and comparable jurisdiction standards to identify key opportunities and gap areas. PDF Word P H A S E 2 Technical Production
D3 Administrative Draft Standards Manual

THE TECHNICAL CORE
First full draft of the consolidated manual — Park, Landscape, Irrigation, Basin, and Street Trees — for staff-only technical review. PDF Word InDesign D4
Standard Construction Details (CAD
Library)

TECHNICAL PRODUCTION
Full set of .DWG details for planting, irrigation, root barriers, park amenities, trail sections, and basin pump / access facilities. PDF AutoCAD (.dwg) D5 Asset Data Tables & Plant Palettes

GIS INTEGRATION
Editable spreadsheets of approved tree lists and plant data compatible with City asset management systems. Excel (.xlsx)
D6
Prototypical Residential Landscape
Plans

PUBLIC TOOLS
Graphic front-yard plans, irrigation layouts, and plant lists designed specifically for homeowners and small builders. PDF InDesign D7 Park Planning Toolkit

EVALUATION TOOLS
Classification tables, the Point-Based Amenity Matrix, and programming layouts to assist staff in project review. PDF Word Excel P H A S E 3 Review & Adoption
D8 Public Review Draft Standards Manual

THE OUTREACH VERSION
Refined version of the manual incorporating staff feedback, designed for public distribution and decision-making bodies. PDF Word D9 Meeting & Presentation Materials

ADOPTION SUPPORT
Digital slide decks and high-impact boards for Planning Commission and City Council hearings. PPT PDF
D10 Final Standards Manual

FINAL ADOPTED VERSION
A searchable, hyperlinked PDF incorporating final legislative edits, formatted as a cohesive, branded City document. Searchable PDF D11 Final Project Files (Master Set)

TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP
A complete archive of all editable source files, graphics, and diagrams, which become the sole property of the City. Editable Source Files P 1 I N I T I A T I O N & A U D I T
Foundational deliverables establishing project operations and a baseline understanding of existing conditions.

P 2 T E C H N I C A L P R O D U C T I O N
Substantive content: the Manual itself, CAD library, GIS-ready asset data, homeowner templates, and Planning Toolkit.

P 3 R E V I E W & A D O P T I O N
Public-facing materials, hearing support, final adopted Manual, and transfer of all editable source files to the City.

C I T Y O F S A N J A C I N T O | D E S I G N S TA N D A R D S M A N U A L § 1 . 3 D E L I V E R A B L E S R E G I S T E R 2 deliverables · D1–D2
5 deliverables · D3–D7
4 deliverables · D8–D11
(This page intentionally left blank)
PROPOSAL FOR COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TO THE CITY’S LANDSCAPE, IRRIGATION, PARK, BASIN,

PARKWAY AND STREET TREE DESIGN STANDARDS - CITY OF SAN JACINTO APRIL 27, 2026
45 PROJECT SCHEDULE AND WORK PLAN

1. Project Schedule and Timeline
RHA+CW is prepared to initiate work immediately upon contract execution. We propose a focused 9-month timeline to ensure a thorough audit, creative development phase, and a seamless public adoption process. This schedule accounts for the technical complexity of consolidating the City’s diverse standards while allowing sufficient time for the internal review cycles necessary for a highquality final product. • Months 1-2: Project Initiation, Document Audit, and Gap Analysis. • Months 3-5: Technical Drafting of Standards, CAD Detail Library Creation, and Prototypical Residential Design Development.
• Months 6-7: Draft Manual Compilation and Internal City Staff Review. • Months 8-9: Planning Commission/City Council Presentations and Final Adoption.

2. Key Milestones, Stakeholders, and Review Periods
Our work plan identifies critical path “Gatekeeper” milestones where City input is essential to project momentum.
• Milestone 1: Audit Findings Memo.

A summary of inconsistencies in current codes to be reviewed by Planning and Public Works staff. • Milestone 2: 50% Technical Draft.

Review of the initial CAD library and park classification system. • Milestone 3: 90% Administrative Draft Manual.

A 30-day formal review period for all departments (Engineering, Parks, Planning) to provide final consolidated feedback.
• Stakeholder Engagement:

Coordination will be prioritized with Public Works Maintenance (to ensure equipment standards align with current inventory) and the Planning Department (to ensure alignment with General Plan 2040).

PROPOSAL FOR COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TO THE CITY’S LANDSCAPE, IRRIGATION, PARK, BASIN,

PARKWAY AND STREET TREE DESIGN STANDARDS - CITY OF SAN JACINTO APRIL 27, 2026
46 PROJECT SCHEDULE AND WORK PLAN

3. Proposed Meeting Schedule
To maintain transparency and adherence to the schedule, RHA+CW proposes a structured meeting cadence:
• Kickoff Meeting:

Within 10 days of execution to align on communication protocols and data transfer. • Monthly Project Status Meetings:

Virtual check-ins with the City Project Manager to review progress against the schedule and address any “roadblocks.”
• Technical Working Sessions:

Up to three (3) focused workshops with maintenance and plan-check staff to vet specific irrigation and construction details.
• Public Hearings:

Strategic presentations to the Planning Commission and City Council during the adoption phase.

4. Communication and Coordination Procedures
Efficiency is driven by clear communication. RHA+CW will utilize the following protocols:
• Centralized Point of Contact:

All formal communication will flow through our Project Manager, Scott Rice, ensuring consistent messaging and accountability.
• Project Management Portal:

We will utilize a shared digital folder (Basecamp) for the real-time transfer of large CAD files, GIS data, and draft documents.
• Quality Control Log:

Every round of City feedback will be documented in a “Comment/Response Matrix,” ensuring that every staff suggestion is either incorporated or addressed with a technical justification. This transparency ensures that the final manual is a true reflection of the City’s collective expertise. We will also utilize Mentimeter to capture real-time stakeholder input and feedback.

PROPOSAL FOR COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TO THE CITY’S LANDSCAPE, IRRIGATION, PARK, BASIN,

PARKWAY AND STREET TREE DESIGN STANDARDS - CITY OF SAN JACINTO APRIL 27, 2026
47 PROJECT SCHEDULE AND WORK PLAN
S E C T I O N 0 1 · P R O G R A M M A N A G E M E N T D E S I G N S TA N D A R D S M A N U A L · P R O J E C T S C H E D U L E

P R O G R A M D E L I V E R Y F R A M E W O R K

1.2 Project Schedule & Milestones
This schedule establishes the three-phase delivery timeline for the Design Standards Manual — from initial audit through Council adoption — covering May 2026 to January 2027. Dates are target milestones; deliverables are binding.

I D M I L E S T O N E / TA S K
Phase & scope S TA R T E N D T I M E L I N E MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN

D E L I V E R A B L E
Required output
P H A S E 1 Initiation & Audit

1.1 Project Kick-off Meeting May 4
2026
May 8
2026 Work Plan & Communication Protocol

1.2 Document Audit & Data Collection May 11
2026
May 29
2026 Audit Log of Legacy Standards

1.3 Gap Analysis & Code Consistency Jun 1
2026
Jun 15
2026 Memo: Technical Gap Analysis
P H A S E 2 Technical Production

2.1 Park Classification & Scoring Matrix Jun 16 2026
Jul 15 2026 Draft Recreation Value Matrix

2.2 Landscape, Basin & Tree Standards Jul 16 2026
Aug 30 2026 Draft Planting & Parkway Specs

2.3 CAD Standard Details Library
Aug 1 2026
Oct 15 2026 50% & 90% .DWG Detail Sets

2.4 Prototypical Residential Designs Aug 15 2026
Oct 30 2026 Four (4) Resident-Ready Templates
P H A S E 3 Review & Adoption

3.1 Internal Staff Working Sessions Nov 2 2026
Nov 20 2026 Consolidated Review Comments

3.2 Administrative Draft Manual Nov 23 2026
Dec 18 2026 90% Administrative Draft

3.3 Planning Commission Presentation Jan 11 2027
Jan 15 2027 Public Hearing Graphics

3.4 City Council Adoption Jan 25 2027
Jan 29 2027 Final Adopted Design Standards
P 1 I N I T I A T I O N & A U D I T
Establishes baseline through kick-off, legacy document audit, and gap analysis — ensuring technical production is grounded in current code & practice.

P 2 T E C H N I C A L P R O D U C T I O N
Core deliverable phase: matrices, planting specs, CAD details, and residential templates. Parallel tasks drive the nine-week aggregate schedule.

P 3 R E V I E W & A D O P T I O N
Staff review, Administrative Draft, Planning Commission, and City Council adoption — culminating in the final Design Standards Manual.

C I T Y O F S A N J A C I N T O | D E S I G N S TA N D A R D S M A N U A L § 1 . 2 P R O J E C T S C H E D U L E & M I L E S T O N E S May 1 — Jun 15, 2026
PROPOSAL FOR COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TO THE CITY’S LANDSCAPE, IRRIGATION, PARK, BASIN,

PARKWAY AND STREET TREE DESIGN STANDARDS - CITY OF SAN JACINTO APRIL 27, 2026
48 EXCEPTIONS TO THE RFP OR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT RHA Community Works has conducted a comprehensive review of the Request for Proposals (RFP No. SJ-PU-26-002) and the City of San Jacinto’s draft Professional Services Agreement. Based on our extensive history of providing professional landscape architectural and planning services to the City, we find the terms and conditions outlined in these documents to be consistent with industry standards and our established working relationship with the City.

RHA Community Works has no exceptions to the requirements of this RFP or the terms and conditions of the draft Professional Services Agreement.

By submitting this proposal, we affirm our full acceptance of the City’s terms and our readiness to execute the agreement as drafted upon contract award. We are committed to adhering to all identified timelines, insurance requirements, and performance standards to ensure the successful delivery of the Comprehensive Update to the City’s Design Standards.

PROPOSAL FOR COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TO THE CITY’S LANDSCAPE, IRRIGATION, PARK, BASIN,

PARKWAY AND STREET TREE DESIGN STANDARDS - CITY OF SAN JACINTO APRIL 27, 2026
49 EVIDENCE OF INSURANCE

SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE

THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS.

INSURER(S) AFFORDING COVERAGE
INSURER F :

INSURER E :

INSURER D :

INSURER C :

INSURER B :

INSURER A :

NAIC #
NAME:

CONTACT
(A/C, No):

FAX
E-MAIL
ADDRESS:

PRODUCER
(A/C, No, Ext):

PHONE

INSURED
COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NUMBER:

IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must have ADDITIONAL INSURED provisions or be endorsed.

If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s).

THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS

CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER.

OTHER:
(Per accident)
(Ea accident)
$
$
N / A
SUBR
WVD
ADDL
INSD

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS

CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. $
$
$
$ PROPERTY DAMAGE
BODILY INJURY (Per accident)
BODILY INJURY (Per person)

COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT

AUTOS ONLY

AUTOS ONLY AUTOS

NON-OWNED

OWNED SCHEDULED

ANY AUTO

AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY
Y / N

WORKERS COMPENSATION

AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY
OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED?
(Mandatory in NH)
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below
If yes, describe under

ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE
$
$
$
E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT
E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEE
E.L. EACH ACCIDENT
ER

OTH- STATUTEPER
(MM/DD/YYYY) LIMITS POLICY EXP (MM/DD/YYYY)

POLICY EFF LTR TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER INSR
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES (ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, may be attached if more space is required)

EXCESS LIAB
UMBRELLA LIAB EACH OCCURRENCE $
AGGREGATE $
$
OCCUR

CLAIMS-MADE
DED RETENTION $
PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG $
GENERAL AGGREGATE $
PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $
MED EXP (Any one person) $
EACH OCCURRENCE $

DAMAGE TO RENTED
PREMISES (Ea occurrence) $

COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY

CLAIMS-MADE OCCUR
GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER:

POLICY PROJECT LOC

CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE (MM/DD/YYYY)

CANCELLATION

AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
ACORD 25 (2016/03)
© 1988-2015 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved.

CERTIFICATE HOLDER
The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD
HIRED

AUTOS ONLY
8/26/2025
Risk Strategies Company
2040 Main Street, Suite 450
Irvine, CA 92614
949-242-9237
www.risk-strategies.com CA DOI License No. 0F06675
RSC Insurance Brokerage
Sherry Young
[email protected]
Community Works Design Group, LLC
7111 Indiana Ave., Ste 300
Riverside CA 92504
86842478
*Evidence of Insurance*
A 6802H141407 9/1/2025 9/1/2026 2,000,000
1,000,000
✓
10,000
✓
2,000,000
4,000,000
✓ 4,000,000
B BA1S986502 9/1/2025 9/1/2026 1,000,000
✓ ✓
A ✓ ✓ CUP9W423158 9/1/2025 9/1/2026 1,000,000
1,000,000
✓ 0
A UB4J51726A 9/1/2025 9/1/2026 ✓
1,000,000 N
1,000,000
1,000,000
C Professional Liability 107904001 9/1/2025 9/1/2026 Per Claim: $2,000,000 Aggregate: $2,000,000
Travelers Property Casualty Co of America 25674
Travelers Indemnity Company of CT 25682
Travelers Casualty and Surety Co of America 31194
86842478 | 25-26 GL-HNOA-UL-WC-PL | Sherry Young | 8/26/2025 5:41:52 AM (PDT) | Page 1 of 1 Project
Principal
Senior
Landscape
Architect
Construction
Manager
Project
Manager
Landscape
Designer Office Manager
Phase
No.

Task Description $240.00 $195.00 $185.00 $180.00 $150.00 $125.00

1.0 Project Initiation & Audit 16 40 36 32 0 6 130 $24,090.00

1.1 Task 1: Project Initiation & Coordination: Project Work Plan/Schedule, Communication & Coordination Protocol, Kick-Off Meeting 4 4 4 4 16 $3,230.00

1.2 Task 2: Existing Document Audit: Technical Memo: Existing Conditions & Gap Analysis and Review of General Plan 2040, 2005 Guidelines, and Municipal Code. 4 12 12 12 36 $7,680.001.3 Task 3: Best Practices Research: Best Practices Summary (Comparable Jurisdictions) & Recommendations and Framework Report 4 16 12 16 44 $9,180.001.4 Phase 1: Project Management 4 8 8 6 16 $4,000.002.0 Administrative Draft & Technical Development 40 104 56 104 208 6 518 $90,910.002.1 Task 4: Administrative Draft Development Administrative Draft Standards Manual (90% Complete) 12 24 12 24 32 104 $18,900.002.2 Task 5: Standard Construction Details Standard Detail Library (.DWG & PDF) 8 24 12 24 64 132 $22,740.002.3 Task 6: Asset Data & Palettes Plant Palettes & Street Tree Data Tables (GIS Compatible) 4 24 12 24 48 112 $19,380.002.4 Task 7: Residential Prototypical Designs Four (4) to six (6) Prototypical Residential Front Yard Plans 8 24 12 32 64 140 $24,180.002.5 Phase 2: Project Management 8 8 8 6 30 $5,710.003.0 Evaluation Tools & Final Adoption 40 48 40 36 56 6 76 $42,115.003.1 Task 8: Park Planning Toolkit D10: Park Planning Toolkit (Scoring Matrix & Definitions) 12 12 8 12 24 68 $12,460.003.2 Task 9: Public Review Draft Public Review Draft Standards Manual 8 12 8 12 12 52 $9,700.003.3 Task 10: Adoption Support & Presentations Presentation Materials (Slide Decks/Graphics) 12 8 8 4 12 32 $8,440.003.4 Task 11: Final Project Files Final Adopted Standards Manual (Searchable/Hyperlinked) & Final Editable Project File Archive 4 8 8 8 8 36 $6,765.003.5 Phase 3: Project Management 4 8 8 6 26 $4,750.00 96 192 132 172 264 18 874 $157,115.00
$2,500.00
$23,040.00 $37,440.00 $24,420.00 $30,960.00 $39,600.00 $2,250.00 880* $159,615.00 CITY OF SAN JACINTO: COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TO THE CITY’S LANDSCAPE, IRRIGATION, PARK, BASIN, PARKWAY AND STREET TREE DESIGN STANDARDS SUBTOTAL HOURS AND FEE:

TOTAL HOURS AND FEE:

RHA COMMUNITY WORKS
RHA+CW
Hours Fee By Task
OTHER DIRECT COSTS (Printing, Travel, etc.):
* The proposed hours are based on RHA Community Works’ recommended project approach and technical methodology. However, we remain fully committed to collaborating with City staff to refine this scope and adjust the allocation of resources as necessary to align with the City’s specific budgetary requirements 24438.00000\30452526.3
(BB&K 2021) -1- Professional Services Agreement

CITY OF SAN JACINTO

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN

THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO
AND

INSERT CONSULTANT NAME
24438.00000\30452526.3
(BB&K 2021) -2- Professional Services Agreement

1. PARTIES AND DATE.

This Agreement is made and entered into this 9th day of INSERT DATE, by and between the City of San Jacinto, a municipal corporation, organized under the laws of the State of California, with its principal place of business at 595 South San Jacinto Avenue, San Jacinto, California 92583 ("City") and INSERT NAME, a California Corporation, with its principal place of business at INSERT ADRESS ("Consultant"). City and Consultant are sometimes individually referred to herein as "Party" and collectively as "Parties."

2. RECITALS.

2.1 Consultant.

Consultant desires to perform and assume responsibility for the provision of certain professional services required by the City on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. Consultant represents that it is experienced in providing professional hydrogeological services to public clients, is licensed in the State of California, and is familiar with the plans of City.

2.2 Project.

City desires to engage Consultant to render such professional services for the INSERT PROJECT NAME ("Project") as set forth in this Agreement.

3. TERMS.

3.1 Scope of Services and Term.

3.1.1 General Scope of Services. Consultant promises and agrees to furnish to the City all labor, materials, tools, equipment, services, and incidental and customary work necessary to fully and adequately supply the professional hydrogeological consulting services necessary for the Project ("Services"). The Services are more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. All Services shall be subject to, and performed in accordance with, this Agreement, the exhibits attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations.

3.1.2 Term. The term of this Agreement shall be from INSERT DATE, until INSERT DATE, unless earlier terminated as provided herein. Consultant shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement, and shall meet any other established schedules and deadlines.

3.2 Compensation.

3.2.1 Compensation. Consultant shall receive compensation, including authorized reimbursements, for all Services rendered under this Agreement at the rates set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The total compensation shall not exceed INSERT AMOUNT without written approval of the City Council or City Manager, as applicable. Extra Work may be authorized, as described below, and if authorized, 24438.00000\30452526.3
(BB&K 2021) -3- Professional Services Agreement
will be compensated at the rates and manner set forth in this Agreement.

3.2.2 Payment of Compensation. Consultant shall submit to City a monthly invoice which indicates work completed and hours of Services rendered by Consultant. The invoice shall describe the amount of Services provided since the initial commencement date, or since the start of the subsequent billing periods, as appropriate, through the date of the invoice.

City shall, within 30 days of receiving such invoice, review the invoice and pay all non-disputed and approved charges. If the City disputes any of Consultant's fees, the City shall give written notice to Consultant within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice of any disputed fees set forth therein. Payment shall not constitute acceptance of any Services completed by Consultant.

The making of final payment shall not constitute a waiver of any claims by the City for any reason whatsoever.

3.2.3 Reimbursement for Expenses. Consultant shall not be reimbursed for any expenses unless authorized in writing by City, or included in Exhibit "B" of this Agreement.

3.2.4 Extra Work. At any time during the term of this Agreement, City may request that Consultant perform Extra Work. As used herein, "Extra Work" means any work which is determined by City to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which the Parties did not reasonably anticipate would be necessary at the execution of this Agreement. Consultant shall not perform, nor be compensated for, Extra Work without written authorization from the City.

3.2.5 Rate Increases. In the event that this Agreement is renewed pursuant to Section 3.1.2, the rate set forth in Exhibit “B” may be adjusted each year at the time of renewal as set forth in Exhibit “B.”

3.3 Responsibilities of Consultant.

3.3.1 Independent Contractor; Control and Payment of Subordinates. The Services shall be performed by Consultant or under its supervision. Consultant will determine the means, methods and details of performing the Services subject to the requirements of this Agreement. City retains Consultant on an independent contractor basis and not as an employee. Consultant retains the right to perform similar or different services for others during the term of this Agreement. Any personnel performing the Services on behalf of Consultant shall also not be employees of City and shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City, nor any of its officials, officers, directors, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees, or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall pay all wages, salaries, and other amounts due such personnel in connection with their performance of Services under this Agreement and as required by law. Consultant shall be responsible for all reports and obligations respecting such additional personnel, including, but not limited to: social security taxes, income tax withholding, unemployment insurance, disability insurance, and workers' compensation insurance.

3.3.2 Schedule of Services. Consultant shall perform the Services expeditiously, within the term of this Agreement, and in accordance with the Schedule of Services set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

Consultant represents that it has the professional and technical personnel required to perform the Services in conformance with such conditions. In order to facilitate Consultant's 24438.00000\30452526.3
(BB&K 2021) -4- Professional Services Agreement
conformance with the Schedule, City shall respond to Consultant's submittals in a timely manner. Upon request of City, Consultant shall provide a more detailed schedule of anticipated performance to meet the Schedule of Services.

3.3.3 Conformance to Applicable Requirements. All work prepared by Consultant shall be subject to the approval of City.

3.3.4 Substitution of Key Personnel. Consultant has represented to City that certain key personnel will perform and coordinate the Services under this Agreement. Should one or more of such personnel become unavailable, Consultant may substitute other personnel of at least equal competence upon written approval of City. In the event that City and Consultant cannot agree as to the substitution of key personnel, City shall be entitled to terminate this Agreement for cause. The key personnel for performance of this Agreement are as follows: Mathew Osborn, Public Utilities Superintendent.

3.3.5 City's Representative. The City hereby designates Mathew Osborn, Public Utilities Superintendent, or his/her designee, to act as its representative in all matters pertaining to the administration and performance of this Agreement ("City's Representative").

City's Representative shall have the power to act on behalf of the City for review and approval of all products submitted by Consultant but not the authority to enlarge the Scope of Services or change the total compensation due to Consultant under this Agreement. The City Manager shall be authorized to act on City's behalf and to execute all necessary documents which enlarge the Scope of Services or change the Consultant's total compensation subject to the provisions contained in this Agreement. Consultant shall not accept direction or orders from any person other than the City Manager, City's Representative or his/her designee.

3.3.6 Consultant's Representative. Consultant hereby designates Russell Kyle, President/ Principal Hydrogeologist, or his/her designee, to act as its representative for the performance of this Agreement ("Consultant's Representative"). Consultant's Representative shall have full authority to represent and act on behalf of the Consultant for all purposes under this Agreement. The Consultant's Representative shall supervise and direct the Services, using his/her best skill and attention, and shall be responsible for all means, methods, techniques, sequences, and procedures and for the satisfactory coordination of all portions of the Services under this Agreement.

3.3.7 Coordination of Services. Consultant agrees to work closely with City staff in the performance of Services and shall be available to City's staff, consultants and other staff at all reasonable times.

3.3.8 Standard of Care; Performance of Employees. Consultant shall perform all Services under this Agreement in a skillful and competent manner, consistent with the standards generally recognized as being employed by professionals in the same discipline in the State of California. Consultant represents and maintains that it is skilled in the professional calling necessary to perform the Services. Consultant warrants that all employees and subconsultants shall have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. Finally, Consultant represents that it, its employees and subconsultants have all licenses, permits, qualifications and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services, and that such licenses and approvals shall be maintained throughout the term of this Agreement. Consultant shall perform, at its own cost and expense and without reimbursement from the City, any services necessary to correct errors or omissions which are caused by the 24438.00000\30452526.3
(BB&K 2021) -5- Professional Services Agreement
Consultant's failure to comply with the standard of care provided for herein. Any employee of the Consultant or its subconsultants who is determined by the City to be uncooperative, incompetent, a threat to the adequate or timely completion of the Project, a threat to the safety of persons or property, or any employee who fails or refuses to perform the Services in a manner acceptable to the City, shall be promptly removed from the Project by the Consultant and shall not be re-employed to perform any of the Services or to work on the Project.

3.3.9 Period of Performance.

3.3.9.1 Consultant shall perform and complete all Services under this Agreement within the term set forth in Section 3.1.2 above (“Performance Time”). Consultant shall also perform the Services in strict accordance with any completion schedule or Project milestones described in Exhibits “A” or “B” attached hereto, or which may be separately agreed upon in writing by the City and Consultant (“Performance Milestones”). Consultant agrees that if the Services are not completed within the aforementioned Performance Time and/or pursuant to any such Project Milestones developed pursuant to provisions of this Agreement, it is understood, acknowledged and agreed that the City will suffer damage.

3.3.9.2 Neither City nor Consultant shall be considered in default of this Agreement for delays in performance caused by circumstances beyond the reasonable control of the non-performing Party. For purposes of this Agreement, such circumstances include a Force Majeure Event. A Force Majeure Event shall mean an event that materially affects a Party’s performance and is one or more of the following: (1) Acts of God or other natural disasters; (2) terrorism or other acts of a public enemy; (3) orders of governmental authorities (including, without limitation, unreasonable and unforeseeable delay in the issuance of permits or approvals by governmental authorities that are required for the services); (4) strikes and other organized labor action occurring at the site and the effects thereof on the services, only to the extent such strikes and other organized labor action are beyond the control of Consultant and its subcontractors, and to the extent the effects thereof cannot be avoided by use of replacement workers; and (5) pandemics, epidemics or quarantine restrictions. For purposes of this section, “orders of governmental authorities,” includes ordinances, emergency proclamations and orders, rules to protect the public health, welfare and safety, and other actions of a public agency applicable to the services and Agreement.

3.3.9.3 Should a Force Majeure Event occur, the non-performing Party shall, within a reasonable time of being prevented from performing, give written notice to the other Party describing the circumstances preventing continued performance and the efforts being made to resume performance of this Agreement. Force Majeure Events and/or delays, regardless of the Party responsible for the delay, shall not entitle Consultant to any additional compensation. Notwithstanding the foregoing in this section, the City may still terminate this Agreement in accordance with the termination provisions of this Agreement.

3.3.10 Laws and Regulations; Employee/Labor Certification. Consultant shall keep itself fully informed of and in compliance with all local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations in any manner affecting the performance of the Project or the Services, including all Cal/OSHA requirements, and shall give all notices required by law. Consultant shall be liable for all violations of such laws and regulations in connection with Services. If Consultant performs any work knowing it to be contrary to such laws, rules and regulations, Consultant shall be solely responsible for all costs arising therefrom. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold City, its officials, directors, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers free and 24438.00000\30452526.3
(BB&K 2021) -6- Professional Services Agreement
harmless, pursuant to the indemnification provisions of this Agreement, from any claim or liability arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with such laws, rules or regulations.

3.3.10.1 Employment Eligibility; Consultant. Consultant certifies that it fully complies with all requirements and restrictions of state and federal law respecting the employment of undocumented aliens, including, but not limited to, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, as may be amended from time to time and shall require all subconsultants and sub-subconsultants to comply with the same. Consultant certifies that it has not committed a violation of any such law within the five (5) years immediately preceding the date of execution of this Agreement, and shall not violate any such law at any time during the term of the Agreement.

3.3.10.2 Employment Eligibility; Failure to Comply. Each person executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant verifies that they are a duly authorized officer of Consultant, and understands that any of the following shall be grounds for the City to terminate the Agreement for cause: (1) failure of Consultant or its subcontractors, consultants, sub-subcontractors or subconsultants to meet any of the requirements provided for in Sections

3.3.10.1 or 3.3.10.2; (2) any misrepresentation or material omission concerning compliance with such requirements (including in those verifications provided to the Consultant under Section

3.3.10.2); or (3) failure to immediately remove from the Project any person found not to be in compliance with such requirements.

3.3.10.3 Equal Opportunity Employment. Consultant represents that it is an equal opportunity employer and it shall not discriminate against any subconsultant, employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, handicap, ancestry, sex or age. Such non-discrimination shall include, but not be limited to, all activities related to initial employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination. Consultant shall also comply with all relevant provisions of City's Minority Business Enterprise program, Affirmative Action Plan or other related programs or guidelines currently in effect or hereinafter enacted.

3.3.10.4 Air Quality. To the extent applicable, Consultant must fully comply with all applicable laws, rules and regulations in furnishing or using equipment and/or providing services, including, but not limited to, emissions limits and permitting requirements imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and/or California Air Resources Board (CARB). Consultant shall indemnify City against any fines or penalties imposed by SCAQMD, CARB, or any other governmental or regulatory agency for violations of applicable laws, rules and/or regulations by Consultant, its subconsultants, or others for whom Consultant is responsible under its indemnity obligations provided for in this Agreement.

3.3.10.5 Water Quality Management and Compliance. Consultant shall keep itself and all subcontractors, staff, and employees fully informed of and in compliance with all local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations that may impact, or be implicated by the performance of the Services including, without limitation, all applicable provisions of the City’s ordinances regulating water quality and storm water; the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. § 1251, et seq.); the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Water Code § 13000 et seq.); and any and all regulations, policies, or permits issued pursuant to any such authority. Consultant must additionally comply with the lawful requirements of the City, and any other municipality, drainage district, or other local agency with jurisdiction over the location where the Services are to be conducted, regulating water quality and storm water discharges. 24438.00000\30452526.3
(BB&K 2021) -7- Professional Services Agreement
City may seek damages from Consultant for delay in completing the Services caused by Consultant’s failure to comply with the laws, regulations and policies described in this Section, or any other relevant water quality law, regulation, or policy.

3.3.10.6 Safety. Consultant shall execute and maintain its work so as to avoid injury or damage to any person or property. In carrying out its Services, the Consultant shall at all times be in compliance with all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations, and shall exercise all necessary precautions for the safety of employees appropriate to the nature of the work and the conditions under which the work is to be performed.

3.3.11 Insurance.

3.3.11.1 Time for Compliance. Consultant shall not commence work under this Agreement until it has provided evidence satisfactory to the City that it has secured all insurance required under this section. In addition, Consultant shall not allow any subconsultant to commence work on any subcontract until it has provided evidence satisfactory to the City that the subconsultant has secured all insurance required under this section. Failure to provide and maintain all required insurance shall be grounds for the City to terminate this Agreement for cause.

3.3.11.2 Types of Insurance Required. As a condition precedent to the effectiveness of this Agreement for work to be performed hereunder, and without limiting the indemnity provisions of the Agreement, the Consultant, in partial performance of its obligations under such Agreement, shall procure and maintain in full force and effect during the term of the Agreement the following policies of insurance. If the existing policies do not meet the insurance requirements set forth herein, Consultant agrees to amend, supplement or endorse the policies to do so.
(A) Commercial General Liability: Commercial General
Liability Insurance which affords coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office "occurrence" form CG 00 01, or the exact equivalent, with limits of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and no less than $2,000,000 in the general aggregate. Defense costs shall be paid in addition to the limits. The policy shall contain no endorsements or provisions (1) limiting coverage for contractual liability; (2) excluding coverage for claims or suits by one insured against another (cross-liability); (3) products/completed operations liability; or (4) containing any other exclusion(s) contrary to the terms or purposes of this Agreement. (B) Automobile Liability Insurance: Automobile Liability Insurance with coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office Form CA 00 01 covering "Any Auto" (Symbol 1), or the exact equivalent, covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities with limits of not less than $1,000,000 combined limit for each occurrence. [***NOTE: If Consultant does not own any company vehicles or may not be able to purchase a Business Automobile Insurance Policy, the requirement may be satisfied by providing either of the following: (1) a Personal Automobile Liability policy for the Consultant's own vehicle stipulating "Automobile Liability Insurance with a limit of not less than $1,000,000 each accident"; or (2) a non-owned auto endorsement to the Commercial General Liability policy if Consultant uses vehicles of others (e.g., vehicles of employees). 24438.00000\30452526.3
(BB&K 2021) -8- Professional Services Agreement
(C) Workers' Compensation: Workers' Compensation
Insurance, as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance with a limit of not less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and disease.

3.3.11.3 Insurance Endorsements. Required insurance policies shall contain the following provisions, or Consultant shall provide endorsements on forms approved by the City to add the following provisions to the insurance policies:
(A) Automobile Liability. (1) Cancellation: Required insurance policies shall not be canceled or the coverage reduced until a thirty (30) day written notice of cancellation has been served upon the City except ten (10) days shall be allowed for nonpayment of premium. (B) Workers' Compensation: (1) Cancellation: Required
insurance policies shall not be canceled or the coverage reduced until a thirty (30) day written notice of cancellation has been served upon the City except ten (10) days shall be allowed for non-payment of premium. (2) Waiver of Subrogation: A waiver of subrogation stating that the insurer waives all rights of subrogation against the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers.

3.3.11.4 Primary and Non-Contributing Insurance. All policies of insurance shall be primary and any other insurance, deductible, or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, or volunteers shall not contribute with this primary insurance. Policies shall contain or be endorsed to contain such provisions.

3.3.11.5 Waiver of Subrogation. All required insurance coverages, except for the professional liability coverage, shall contain or be endorsed to waiver of subrogation in favor of the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers or shall specifically allow Consultant or others providing insurance evidence in compliance with these specifications to waive their right of recovery prior to a loss. Consultant hereby waives its own right of recovery against City, and shall require similar written express waivers and insurance clauses from each of its subconsultants.

3.3.11.6 Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductible or self-insured retention must be approved in writing by the City and shall protect the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers in the same manner and to the same extent as they would have been protected had the policy or policies not contained a deductible or self-insured retention.

3.3.11.7 Evidence of Insurance. The Consultant, concurrently with the execution of the Agreement, and as a condition precedent to the effectiveness thereof, shall deliver either certified copies of the required policies, or original certificates on forms approved by the City, together with all endorsements affecting each policy. Required insurance policies shall not be in compliance if they include any limiting provision or endorsement that has not been submitted to the City for approval. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy shall be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. At least fifteen (15 days) prior to the expiration of any such policy, evidence of insurance showing that such insurance coverage has been renewed or extended shall be filed with the City. If such coverage is cancelled or reduced and not replaced immediately so as to avoid a lapse in the required coverage, Consultant shall, within ten (10) days after receipt of written notice of such 24438.00000\30452526.3
(BB&K 2021) -9- Professional Services Agreement
cancellation or reduction of coverage, file with the City evidence of insurance showing that the required insurance has been reinstated or has been provided through another insurance company or companies.

3.3.11.8 Acceptability of Insurers. Each such policy shall be from a company or companies with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII and authorized to transact business of insurance in the State of California, or otherwise allowed to place insurance through surplus line brokers under applicable provisions of the California Insurance Code or any federal law.

3.3.11.9 Enforcement of Agreement Provisions (non estoppel).

Consultant acknowledges and agrees that actual or alleged failure on the part of the City to inform Consultant of non-compliance with any requirement imposes no additional obligation on the City nor does it waive any rights hereunder.

3.3.11.10 Requirements Not Limiting. Requirement of specific coverage or minimum limits contained in this Section are not intended as a limitation on coverage, limits, or other requirement, or a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any insurance.

3.3.11.11 Additional Insurance Provisions
(A) The foregoing requirements as to the types and limits of insurance coverage to be maintained by Consultant, and any approval of said insurance by the City, is not intended to and shall not in any manner limit or qualify the liabilities and obligations otherwise assumed by the Consultant pursuant to this Agreement, including but not limited to, the provisions concerning indemnification.
(B) If at any time during the life of the Agreement, any policy of insurance required under this Agreement does not comply with these specifications or is canceled and not replaced, City has the right but not the duty to obtain the insurance it deems necessary and any premium paid by City will be promptly reimbursed by Consultant or City will withhold amounts sufficient to pay premium from Consultant payments. In the alternative, City may cancel this Agreement.
(C) The City may require the Consultant to provide complete copies of all insurance policies in effect for the duration of the Project. (D) Neither the City nor any of its officials, officers, employees, agents or volunteers shall be personally responsible for any liability arising under or by virtue of this Agreement.
(E) The limits set forth herein shall apply separately to each insured against whom claims are made or suits are brought, except with respect to the limits of liability. Further the limits set forth herein shall not be construed to relieve the Consultant from liability in excess of such coverage, nor shall it limit the Consultant’s indemnification obligations to the City and shall not preclude the City from taking such other actions available to the City under other provisions of the Agreement or law.
24438.00000\30452526.3
(BB&K 2021) -10- Professional Services Agreement
(F) Consultant shall report to the City, in addition to Consultant’s insurer, any and all insurance claims submitted by Consultant in connection with the Services under this Agreement.

3.3.11.12 Insurance for Subconsultants. Consultant shall include all subconsultants engaged in any work for Consultant relating to this Agreement as additional insureds under the Consultant's policies, or the Consultant shall be responsible for causing subconsultants to purchase the appropriate insurance in compliance with the terms of these Insurance Requirements, including adding the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers as additional insureds to the subconsultant's policies. All policies of Commercial General Liability insurance provided by Consultant’s subconsultants performing work relating to this Agreement shall be endorsed to name the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers as additional insureds using endorsement form ISO CG 20 38 04 13 or an endorsement providing equivalent coverage. Consultant shall not allow any subconsultant to commence work on any subcontract relating to this Agreement until it has received satisfactory evidence of subconsultant’s compliance with all insurance requirements under this Agreement, to the extent applicable. The Consultant shall provide satisfactory evidence of compliance with this section upon request of the City.

3.4 Labor Code Requirements.

3.4.1 Prevailing Wages. Consultant is aware of the requirements of California Labor Code Section 1720, et seq., and 1770, et seq., as well as California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 16000, et seq., ("Prevailing Wage Laws"), which require the payment of prevailing wage rates and the performance of other requirements on "public works" and "maintenance" projects. If the Services are being performed as part of an applicable "public works" or "maintenance" project, as defined by the Prevailing Wage Laws, and if the total compensation is $1,000 or more, Consultant agrees to fully comply with such Prevailing Wage Laws. City shall provide Consultant with a copy of the prevailing rates of per diem wages in effect at the commencement of this Agreement. Consultant shall make copies of the prevailing rates of per diem wages for each craft, classification or type of worker needed to execute the Services available to interested parties upon request, and shall post copies at the Consultant's principal place of business and at the project site. It is the intent of the parties to effectuate the requirements of sections 1771, 1774, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1813, and 1815 of the Labor Code within this Agreement, and Consultant shall therefore comply with such Labor Code sections to the fullest extent required by law. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers free and harmless from any claim or liability arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with the Prevailing Wage Laws.

3.4.2 Registration/DIR Compliance. If the Services are being performed on a public works project of over $25,000 when the project is for construction, alteration, demolition, installation, or repair work, or a public works project of over $15,000 when the project is for maintenance work, in addition to the foregoing, then pursuant to Labor Code sections 1725.5 and 1771.1, the Consultant and all subconsultants must be registered with the Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”). Consultant shall maintain registration for the duration of the Project and require the same of any subconsultants.

3.4.3 Compliance Monitoring. This Project may also be subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the DIR. It shall be Consultant’s sole responsibility to comply with all applicable registration and labor compliance requirements, including the submission of 24438.00000\30452526.3
(BB&K 2021) -11- Professional Services Agreement
payroll records directly to the DIR. Any stop orders issued by the DIR against Consultant or any subconsultant that affect Consultant’s performance of services, including any delay, shall be Consultant’s sole responsibility. Any delay arising out of or resulting from such stop orders shall be considered Consultant caused delay and shall not be compensable by the City. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officials, officers, employees and agents free and harmless from any claim or liability arising out of stop orders issued by the DIR against Consultant or any subconsultant.

3.4.4 Labor Certification. By its signature hereunder, Consultant certifies that it is aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or to undertake selfinsurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and agrees to comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Services.

3.5 Accounting Records.

3.5.1 Maintenance and Inspection. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to all costs and expenses incurred under this Agreement. All such records shall be clearly identifiable. Consultant shall allow a representative of City during normal business hours to examine, audit, and make transcripts or copies of such records and any other documents created pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings, and activities related to the Agreement for a period of three (3) years from the date of final payment under this Agreement.

3.6 General Provisions.

3.6.1 Termination of Agreement.

3.6.1.1 Grounds for Termination. City may, by written notice to Consultant, terminate the whole or any part of this Agreement at any time and without cause by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination, and specifying the effective date thereof, at least seven (7) days before the effective date of such termination. Upon termination, Consultant shall be compensated only for those Services which have been adequately rendered to City, and Consultant shall be entitled to no further compensation. Consultant may not terminate this Agreement except for cause. The rights and remedies of the City provided in this section shall not be exclusive and are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law, equity or under this Agreement.

3.6.1.2 Effect of Termination. If this Agreement is terminated as provided herein, City may require Consultant to provide all finished or unfinished Documents and Data and other information of any kind prepared by Consultant in connection with the performance of Services under this Agreement. Consultant shall be required to provide such document and other information within fifteen (15) days of the request.

3.6.1.3 Additional Services. In the event this Agreement is terminated in whole or in part as provided herein, City may procure, upon such terms and in such manner as it may determine appropriate, services similar to those terminated.

3.6.2 Delivery of Notices. All notices permitted or required under this Agreement shall be given to the respective parties at the following address, or at such other 24438.00000\30452526.3
(BB&K 2021) -12- Professional Services Agreement
address as the respective parties may provide in writing for this purpose:

Consultant: INSERT CONSULTANT INFO
City: City of San Jacinto
595 S. San Jacinto Avenue
San Jacinto, CA 92583
ATTN: INSERT NAME
Such notice shall be deemed made when personally delivered or when mailed, forty-eight (48) hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail, first class postage prepaid and addressed to the party at its applicable address. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred, regardless of the method of service.

3.6.3 Ownership of Materials and Confidentiality.

3.6.3.1 Documents & Data; Licensing of Intellectual Property. This Agreement creates a non-exclusive and perpetual license for City to copy, use, modify, reuse, or sublicense any and all copyrights, designs, and other intellectual property embodied in plans, specifications, studies, drawings, estimates, and other documents or works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, including but not limited to, physical drawings or data magnetically or otherwise recorded on computer diskettes, which are prepared or caused to be prepared by Consultant under this Agreement ("Documents & Data"). All Documents & Data shall be and remain the property of City, and shall not be used in whole or in substantial part by Consultant on other projects without the City’s express written permission. Within thirty (30) days following the completion, suspension, abandonment or termination of this Agreement, Consultant shall provide to City reproducible copies of all Documents & Data, in a form and amount required by City. City reserves the right to select the method of document reproduction and to establish where the reproduction will be accomplished. The reproduction expense shall be borne by City at the actual cost of duplication. In the event of a dispute regarding the amount of compensation to which the Consultant is entitled under the termination provisions of this Agreement, Consultant shall provide all Documents & Data to City upon payment of the undisputed amount. Consultant shall have no right to retain or fail to provide to City any such documents pending resolution of the dispute. In addition, Consultant shall retain copies of all Documents & Data on file for a minimum of fifteen (15) years following completion of the Project, and shall make copies available to City upon the payment of actual reasonable duplication costs. Before destroying the Documents & Data following this retention period, Consultant shall make a reasonable effort to notify City and provide City with the opportunity to obtain the documents.

3.6.3.2 Subconsultants. Consultant shall require all subconsultants to agree in writing that City is granted a non-exclusive and perpetual license for any Documents & Data the subconsultant prepares under this Agreement. Consultant represents and warrants that Consultant has the legal right to license any and all Documents & Data. Consultant makes no such representation and warranty in regard to Documents & Data which were prepared by design professionals other than Consultant or its subconsultants, or those provided to Consultant by the City.

3.6.3.3 Right to Use. City shall not be limited in any way in its use or reuse of the Documents and Data or any part of them at any time for purposes of this Project or 24438.00000\30452526.3
(BB&K 2021) -13- Professional Services Agreement
another project, provided that any such use not within the purposes intended by this Agreement or on a project other than this Project without employing the services of Consultant shall be at City’s sole risk. If City uses or reuses the Documents & Data on any project other than this Project, it shall remove the Consultant’s seal from the Documents & Data and indemnify and hold harmless Consultant and its officers, directors, agents and employees from claims arising out of the negligent use or re-use of the Documents & Data on such other project. Consultant shall be responsible and liable for its Documents & Data, pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, only with respect to the condition of the Documents & Data at the time they are provided to the City upon completion, suspension, abandonment or termination. Consultant shall not be responsible or liable for any revisions to the Documents & Data made by any party other than Consultant, a party for whom the Consultant is legally responsible or liable, or anyone approved by the Consultant.

3.6.3.4 Indemnification. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, volunteers and agents free and harmless, pursuant to the indemnification provisions of this Agreement, for any alleged infringement of any patent, copyright, trade secret, trade name, trademark, or any other proprietary right of any person or entity in consequence of the use on the Project by City of the Documents & Data, including any method, process, product, or concept specified or depicted.

3.6.3.5 Confidentiality. All ideas, memoranda, specifications, plans, procedures, drawings, descriptions, computer program data, input record data, written information, and other Documents & Data either created by or provided to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement shall be held confidential by Consultant.

Such materials shall not, without the prior written consent of City, be used by Consultant for any purposes other than the performance of the Services. Nor shall such materials be disclosed to any person or entity not connected with the performance of the Services or the Project. Nothing furnished to Consultant which is otherwise known to Consultant or is generally known, or has become known, to the related industry shall be deemed confidential. Consultant shall not use City's name or insignia, photographs of the Project, or any publicity pertaining to the Services or the Project in any magazine, trade paper, newspaper, television or radio production or other similar medium without the prior written consent of City.

3.6.3.6 Confidential Information. The City shall refrain from releasing Consultant’s proprietary information ("Proprietary Information") unless the City's legal counsel determines that the release of the Proprietary Information is required by the California Public Records Act or other applicable state or federal law, or order of a court of competent jurisdiction, in which case the City shall notify Consultant of its intention to release Proprietary Information.

Consultant shall have five (5) working days after receipt of the release notice to give City written notice of Consultant's objection to the City's release of Proprietary Information. Consultant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, and its officers, directors, employees, and agents from and against all liability, loss, cost or expense (including attorney’s fees) arising out of a legal action brought to compel the release of Proprietary Information. City shall not release the Proprietary Information after receipt of the objection notice unless either: (1) Consultant fails to fully indemnify, defend (with City's choice of legal counsel), and hold City harmless from any legal action brought to compel such release; and/or (2) a final and non-appealable order by a court of competent jurisdiction requires that City release such information.

3.6.4 Cooperation; Further Acts. The Parties shall fully cooperate with one another, and shall take any additional acts or sign any additional documents as may be 24438.00000\30452526.3
(BB&K 2021) -14- Professional Services Agreement
necessary, appropriate or convenient to attain the purposes of this Agreement.

3.6.5 Indemnification.

3.6.5.1 To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall defend (with counsel of City’s choosing), indemnify and hold the City, its officials, officers, employees, volunteers, and agents free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury of any kind, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of, pertaining to, or incident to any acts, errors or omissions, or willful misconduct of Consultant, its officials, officers, employees, subcontractors, consultants or agents in connection with the performance of the Consultant’s Services, the Project or this Agreement, including without limitation the payment of all damages, expert witness fees and attorney’s fees and other related costs and expenses except such loss or damage caused by the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City. Consultant's obligation to indemnify shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement and shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by Consultant, the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, or volunteers.

3.6.5.2 If Consultant’s obligation to defend, indemnify, and/or hold harmless arises out of Consultant’s performance as a “design professional” (as that term is defined under Civil Code section 2782.8), then, and only to the extent required by Civil Code section 2782.8, which is fully incorporated herein, Consultant’s indemnification obligation shall be limited to claims that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Consultant, and, upon Consultant obtaining a final adjudication by a court of competent jurisdiction, Consultant’s liability for such claim, including the cost to defend, shall not exceed the Consultant’s proportionate percentage of fault.

3.6.6 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire Agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior negotiations, understandings or agreements. This Agreement may only be modified by a writing signed by both parties.

3.6.7 Governing Law; Government Code Claim Compliance. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. Venue shall be in Riverside County. In addition to any and all contract requirements pertaining to notices of and requests for compensation or payment for extra work, disputed work, claims and/or changed conditions, Consultant must comply with the claim procedures set forth in Government Code sections 900 et seq. prior to filing any lawsuit against the City. Such Government Code claims and any subsequent lawsuit based upon the Government Code claims shall be limited to those matters that remain unresolved after all procedures pertaining to extra work, disputed work, claims, and/or changed conditions have been followed by Consultant. If no such Government Code claim is submitted, or if any prerequisite contractual requirements are not otherwise satisfied as specified herein, Consultant shall be barred from bringing and maintaining a valid lawsuit against the City.

3.6.8 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this Agreement.

3.6.9 City's Right to Employ Other Consultants. City reserves right to employ other consultants in connection with this Project.
24438.00000\30452526.3
(BB&K 2021) -15- Professional Services Agreement

3.6.10 Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding on the successors and assigns of the parties.

3.6.11 Assignment or Transfer. Consultant shall not assign, hypothecate, or transfer, either directly or by operation of law, this Agreement or any interest herein without the prior written consent of the City. Any attempt to do so shall be null and void, and any assignees, hypothecates or transferees shall acquire no right or interest by reason of such attempted assignment, hypothecation or transfer.

3.6.12 Construction; References; Captions. Since the Parties or their agents have participated fully in the preparation of this Agreement, the language of this Agreement shall be construed simply, according to its fair meaning, and not strictly for or against any Party.

Any term referencing time, days or period for performance shall be deemed calendar days and not work days. All references to Consultant include all personnel, employees, agents, and subconsultants of Consultant, except as otherwise specified in this Agreement. All references to City include its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers except as otherwise specified in this Agreement. The captions of the various articles and paragraphs are for convenience and ease of reference only, and do not define, limit, augment, or describe the scope, content, or intent of this Agreement.

3.6.13 Amendment; Modification. No supplement, modification, or amendment of this Agreement shall be binding unless executed in writing and signed by both Parties.

3.6.14 Waiver. No waiver of any default shall constitute a waiver of any other default or breach, whether of the same or other covenant or condition. No waiver, benefit, privilege, or service voluntarily given or performed by a Party shall give the other Party any contractual rights by custom, estoppel, or otherwise.

3.6.15 No Third-Party Beneficiaries. There are no intended third party beneficiaries of any right or obligation assumed by the Parties.

3.6.16 Invalidity; Severability. If any portion of this Agreement is declared invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions shall continue in full force and effect.

3.6.17 Prohibited Interests. Consultant maintains and warrants that it has not employed nor retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Consultant, to solicit or secure this Agreement. Further, Consultant warrants that it has not paid nor has it agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Consultant, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Agreement. For breach or violation of this warranty, City shall have the right to rescind this Agreement without liability. For the term of this Agreement, no member, officer or employee of City, during the term of his or her service with City, shall have any direct interest in this Agreement, or obtain any present or anticipated material benefit arising therefrom.

3.6.18 Authority to Enter Agreement. Consultant has all requisite power and authority to conduct its business and to execute, deliver, and perform the Agreement. Each Party warrants that the individuals who have signed this Agreement have the legal power, right, and authority to make this Agreement and bind each respective Party. 24438.00000\30452526.3
(BB&K 2021) -16- Professional Services Agreement

3.6.19 Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original.

3.6.20 Survival. All rights and obligations hereunder that by their nature are to continue after any expiration or termination of this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the indemnification obligations, shall survive any such expiration or termination.

3.7 Subcontracting.

3.7.1 Prior Approval Required. Consultant shall not subcontract any portion of the work required by this Agreement, except as expressly stated herein, without prior written approval of City. Subcontracts, if any, shall contain a provision making them subject to all provisions stipulated in this Agreement.
[SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE]
24438.00000\30452526.3
(BB&K 2021) -17- Professional Services Agreement

SIGNATURE PAGE TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO AND INSERT CONSULTANT NAME IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the Parties has caused this Agreement to be executed on the day and year first above written.

CITY OF SAN JACINTO INSERT CONSULTANT NAME
By: ____________________________ By: ____________________________ Robert A. Johnson INSERT NAME
City Manager INSERT TITLE
Attest:

City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
______________________________
Best Best & Krieger LLP
City Attorney
24438.00000\30452526.3
(BB&K 2021) Exhibit “A” Professional Services Agreement EXHIBIT "A"

SCOPE OF SERVICES
24438.00000\30452526.3
(BB&K 2021) Exhibit “B” Professional Services Agreement EXHIBIT "B"

COMPENSATION & SCHEDULE OF SERVICES
June 2, 2026
TO: City Council

REQUESTED
BY:

Cynthia Espinosa, Director of Community Engagement and Communications

APPROVED
BY:

Robert A. Johnson, City Manager
SUBJECT: City Net PSA Renewal for Street Outreach and Emergency Shelter RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that City Council approve the FY 2026-2027 Professional Services Agreement with City Net to provide comprehensive street outreach and emergency hotel services, and authorize the City Manager or their designee to sign the agreement.

DISCUSSION:

The City of San Jacinto has maintained a long-standing commitment to reducing the impacts of homelessness and supporting the at-risk population within the community. Following the hiring of City Manager Robert Johnson in February 2017, the City Council directed staff to begin identifying resources, partnerships, and programmatic approaches to address these complex challenges.

Homelessness is a multifaceted socio-economic issue affecting communities nationwide, and effective response requires a coordinated, methodical approach supported by sustained resources. Since 2017, the City has taken incremental but intentional steps to build a foundation for a sustainable, long-term program focused on stabilization and support services, including access to mental health care, substance use treatment, housing navigation, job readiness, income stability, and improved overall quality of life.

One of the most significant ongoing challenges has been securing consistent, long-term funding for a “boots-onthe-ground” outreach model capable of providing comprehensive “wraparound” services to individuals identified through the City’s Homeless, At-Risk Population (HARP) efforts.

In June 2017, the City Council approved the expansion of the Code Enforcement Division with the addition of three Code Enforcement Officers and a supervisor, as well as two Problem-Oriented Policing (POP) Sheriff Deputies.

This coordinated approach allowed the City to more effectively address quality-of-life concerns such as illegal dumping, graffiti, panhandling, vagrancy, encampments, and nuisance activity on both public and private property.

In early 2018, City leadership met with representatives from the City of Temecula to learn about their partnership with City Net and the success of their outreach and wraparound service model. At that time, the associated costs of implementing a comparable program in San Jacinto were determined to be cost-prohibitive. Despite this, the City continued to pursue regional collaboration through participation in Continuum of Care meetings and outreach efforts coordinated by Supervisor Washington’s office.

A top priority identified through both the Measure V campaign and the City’s community needs assessment was addressing homelessness in a more structured and sustainable way. With the passage of Measure V, the City was able to allocate resources to formally establish a dedicated Homeless, At-Risk Population Outreach Program (HARP Outreach), positioning the City to more effectively coordinate services and partnerships focused on this critical issue.

The City’s partnership with City Net has been instrumental in advancing these efforts. City Net has not only provided direct outreach and case management services but has also supported the City in qualifying for and securing critical grant funding, including the Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention (HHAP) Program and the Encampment Resolution Fund (ERF). These funds have helped offset General Fund expenditures while expanding outreach and services beyond city boundaries.

Importantly, this regional approach has allowed the City to address encampments and individuals along the San Jacinto River and surrounding unincorporated areas. Without these services, many of the individuals in those areas would continue to migrate into city limits, placing additional strain on local resources and public services. City Net’s consistent engagement, data tracking, and coordinated service delivery have strengthened the City’s ability to demonstrate need, secure funding, and implement a more effective, regionally informed response to homelessness and at-risk population impacts.

In total for fiscal year 2025-2026, City Net made 1,172 contacts, averaged 112 clients enrolled in services monthly, and 44 of those individuals were serviced by the City’s motel program and exited the streets of San Jacinto.

Through City Net's outreach services over 150 police calls for service have been diverted, and 619 one on one case manager hours have been performed. This data shows the positive impact that the program has delivered.

The services provided by City Net have been instrumental in addressing the critical needs of homeless and at-risk individuals within San Jacinto’s community. The continuation of this contract will continue to offer hope and stability to the most vulnerable members in San Jacinto, and contribute to the overall positive well-being and quality of life of residents.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Funding for the City Net contract in an amount not to exceed $616,313.02 is included in the FY 2026-2027 budget, Account No. 010-9500-950.34-05.

Attachments
City_Net_Professional_Services_Contract_July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2027.pdf (BB&K 2018)
24438.00000\30452526.1 -1 -

CITY OF SAN JACINTO

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

1. PARTIES AND DATE.

This Agreement is made and entered into this 1st day of July, 2026, by and between the City of San Jacinto, a municipal corporation, organized under the laws of the State of California, with its principal place of business at 595 S. San Jacinto Avenue, San Jacinto, California 92583 ("City") and City Net, a non-profit with its principal place of business at PO Box 4508 Atlantic Ave Ste. 292, Long Beach, CA 90807 (Consultant"). City and Consultant are sometimes individually referred to herein as "Party" and collectively as "Parties."

2. RECITALS.

2.1 Consultant.

Consultant desires to perform and assume responsibility for the provision of certain professional street outreach and engagement services to homeless consulting services required by the City on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. Consultant represents that it is experienced in providing professional street outreach consulting services to public clients, is licensed in the State of California, and is familiar with the plans of City.

2.2 Project.

City desires to engage Consultant to render such professional street outreach consulting services for Street Outreach and Engagement through the HARP project ("Project") as set forth in this Agreement.

3. TERMS.

3.1 Scope of Services and Term.

3.1.1 General Scope of Services. Consultant promises and agrees to furnish to the City all labor, materials, tools, equipment, services, and incidental and customary work necessary to fully and adequately supply the professional street outreach consulting services necessary for the Project ("Services"). The Services are more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. All Services shall be subject to, and performed in accordance with, this Agreement, the exhibits attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations. Term.

The term of this Agreement shall be from July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2027, unless earlier terminated as provided herein. Consultant shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement, and shall meet any other established schedules and deadlines.

3.2 Responsibilities of Consultant.

3.2.1 Independent Contractor; Control and Payment of Subordinates. The Services shall be performed by Consultant or under its supervision. Consultant will determine the means, methods and details of performing the Services subject to the requirements of this Agreement. City retains Consultant on an independent contractor basis and not as an employee. (BB&K 2018)
24438.00000\30452526.1 -2 -
Consultant retains the right to perform similar or different services for others during the term of this Agreement. Any additional personnel performing the Services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall also not be employees of City and shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City, nor any of its officials, officers, directors, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees, or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall pay all wages, salaries, and other amounts due such personnel in connection with their performance of Services under this Agreement and as required by law. Consultant shall be responsible for all reports and obligations respecting such additional personnel, including, but not limited to: social security taxes, income tax withholding, unemployment insurance, disability insurance, and workers' compensation insurance.

3.2.2 Schedule of Services. Consultant shall perform the Services expeditiously, within the term of this Agreement, and in accordance with the Schedule of Services set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Consultant represents that it has the professional and technical personnel required to perform the Services in conformance with such conditions. In order to facilitate Consultant's conformance with the Schedule, City shall respond to Consultant's submittals in a timely manner. Upon request of City, Consultant shall provide a more detailed schedule of anticipated performance to meet the Schedule of Services.

3.2.3 Conformance to Applicable Requirements. All work prepared by Consultant shall be subject to the approval of City.

3.2.4 Substitution of Key Personnel. Consultant has represented to City that certain key personnel will perform and coordinate the Services under this Agreement. Should one or more of such personnel become unavailable, Consultant may substitute other personnel of at least equal competence upon written approval of City. In the event that City and Consultant cannot agree as to the substitution of key personnel, City shall be entitled to terminate this Agreement for cause. As discussed below, any personnel who fail or refuse to perform the Services in a manner acceptable to the City, or who are determined by the City to be uncooperative, incompetent, a threat to the adequate or timely completion of the Project or a threat to the safety of persons or property, shall be promptly removed from the Project by the Consultant at the request of the City. The key personnel for performance of this Agreement are as follows: Brad Fieldhouse, President and Jessica Bruce, Chief Program Officer.

3.2.5 City's Representative. The City hereby designates the City Manager, or his/her designee, to act as its representative in all matters pertaining to the administration and performance of this Agreement ("City's Representative"). City's Representative shall have the power to act on behalf of the City for review and approval of all products submitted by Consultant but not the authority to enlarge the Scope of Work or change the total compensation due to Consultant under this Agreement. The City Manager shall be authorized to act on City's behalf and to execute all necessary documents which enlarge the Scope of Work or change the Consultant's total compensation subject to the provisions contained in Section 3.3 of this Agreement. Consultant shall not accept direction or orders from any person other than the City Manager, City's Representative or his/her designee.

3.2.6 Consultant's Representative. Consultant hereby designates Brad Fieldhouse, or his/her designee, to act as its representative for the performance of this Agreement ("Consultant's Representative"). Consultant's Representative shall have full authority to represent and act on behalf of the Consultant for all purposes under this Agreement. The Consultant's (BB&K 2018)
24438.00000\30452526.1 -3 -
Representative shall supervise and direct the Services, using his/her best skill and attention, and shall be responsible for all means, methods, techniques, sequences, and procedures and for the satisfactory coordination of all portions of the Services under this Agreement.

3.2.7 Coordination of Services. Consultant agrees to work closely with City staff in the performance of Services and shall be available to City's staff, consultants and other staff at all reasonable times.

3.2.8 Standard of Care; Performance of Employees. Consultant shall perform all Services under this Agreement in a skillful and competent manner, consistent with the standards generally recognized as being employed by professionals in the same discipline in the State of California. Consultant represents and maintains that it is skilled in the professional calling necessary to perform the Services. Consultant warrants that all employees and sub consultants shall have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. Finally, Consultant represents that it, its employees and sub consultants have all licenses, permits, qualifications and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services, and that such licenses and approvals shall be maintained throughout the term of this Agreement.

As provided for in the indemnification provisions of this Agreement, Consultant shall perform, at its own cost and expense and without reimbursement from the City, any services necessary to correct errors or omissions which are caused by the Consultant's failure to comply with the standard of care provided for herein. Any employee of the Consultant or its sub-consultants who is determined by the City to be uncooperative, incompetent, a threat to the adequate or timely completion of the Project, a threat to the safety of persons or property, or any employee who fails or refuses to perform the Services in a manner acceptable to the City, shall be promptly removed from the Project by the Consultant and shall not be re-employed to perform any of the Services or to work on the Project.

3.2.9 Laws and Regulations; Employee/Labor Certification. Consultant shall keep itself fully informed of and in compliance with all local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations in any manner affecting the performance of the Project or the Services, including all Cal/OSHA requirements, and shall give all notices required by law. Consultant shall be liable for all violations of such laws and regulations in connection with Services. If Consultant performs any work knowing it to be contrary to such laws, rules and regulations, Consultant shall be solely responsible for all costs arising therefrom. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold City, its officials, directors, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers free and harmless, pursuant to the indemnification provisions of this Agreement, from any claim or liability arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with such laws, rules or regulations.

3.2.9.1 Employment Eligibility; Consultant. By executing this Agreement, Consultant verifies that it fully complies with all requirements and restrictions of state and federal law respecting the employment of undocumented aliens, including, but not limited to, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, as may be amended from time to time. Such requirements and restrictions include, but are not limited to, examination and retention of documentation confirming the identity and immigration status of each employee of the Consultant.

Consultant also verifies that it has not committed a violation of any such law within the five (5) years immediately preceding the date of execution of this Agreement, and shall not violate any such law at any time during the term of the Agreement. Consultant shall avoid any violation of any such law during the term of this Agreement by participating in an electronic verification of work authorization program operated by the United States Department of Homeland Security, by participating in an equivalent federal work authorization program operated by the United States (BB&K 2018)
24438.00000\30452526.1 -4 -
Department of Homeland Security to verify information of newly hired employees, or by some other legally acceptable method. Consultant shall maintain records of each such verification, and shall make them available to the City or its representatives for inspection and copy at any time during normal business hours. The City shall not be responsible for any costs or expenses related to Consultant’s compliance with the requirements provided for in Section 3.2.10 or any of its subsections.

3.2.9.2 Employment Eligibility; Subcontractors, Consultants, Subsubcontractors and Subconsultants. To the same extent and under the same conditions as Consultant, Consultant shall require all of its subcontractors, consultants, sub-subcontractors and subconsultants performing any work relating to the Project or this Agreement to make the same verifications and comply with all requirements and restrictions provided for in Section 3.2.10.1.

3.2.9.3 Employment Eligibility; Failure to Comply. Each person executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant verifies that they are a duly authorized officer of Consultant, and understands that any of the following shall be grounds for the City to terminate the Agreement for cause: (1) failure of Consultant or its subcontractors, consultants, subsubcontractors or subconsultants to meet any of the requirements provided for in Sections

3.2.10.1 or 3.2.10.2; (2) any misrepresentation or material omission concerning compliance with such requirements (including in those verifications provided to the Consultant under Section

3.2.10.2); or (3) failure to immediately remove from the Project any person found not to be in compliance with such requirements.

3.2.9.4 Equal Opportunity Employment. Consultant represents that it is an equal opportunity employer and it shall not discriminate against any subconsultant, employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, handicap, ancestry, sex or age. Such non-discrimination shall include, but not be limited to, all activities related to initial employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination. Consultant shall also comply with all relevant provisions of City's Minority Business Enterprise program, Affirmative Action Plan or other related programs or guidelines currently in effect or hereinafter enacted.

3.2.9.5 Air Quality. To the extent applicable, Consultant must fully comply with all applicable laws, rules and regulations in furnishing or using equipment and/or providing services, including, but not limited to, emissions limits and permitting requirements imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and/or California Air Resources Board (CARB). Although the SCAQMD and CARB limits and requirements are more broad, Consultant shall specifically be aware of their application to "portable equipment", which definition is considered by SCAQMD and CARB to include any item of equipment with a fuelpowered engine. Consultant shall indemnify City against any fines or penalties imposed by SCAQMD, CARB, or any other governmental or regulatory agency for violations of applicable laws, rules and/or regulations by Consultant, its sub-consultants, or others for whom Consultant is responsible under its indemnity obligations provided for in this Agreement.

3.2.9.6 Safety. Consultant shall execute and maintain its work so as to avoid injury or damage to any person or property. In carrying out its Services, the Consultant shall at all times be in compliance with all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations, and shall exercise all necessary precautions for the safety of employees appropriate to the nature of the work and the conditions under which the work is to be performed. Safety precautions, where applicable, shall include, but shall not be limited to: (A) adequate life (BB&K 2018)
24438.00000\30452526.1 -5 -
protection and lifesaving equipment and procedures; (B) instructions in accident prevention for all employees and subconsultants, such as safe walkways, scaffolds, fall protection ladders, bridges, gang planks, confined space procedures, trenching and shoring, equipment and other safety devices, equipment and wearing apparel as are necessary or lawfully required to prevent accidents or injuries; and (C) adequate facilities for the proper inspection and maintenance of all safety measures.

3.2.10 Insurance.

3.2.10.1 Time for Compliance. Consultant shall not commence Services under this Agreement until it has provided evidence satisfactory to the City that it has secured all insurance required under this section. In addition, Consultant shall not allow any subconsultant to commence work on any subcontract until it has provided evidence satisfactory to the City that the subconsultant has secured all insurance required under this section. Failure to provide and maintain all required insurance shall be grounds for the City to terminate this Agreement for cause.

3.2.10.2 Minimum Requirements. Consultant shall, at its expense, procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the Agreement by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, employees or subconsultants.

Consultant shall also require all of its subconsultants to procure and maintain the same insurance for the duration of the Agreement. Such insurance shall meet at least the following minimum levels of coverage:
(A) Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as the latest version of the following: (1) General Liability: Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001); (2) Automobile Liability:

Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form number CA 0001, code 1 (any auto); and (3) Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability: Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer’s Liability Insurance. (B) Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: (1) General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with general aggregate limit is used, including, but not limited to, form CG 2503, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this Agreement/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit; (2) Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage; and (3) Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability: Workers’ Compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of California. Employer’s Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.

3.2.10.3 Professional Liability. Consultant shall procure and maintain, and require its sub-consultants to procure and maintain, for a period of five (5) years following completion of the Project, errors and omissions liability insurance appropriate to their profession.

Such insurance shall be in an amount not less than $1,000,000 MINIMUM; per claim, and shall be endorsed to include contractual liability.

3.2.10.4 Insurance Endorsements. The insurance policies shall contain the following provisions, or Consultant shall provide endorsements on forms supplied or approved by the City to add the following provisions to the insurance policies:
(BB&K 2018)
24438.00000\30452526.1 -6 -
(A) General Liability. The general liability policy shall be endorsed to state that: (1) the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers shall be covered as additional insured with respect to the Work or operations performed by or on behalf of the Consultant, including materials, parts or equipment furnished in connection with such work; and (2) the insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers, or if excess, shall stand in an unbroken chain of coverage excess of the Consultant’s scheduled underlying coverage. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant’s insurance and shall not be called upon to contribute with it in any way.
(B) Automobile Liability. The automobile liability policy shall be endorsed to state that: (1) the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to the ownership, operation, maintenance, use, loading or unloading of any auto owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant or for which the Consultant is responsible; and (2) the insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers, or if excess, shall stand in an unbroken chain of coverage excess of the Consultant’s scheduled underlying coverage. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant’s insurance and shall not be called upon to contribute with it in any way. (C) Workers’ Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage.

The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers for losses paid under the terms of the insurance policy which arise from work performed by the Consultant.
(D) All Coverages. Each insurance policy required by this Agreement shall be endorsed to state that: (A) coverage shall not be suspended, voided, reduced or canceled except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City; and (B) any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies, including breaches of warranties, shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers.

3.2.10.5 Separation of Insureds; No Special Limitations. All insurance required by this Section shall contain standard separation of insureds provisions. In addition, such insurance shall not contain any special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers.

3.2.10.6 Deductibles and Self-Insurance Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. Consultant shall guarantee that, at the option of the City, either: (1) the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers; or (2) the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigation costs, claims and administrative and defense expenses.

3.2.10.7 Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best’s rating no less than A:VIII, licensed to do business in California, and satisfactory to the City.
(BB&K 2018)
24438.00000\30452526.1 -7 -

3.2.10.8 Verification of Coverage. Consultant shall furnish City with original certificates of insurance and endorsements effecting coverage required by this Agreement on forms satisfactory to the City. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy shall be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf, and shall be on forms provided by the City if requested. All certificates and endorsements must be received and approved by the City before work commences. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time.

3.2.10.9 Reporting of Claims. Consultant shall report to the City, in addition to Consultant’s insurer, any and all insurance claims submitted by Consultant in connection with the Services under this Agreement.

3.2.10.10 Standard of Care. Consultant warrants that all employees and subcontractors shall have sufficient skill and experience to perform the work assigned to them without impacting water quality in violation of the laws, regulations and policies described in Section 3.2.12.2 of this Agreement. Consultant further warrants that it, its employees and subcontractors have or will receive adequate training, as determined by the City, regarding these requirements as they may relate to the Services.

3.2.10.11 Liability for Non-compliance.
(A) Indemnity: Failure to comply with laws, regulations, and ordinances listed in Section 3.2.14.2 of this Agreement is a violation of federal and state law.

Notwithstanding any other indemnity contained in this Agreement, Consultant agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officials, officers, agents, employees and authorized volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses or liabilities of any kind or nature which the City, its officials, officers, agents, employees and authorized volunteers may sustain or incur for noncompliance with the laws, regulations, and ordinances listed above, arising out of or in connection with the Services, except for liability resulting from the sole established negligence, willful misconduct or active negligence of the City, its officials, officers, agents, employees or authorized volunteers.
(B) Defense: City reserves the right to defend any enforcement action or civil action brought against the City for Consultant’s failure to comply with any applicable water quality law, regulation, or policy. Consultant hereby agrees to be bound by, and to reimburse the City for the costs associated with, any settlement reached between the City and the relevant enforcement entity.
(C) Damages: City may seek damages from Consultant for
delay in completing the Services caused by Consultant’s failure to comply with the laws, regulations and policies described in Section 3.2.12.2 of this Agreement, or any other relevant water quality law, regulation, or policy.

3.3 Fees and Payments.

3.3.1 Compensation. Consultant shall receive compensation, including authorized reimbursements, for all Services rendered under this Agreement at the rates set forth in Exhibit "C" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The total compensation shall (BB&K 2018)
24438.00000\30452526.1 -8 -
not exceed Six Hundred and Sixteen thousand, three hundred and thirteen dollars, and two cents ($616,313.02) for the City-Wide contract without written approval of the City Council or City Manager as applicable. Extra Work may be authorized, as described below, and if authorized, will be compensated at the rates and manner set forth in this Agreement.

3.3.2 Payment of Compensation. Consultant shall submit to City a monthly invoice which indicates work completed and hours of Services rendered by Consultant. The invoice shall describe the amount of Services provided since the initial commencement date, or since the start of the subsequent billing periods, as appropriate, through the date of the invoice.

City shall, within 30 days of receiving such invoice, review the invoice and pay all non-disputed and approved charges thereon. If the City disputes any of Consultant's fees, the City shall give written notice to Consultant within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice of any disputed fees set forth therein.

3.3.3 Reimbursement for Expenses. Consultant shall not be reimbursed for any expenses unless authorized in writing by City, or included in Exhibit "B" of this Agreement.

3.3.4 Extra Work. At any time during the term of this Agreement, City may request that Consultant perform Extra Work. As used herein, "Extra Work" means any work which is determined by City to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which the Parties did not reasonably anticipate would be necessary at the execution of this Agreement.

Consultant shall not perform, nor be compensated for, Extra Work without written authorization from the City.

3.3.5 Rate Increases. In the event that this Agreement is renewed pursuant to Section 3.1.2, the rate set forth in Exhibit “B” may be adjusted each year at the time of renewal as set forth in Exhibit “C.”

3.4 Labor Code Requirements.

3.4.1 Prevailing Wages. Consultant is aware of the requirements of California Labor Code Section 1720, et seq., and 1770, et seq., as well as California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 16000, et seq., ("Prevailing Wage Laws"), which require the payment of prevailing wage rates and the performance of other requirements on "public works" and "maintenance" projects. If the Services are being performed as part of an applicable "public works" or "maintenance" project, as defined by the Prevailing Wage Laws, and if the total compensation is $1,000 or more, Consultant agrees to fully comply with such Prevailing Wage Laws. City shall provide Consultant with a copy of the prevailing rates of per diem wages in effect at the commencement of this Agreement. Consultant shall make copies of the prevailing rates of per diem wages for each craft, classification or type of worker needed to execute the Services available to interested parties upon request, and shall post copies at the Consultant's principal place of business and at the project site. It is the intent of the parties to effectuate the requirements of sections 1771, 1774, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1813, and 1815 of the Labor Code within this Agreement, and Consultant shall therefore comply with such Labor Code sections to the fullest extent required by law. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers free and harmless from any claim or liability arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with the Prevailing Wage Laws.

3.4.2 Registration. If the Services are being performed on a public works project of over $25,000 when the project is for construction, alteration, demolition, installation, or repair (BB&K 2018)
24438.00000\30452526.1 -9 -
work, or a public works project of over $15,000 when the project is for maintenance work, in addition to the foregoing, then pursuant to Labor Code sections 1725.5 and 1771.1, the Consultant and all subconsultants must be registered with the Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”). Consultant shall maintain registration for the duration of the project and require the same of any subconsultants. This project may also be subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the DIR. It shall be Consultant’s sole responsibility to comply with all applicable registration and labor compliance requirements, including the submission of payroll records directly to the DIR.

3.4.3 Labor Certification. By its signature hereunder, Consultant certifies that it is aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and agrees to comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Services.

3.5 Accounting Records.

3.5.1 Maintenance and Inspection. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to all costs and expenses incurred under this Agreement. All such records shall be clearly identifiable. Consultant shall allow a representative of City during normal business hours to examine, audit, and make transcripts or copies of such records and any other documents created pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings, and activities related to the Agreement for a period of three (3) years from the date of final payment under this Agreement.

3.6 General Provisions.

3.6.1 Termination of Agreement.

3.6.1.1 Grounds for Termination. City may, by written notice to Consultant, terminate the whole or any part of this Agreement at any time and without cause by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination, and specifying the effective date thereof, at least seven (7) days before the effective date of such termination. Upon termination, Consultant shall be compensated only for those services which have been adequately rendered to City, and Consultant shall be entitled to no further compensation. Consultant may not terminate this Agreement except for cause.

3.6.1.2 Effect of Termination. If this Agreement is terminated as provided herein, City may require Consultant to provide all finished or unfinished Documents and Data and other information of any kind prepared by Consultant in connection with the performance of Services under this Agreement. Consultant shall be required to provide such document and other information within fifteen (15) days of the request.

3.6.1.3 Additional Services. In the event this Agreement is terminated in whole or in part as provided herein, City may procure, upon such terms and in such manner as it may determine appropriate, services similar to those terminated.

3.6.2 Delivery of Notices. All notices permitted or required under this Agreement shall be given to the respective parties at the following address, or at such other address as the respective parties may provide in writing for this purpose:
(BB&K 2018)
24438.00000\30452526.1 -10
Consultant: City Net (Kingdom Causes INC)
PO Box 4508 Atlantic Ave Ste. 292,
Long Beach, CA 90807
ATTN: Brad Fieldhouse, President
City: City of San Jacinto
595 S. San Jacinto Avenue
San Jacinto, CA 92583
ATTN: City Manager
Such notice shall be deemed made when personally delivered or when mailed, forty-eight (48) hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail, first class postage prepaid and addressed to the party at its applicable address. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred, regardless of the method of service.

3.6.3 Ownership of Materials and Confidentiality.

3.6.3.1 Documents & Data; Licensing of Intellectual Property. This Agreement creates a non-exclusive and perpetual license for City to copy, use, modify, reuse, or sublicense any and all copyrights, designs, and other intellectual property embodied in plans, specifications, studies, drawings, estimates, and other documents or works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, including but not limited to, physical drawings or data magnetically or otherwise recorded on computer diskettes, which are prepared or caused to be prepared by Consultant under this Agreement ("Documents & Data"). All Documents & Data shall be and remain the property of City, and shall not be used in whole or in substantial part by Consultant on other projects without the City’s express written permission. Within thirty (30) days following the completion, suspension, abandonment or termination of this Agreement, Consultant shall provide to City reproducible copies of all Documents & Data, in a form and amount required by City. City reserves the right to select the method of document reproduction and to establish where the reproduction will be accomplished. The reproduction expense shall be borne by City at the actual cost of duplication. In the event of a dispute regarding the amount of compensation to which the Consultant is entitled under the termination provisions of this Agreement, Consultant shall provide all Documents & Data to City upon payment of the undisputed amount. Consultant shall have no right to retain or fail to provide to City any such documents pending resolution of the dispute. In addition, Consultant shall retain copies of all Documents & Data on file for a minimum of fifteen (15) years following completion of the Project, and shall make copies available to City upon the payment of actual reasonable duplication costs. Before destroying the Documents & Data following this retention period, Consultant shall make a reasonable effort to notify City and provide City with the opportunity to obtain the documents.

3.6.3.2 Subconsultants. Consultant shall require all subconsultants to agree in writing that City is granted a non-exclusive and perpetual license for any Documents & Data the subconsultant prepares under this Agreement. Consultant represents and warrants that Consultant has the legal right to license any and all Documents & Data. Consultant makes no such representation and warranty in regard to Documents & Data which were prepared by design professionals other than Consultant or its subconsultants, or those provided to Consultant by the City.

3.6.3.3 Right to Use. City shall not be limited in any way in its use or reuse of the Documents and Data or any part of them at any time for purposes of this Project or (BB&K 2018)
24438.00000\30452526.1 -11
another project, provided that any such use not within the purposes intended by this Agreement or on a project other than this Project without employing the services of Consultant shall be at City’s sole risk. If City uses or reuses the Documents & Data on any project other than this Project, it shall remove the Consultant’s seal from the Documents & Data and indemnify and hold harmless Consultant and its officers, directors, agents and employees from claims arising out of the negligent use or re-use of the Documents & Data on such other project. Consultant shall be responsible and liable for its Documents & Data, pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, only with respect to the condition of the Documents & Data at the time they are provided to the City upon completion, suspension, abandonment or termination. Consultant shall not be responsible or liable for any revisions to the Documents & Data made by any party other than Consultant, a party for whom the Consultant is legally responsible or liable, or anyone approved by the Consultant.

3.6.3.4 Indemnification. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, volunteers and agents free and harmless, pursuant to the indemnification provisions of this Agreement, for any alleged infringement of any patent, copyright, trade secret, trade name, trademark, or any other proprietary right of any person or entity in consequence of the use on the Project by City of the Documents & Data, including any method, process, product, or concept specified or depicted.

3.6.3.5 Confidentiality. All ideas, memoranda, specifications, plans, procedures, drawings, descriptions, computer program data, input record data, written information, and other Documents & Data either created by or provided to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement shall be held confidential by Consultant. Such materials shall not, without the prior written consent of City, be used by Consultant for any purposes other than the performance of the Services. Nor shall such materials be disclosed to any person or entity not connected with the performance of the Services or the Project. Nothing furnished to Consultant which is otherwise known to Consultant or is generally known, or has become known, to the related industry shall be deemed confidential. Consultant shall not use City's name or insignia, photographs of the Project, or any publicity pertaining to the Services or the Project in any magazine, trade paper, newspaper, television or radio production or other similar medium without the prior written consent of City.

3.6.3.6 Confidential Information. The City shall refrain from releasing Consultant’s proprietary information ("Proprietary Information") unless the City's legal counsel determines that the release of the Proprietary Information is required by the California Public Records Act or other applicable state or federal law, or order of a court of competent jurisdiction, in which case the City shall notify Consultant of its intention to release Proprietary Information.

Consultant shall have five (5) working days after receipt of the Release Notice to give City written notice of Consultant's objection to the City's release of Proprietary Information. Consultant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, and its officers, directors, employees, and agents from and against all liability, loss, cost or expense (including attorney’s fees) arising out of a legal action brought to compel the release of Proprietary Information. City shall not release the Proprietary Information after receipt of the Objection Notice unless either: (1) Consultant fails to fully indemnify, defend (with City's choice of legal counsel), and hold City harmless from any legal action brought to compel such release; and/or (2) a final and non-appealable order by a court of competent jurisdiction requires that City release such information.

3.6.4 Cooperation; Further Acts. The Parties shall fully cooperate with one another, and shall take any additional acts or sign any additional documents as may be necessary, (BB&K 2018)
24438.00000\30452526.1 -12
appropriate or convenient to attain the purposes of this Agreement.

3.6.5 Attorney's Fees. If either party commences an action against the other party, either legal, administrative or otherwise, arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to have and recover from the losing party reasonable attorney's fees and all other costs of such action.

3.6.6 Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall defend (with counsel of City’s choosing), indemnify and hold the City, its officials, officers, employees, volunteers, and agents free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury of any kind, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of, pertaining to, or incident to any acts, errors or omissions, or willful misconduct of Consultant, its officials, officers, employees, subconsultants or agents in connection with the performance of the Consultant’s Services, the Project or this Agreement, including without limitation the payment of all damages, expert witness fees and attorney’s fees and other related costs and expenses. Consultant's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by Consultant, the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, or volunteers.

If Consultant’s obligation to defend, indemnify, and/or hold harmless arises out of Consultant’s performance as a “design professional” (as that term is defined under Civil Code section 2782.8), then, and only to the extent required by Civil Code section 2782.8, which is fully incorporated herein, Consultant’s indemnification obligation shall be limited to claims that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Consultant, and, upon Consultant obtaining a final adjudication by a court of competent jurisdiction, Consultant’s liability for such claim, including the cost to defend, shall not exceed the Consultant’s proportionate percentage of fault.

3.6.7 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire Agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior negotiations, understandings or agreements. This Agreement may only be modified by a writing signed by both parties.

3.6.8 Governing Law; Government Code Claim Compliance. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. Venue shall be in Riverside County. In addition to any and all contract requirements pertaining to notices of and requests for compensation or payment for extra work, disputed work, claims and/or changed conditions, Consultant must comply with the claim procedures set forth in Government Code sections 900 et seq. prior to filing any lawsuit against the City. Such Government Code claims and any subsequent lawsuit based upon the Government Code claims shall be limited to those matters that remain unresolved after all procedures pertaining to extra work, disputed work, claims, and/or changed conditions have been followed by Consultant. If no such Government Code claim is submitted, or if any prerequisite contractual requirements are not otherwise satisfied as specified herein, Consultant shall be barred from bringing and maintaining a valid lawsuit against the City.

3.6.9 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this Agreement.

3.6.10 City's Right to Employ Other Consultants. City reserves right to employ other consultants in connection with this Project.
(BB&K 2018)
24438.00000\30452526.1 -13

3.6.11 Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding on the successors and assigns of the parties.

3.6.12 Assignment or Transfer. Consultant shall not assign, hypothecate, or transfer, either directly or by operation of law, this Agreement or any interest herein without the prior written consent of the City. Any attempt to do so shall be null and void, and any assignees, hypothecates or transferees shall acquire no right or interest by reason of such attempted assignment, hypothecation or transfer.

3.6.13 Construction; References; Captions. Since the Parties or their agents have participated fully in the preparation of this Agreement, the language of this Agreement shall be construed simply, according to its fair meaning, and not strictly for or against any Party. Any term referencing time, days or period for performance shall be deemed calendar days and not work days. All references to Consultant include all personnel, employees, agents, and subconsultants of Consultant, except as otherwise specified in this Agreement. All references to City include its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers except as otherwise specified in this Agreement. The captions of the various articles and paragraphs are for convenience and ease of reference only, and do not define, limit, augment, or describe the scope, content, or intent of this Agreement.

3.6.14 Amendment; Modification. No supplement, modification, or amendment of this Agreement shall be binding unless executed in writing and signed by both Parties.

3.6.15 Waiver. No waiver of any default shall constitute a waiver of any other default or breach, whether of the same or other covenant or condition. No waiver, benefit, privilege, or service voluntarily given or performed by a Party shall give the other Party any contractual rights by custom, estoppel, or otherwise.

3.6.16 No Third-Party Beneficiaries. There are no intended third party beneficiaries of any right or obligation assumed by the Parties.

3.6.17 Invalidity; Severability. If any portion of this Agreement is declared invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions shall continue in full force and effect.

3.6.18 Prohibited Interests. Consultant maintains and warrants that it has not employed nor retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Consultant, to solicit or secure this Agreement. Further, Consultant warrants that it has not paid nor has it agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Consultant, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Agreement. For breach or violation of this warranty, City shall have the right to rescind this Agreement without liability. For the term of this Agreement, no member, officer or employee of City, during the term of his or her service with City, shall have any direct interest in this Agreement, or obtain any present or anticipated material benefit arising therefrom.

3.6.19 Authority to Enter Agreement. Consultant has all requisite power and authority to conduct its business and to execute, deliver, and perform the Agreement. Each Party warrants that the individuals who have signed this Agreement have the legal power, right, and authority to make this Agreement and bind each respective Party. (BB&K 2018)
24438.00000\30452526.1 -14

3.6.20 Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original.

3.7 Subcontracting.

3.7.1 Prior Approval Required. Consultant shall not subcontract any portion of the work required by this Agreement, except as expressly stated herein, without prior written approval of City. Subcontracts, if any, shall contain a provision making them subject to all provisions stipulated in this Agreement.
[SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE]
(BB&K 2018)
24438.00000\30452526.1 -15

SIGNATURE PAGE TO

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BY AND
BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO AND City Net
CITY OF SAN JACINTO City Net
By: By:

Robert Johnson Brad Fieldhouse
City Manager President, City Net
Attest:

City Clerk
EXHIBIT "A"

SCOPE OF SERVICES
Vision
City Net proposes to provide street outreach and engagement services to homeless neighbors in San Jacinto, to engage them in case management with the goal of exiting them from the streets, with the long-term goal of dramatically reducing street-level homelessness in the city. City Net will participate in collaborative efforts of agencies from city government, law enforcement and other city first responders, advocacy and civic groups, nonprofit organizations, businesses, homeless neighbors and the faith community working together on shared goals and a common agenda.

Goals

1. Exit homeless neighbors from the streets of San Jacinto, prioritizing the most vulnerable, highprofile, and costly cases.

2. Assess clients’ needs and refer to appropriate local shelter(s) and housing options.

3. Participate in the coordination of homeless activities in San Jacinto through aligned resources, mutually supportive activities, common agenda and share goals.

4. Reduce community costs related to homelessness in the city.

5. Connect homeless neighbors and city agencies to housing solutions throughout the region.

Outreach Schedule
City Net proposes a team of 2.0 FTE street outreach and engagement case managers, along with project leadership and support staff. City Net will deploy these case managers on street outreach and engagement in the city on a set schedule to cover M-F during regular business hours. Night and weekends coverage is available with advanced notice.

Term
Contract term is twelve months, from 7/1/26 through 6/30/27.

Budget
See attached for proposed budget for city-wide homeless.

General Approach
City Net engages in street outreach services for homeless neighbors as described below.

Street outreach is service delivery for the specific purpose of reaching out to unsheltered homeless neighbors; connecting them with emergency shelter, housing, or critical services; and providing urgent, non-facility-based care.

Individuals defined as unsheltered generally meet the following HUD criteria for homelessness: Category 1,literally homeless; and/or Category 4, fleeing/attempting to flee domestic violence (where the individual or household also meet the criteria for category 1) and are:
• living on the streets (or other places not meant for human habitation) • unwilling or unable to access services in emergency shelter.

Housing First
All City Net programs are informed by and consistent with Housing First principals. Housing First is an approach to serving people experiencing homelessness that recognizes a homeless person must first be able to access a
decent, safe place to live, that does not limit length of stay (permanent housing), before stabilizing, improving health, reducing harmful behaviors, or increasing income. Under the Housing First approach, anyone experiencing homelessness is connected to a permanent home as quickly as possible, and programs remove barriers to accessing the housing, like requirements for sobriety or absence of criminal history. It is based on the “hierarchy of need:” people must access necessities—like a safe place to live and food to eat—before being able to achieve quality of life or pursue personal goals. Housing First also values choice not only in where to live, but whether to participate in services.

Finally, Housing First recognizes the need for robust supportive services upon housing placement. It is not “Housing Only” or “Housing Alone”, but “Housing First”, which implies that additional steps are generally needed to achieve successful long-term housing stability.

Trauma-Informed Care
City Net assumes that individuals and families who are homeless have been exposed to trauma. Research has shown that individuals who are homeless are likely to have experienced some form of previous trauma; homelessness itself can be viewed as a traumatic experience; and being homeless increases the risk of further victimization and retraumatization.

Therefore, our programs, policies and procedures are designed not only respond to the immediate crisis of homelessness, but to also contribute to the longer-term healing of homeless individuals. Trauma-Informed Care (TIC) offers a framework for providing services to traumatized individuals within a variety of service settings, including homelessness service settings.

Since trauma also influences how people approach and respond to services, City Net strives to recognize trauma symptoms, acknowledge the role that trauma has played in clients’ lives, and better understand and address the needs of those with trauma histories. The goal of this approach is to avoid retraumatization and exacerbation of trauma symptoms.

This change in understanding can be illustrated by the difference between the questions “What’s wrong with you?” vs. “What has happened to you?” While the terms violence, trauma, abuse, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are frequently used interchangeably, it is useful to think of trauma as a response to violence or other overpowering negative experience such as abuse. Trauma refers to both the event and the particular response to an event. PTSD is one type of disorder resulting from trauma. Becoming “traumatized” varies greatly among individuals, and not everyone exposed to a potential traumatic event will be traumatized.

Trauma begins with an event or experience that overwhelms normal coping mechanisms. There are physical and psychological reactions—which are normal—in response. Retraumatization refers to the psychological and/or physiological experience of being “triggered,” i.e., when an environmental cue related to the trauma—such as a smell or a sound—triggers a full fight-or-flight response. Although environmental triggers cannot be eliminated, City Net seeks to create an environment—both a physical environment, and a framework of compassionate understanding in which the trauma survivor feels safe.

Motivational Interviewing
City Net employs Motivational Interviewing (MI) techniques in its programs. MI is a counseling method that helps people resolve ambivalent feelings and insecurities to find the internal motivation they need to change
their behavior. It is a practical, empathetic, and short-term process that takes into consideration how difficult it is to make life changes.

The core components of MI are to:
• Express and show empathy towards clients
• Support and articulate discrepancies between clients’ goals and choices that take them away from goals
• Deal with resistance without confrontation
• Support self-efficacy
• Support client autonomy.

HMIS
All clients in this proposed project will be entered into/screened through the local Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) and, as appropriate for prospective candidates, the Coordinated Entry System (CES).City Net staff are trained in these systems, and our written policies and procedures state their work must be coordinated through these systems.

In addition to assuring that resources flow to the most vulnerable homeless individuals (through CES), these systems also provide a safeguard against duplication of services because we can see in HMIS what other services and benefits the client is receiving, as well as the agency who may be providing these services. Our case managers and housing navigators are trained to reach out to their counterparts at these other agencies to confirm provision of services, to case conference, and to clarify any questions around potential duplication.

Permanent Housing
Case managers link clients to the Coordinated Entry System (CES) to provide ongoing engagement, document collection, and case management services to facilitate a match to an appropriate permanent housing resource. Case managers also provide services in the context of CES, which is voluntary and client-centered, with the goalof identifying strengths and client-directed goals, while promoting health, recognition, and well-being with a focus on linking the client to a permanent housing resource and providing the necessary services needed to promote housing stability.

Client Referral Process
In accordance with our street outreach and engagement policies and procedures, City Net staff record all assessments and subsequent services in the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS), which requires them to enter and maintain timely and complete client data.

City Net Case Managers are oriented to and trained in resources, homeless services, and organizations for collaboration and referral. They are highly trained to connect residents to shelter and housing resources, including in case managing clients from the streets into permanent supportive housing through CES. Staff representatives attend the local CoC meetings-- Homeless Provider Forums, Case Management Forums, Implementation Committees and the like. Resource lists are updated regularly and kept on-site. Protocols for offering and accepting referrals from other agencies are reviewed by staff, updated, shared and kept in a manual in the City Net offices.

City Net will refer homeless neighbors to emergency health and/or emergency mental health services to the extent that other customary emergency health services and treatments are unavailable or inaccessible to the homeless neighbor. A referral example is outpatient treatment of urgent medical conditions by licensed medical professionals in community-based settings (e.g., streets, parks, and campgrounds) to those eligible participants unwilling or unable to access emergency shelter or an appropriate healthcare facility.

Types of Services
City Net’s street outreach services include services in the following categories: engagement services, case management, emergency health, emergency mental health, transportation, and services for special populations.

These activities are intended to help homeless neighbors to obtain appropriate supportive services, including assistance in obtaining permanent housing, medical health treatment, mental health treatment, counseling, supervision, and other services essential for achieving independent living. Supportive services may include providing access to and assistance in obtaining:
• Medicaid/Medi-Cal
• Women, Infants and Children (WIC)
• Food Stamps/Cal-Fresh/EBT
• Federal-State Unemployment Insurance Program
• Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI)
• Supplemental Security Income (SSI)
• General Relief (GR)
• Other mainstream resources such as housing, health, social services, employment, education services and youth programs that an individual or family may be eligible to receive.

Engagement Services
Engagement Services are activities to locate, identify, and build relationships with unsheltered homeless people to offer immediate support, intervention, and connections with homeless assistance programs and/or mainstream social services and other housing programs. Specific activities include:
• Conducting an initial assessment of client needs and eligibility • Providing informal crisis counseling
• Addressing urgent physical needs, such as providing meals, blankets, clothes, or toiletries • Actively connecting and providing information and referrals to needed services.

Case Management
Case management activities to assess housing and service needs and arrange, coordinate and/or monitor the delivery of individualized services. Specific activities include:
• Assessment and intake using HMIS
• Conducting initial evaluations including, verifying and documenting eligibility • Counseling
• Developing/securing/coordinating services
• Helping obtain Federal, State, and local benefits
• Monitoring and evaluating program participant progress in particular programs • Providing information and referrals to other providers • Developing an individualized housing stabilization plan that leads to the attainment of stable permanent housing.

Emergency Health
City Net will refer homeless neighbors to emergency health services to the extent that other customary emergency health services and treatments are unavailable or inaccessible to the homeless neighbor. An example of emergency health services to which City Net will refer homeless neighbors is outpatient treatment of urgent medical conditions by licensed medical professionals in community-based settings (e.g., streets, parks, and campgrounds) to those eligible participants unwilling or unable to access emergency shelter or an appropriate healthcare facility. City Net may assist healthcare professionals in the case management aspects of the following activities:
• Assessing health problems and developing treatment plans • Assistance in understanding health needs
• Providing directly or assisting to obtain appropriate emergency medical treatment • Providing medication and follow-up services.

Emergency Mental Health
City Net will refer homeless neighbors to emergency mental health services to the extent that other customary emergency mental health services and treatments are unavailable or inaccessible to the homeless neighbor. An example of emergency health services to which City Net will refer homeless neighbors is outpatient treatment of urgent mental health conditions by licensed professionals in community-based setting (e.g., streets, parks, and campgrounds) to those eligible participants unable or unwilling to access emergency shelter or an appropriate mental health care facility. City Net may assist mental healthcare professionals in the case management aspects of the following activities:
• Crisis intervention
• Prescription of psychotropic medications
• Explanation about the use and management of medications • Combinations of therapeutic approaches to address multiple problems.

Transportation
Occasionally, City Net may engage in transportation activities, including:
• Transporting unsheltered people to emergency shelters, emergency health, emergency mental health, or other service facilities
• Provision of public transportation for participants
• Transportation costs (bus tickets, gas, minor car repairs, etc.) to assist homeless neighbors to relocate out of the region, provided they have permanent housing there. • Assisting program participants to use public transportation.

Services for Special Populations
Services for special populations are essential services that have been tailored to address the special needs of homeless youths, victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking, including connections to services offered by rape crisis centers, domestic violence shelters, and other organizations that serve persons who meet the HUD homeless definition and have special needs.

Food and Emergency Services
Food and other emergency services will be given to clients primarily as they first move into housing and for emergency circumstances. During the duration of their tenancy, clients will be connected food banks and service agencies in the community as their primary resource for emergency needs.

COVID-19 Modifications
COVID-19 has caused widespread concern for the health and safety of those experiencing homelessness, as wellas concern for the environment and safety of greater community members and visitors. Living unsheltered may allow people to increase physical distance between themselves and others. However, sleeping outdoors does not provide protection from the environment, personal safety, adequate access to hygiene and sanitation facilities, or connection to services and healthcare.

During the pandemic, City Net’s street outreach and engagement staff are ensuring that unsheltered homeless neighbors have access to services and updated information about COVID-19, by working to:
• Provide information to educate people about COVID-19: where they can get tested, how it spreads, health impacts, common symptoms, and other features of the disease. • Use health messages and materials developed by credible public health sources, such as local and state public health departments or the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
• Provide educational materials about COVID-19 for non-English speakers, those with low literacy or intellectual disabilities, and people who are hearing or vision impaired. • Ensure communication with clients about changes in homeless services policies and/or changes in physical location of services such as food, water, hygiene facilities, regular healthcare, and behavioral health resources.
• Provide health and hygiene interventions:
• Recommend that all clients wear masks any time they are around other people, noting exceptions suchas young children under age 2, anyone who has trouble breathing, or is unconscious, incapacitated, or otherwise unable to remove the mask without assistance. • Provide clients with hygiene materials including items such as hand sanitizer, soap, shampoo, cleansing wipes, socks, blankets, non-perishable snacks, bottled water, sunscreen, gloves, toothbrush, toothpaste,and other items depending on client needs. • Discourage clients from spending time in crowded places or gathering in large groups, for example at locations where food, water, or hygiene supplies are being distributed. • If it is not possible for clients and staff to avoid crowded places, encourage spreading out (at least 6 feet between people) to the extent possible.
• Encourage proper waste disposal to prevent spread of disease and minimize risk. • Continue providing linkages to homeless services, housing, medical, mental health, and substance use treatment, including provision of medication-assisted therapies. • Maintain up-to-date contact information and areas frequented for each person. • Coordinate, integrate, and leverage resources to maximize impact of services for individuals who are experiencing homelessness.
• Engage individuals and families not yet working with a CES Partner Agency, with a primary focus on unsheltered families and individuals in encampments. • Conduct frequent visits to encampments known to have persons experiencing homelessness throughout the city.

Data Policy
The information City Net collects about individuals and families who access our services is confidentially stored in a local electronic database called the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS). HMIS securely records information (data) about people accessing housing and homeless services, which may include, but is not limited to, names and contact information, birthdates, demographic information, self-reported medical information, veteran status, disability status, etc. Under the HMIS Data-Sharing Agreement, the individual client data of those who consent to have their information stored in HMIS is only viewable by qualified staff at each participating agency. In order to participate in HMIS, leaders at each agency must sign an Agency Agreement that includes a commitment to protecting client data and maintaining confidentiality, and agency staff must pass multiple trainings that each go over the importance of client privacy.

City Net is accountable to our HMIS Data-Sharing partners, to the Orange County Continuum of Care, and to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to maintain the privacy and security of the confidential personal information we collect about our clients and their families. Aside from these legal and funding-related obligations, we also believe we have an ethical responsibility to our clients to not share their personal data in ways to which they’ve not agreed. To ensure City Net's commitment to excellent data collection, privacy and security, analysis and reporting practices, City Net does not authorize external agencies to complete these functions on our behalf except in very limited circumstances and only with prior written approval and with City Net's full participation in all data reporting and analysis. This is so that City Net can responsibly provide context and analysis for the data City Net collects within collaborative efforts to coordinate the most effective services for our homeless neighbors, better understand homelessness in our community, assess the types of resources needed in our local area, and participate in generating aggregate statistical reports to HUD, which help to improve policy and bring adequate funding of services for the most vulnerable populations in our community, and so City Net can assure its ethical and legal responsibilities to homeless neighbors to not share their data in ways to which they have not agree.

EXHIBIT "B"
BUDGET
June 2, 2026
TO: City Council

REQUESTED
BY:

Kimberly Ganimian, Finance Director

APPROVED
BY:

Robert A. Johnson, City Manager
SUBJECT: Sixth Amendment to the CR&R Solid Waste Franchise Agreement and Annual Rate Adjustment RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Conduct a public hearing to receive public comment and accept any protests.

2. Adopt Resolution 4129 - Approving the Sixth Amendment to the Franchise Agreement between the City of San Jacinto and CR&R Incorporated and the annual rate adjustments for solid waste collection and handling services.

DISCUSSION:

The City has an exclusive franchise agreement with CR&R Incorporated (CR&R) for the collection and handling of solid waste, recyclables, organic waste, and related services within the City of San Jacinto. Rates charged to residential and commercial customers are established under the Franchise Agreement and are adjusted annually based on inflationary indices and disposal fee pass‑through costs.

The Franchise Agreement has been amended five times since its adoption in 2005 to incorporate legislative requirements, update rate methodologies, and modify service components. CR&R submitted its annual adjustment request for Fiscal Year 2026‑27 on March 10, 2026, in accordance with the procedures established in the Fourth Amendment (2020) and reaffirmed in subsequent amendments.

The Franchise Agreement with CR&R specifies the circumstances required to annually adjust the rates for services. Per the agreement, these rates shall be adjusted each July 1st to reflect the changes in various applicable indices. The rates for both residential and commercial services will adjust July 1, 2026 for fiscal year 2026-2027. Based on data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) for January 2025 through December 2025, the Consumer Price Index (CPI) increased by 2.94%. In addition, the County of Riverside’s Waste Management Department has indicated that they will adjust their disposal rate by 3.28% from $43.63 per ton to $45.06 per ton. As permitted under the Franchise Agreement, these factors result in adjustments to residential, commercial, and ancillary service rates for the upcoming fiscal year.

Solid waste charges are determined based on the type of customer, and type of service provided to the customer which includes the frequency of service, and the type and size of container serving the property. The rate for the typical residential customer, consisting of three 96-gallon carts serviced weekly, will increase by $1.27, from $32.92 per month to $34.19 per month. The standard commercial 3-cubic yard bin with weekly service will increase $10.61 a month from $277.69 to $288.30 per month, and a 10-yard roll-off box will increase from $365.76 to $380.04 per month for a $14.28 increase. The adjusted rates are incorporated into 2026-2027 CR&R Rate Schedule, which replaces the prior Exhibit B in its entirety.

The Sixth Amendment memorializes the City’s approval of the FY 2026‑27 rate adjustments and updates Exhibit B to reflect the new rate schedule. Further, the Sixth Amendment allows for annual adjustments due to inflation and to pass through costs in wholesale service, commencing July 1, 2027, and any time thereafter through and including July 1, 2031. No other provisions of the Franchise Agreement are modified.

Based on the data supplied by both the BLS and the County of Riverside, CR&R prepared proposed rate schedules which pass these adjustments through to the various service rates. The proposed rate schedules for Solid Waste Charges attached to this report are for the period of July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2027.

Public Hearing Notice
In accordance with Proposition 218 requirements, a 45-day notice of the proposed Franchise Agreement Amendment and rate increase was sent to property owners and solid waste customers explaining the proposed residential and non-residential solid waste collection increase. The notice was provided in compliance with the procedures outlined in Proposition 218 and the California Constitution Article 13D. Cost increases will be passed through to the customer.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Solid waste collection, recycling and handling services for residential and commercial customers are paid for by the residential users, property owner or business owner receiving the service. No additional costs will be incurred by the City of San Jacinto.

Attachments
CR&R FY26-27 Rates.pdf
CRR_6th_Amendment_Reso.pdf

Resolution No. 4129

STATE OF CALIFORNIA) RESOLUTION NO. 4129
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss

CITY OF SAN JACINTO)

SIXTH AMENDMENT TO THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT

BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO AND CR&R INCORPORATED
WHEREAS, the City of San Jacinto recognizes that the proper collection and disposal of all solid waste created, produced or brought into the City is a significant health and safety issue;
WHEREAS, CITY and CONTRACTOR entered into a certain Agreement for the Collection and Handling of Solid Waste dated March 17, 2005 (the “2005 Franchise Agreement”);
WHEREAS, CITY and CONTRACTOR entered into a certain First Amendment to the Franchise Agreement between The City of San Jacinto and CR&R Incorporated dated April 15, 2010 (the “First Amendment”); WHEREAS, CITY and CONTRACTOR entered into a certain Second Amendment to the Franchise Agreement between The City of San Jacinto and CR&R Incorporated dated December 17, 2012 (the “Second Amendment”); WHEREAS, CITY and CONTRACTOR entered into a certain Third Amendment to the Franchise Agreement between The City of San Jacinto and CR&R Incorporated dated January 3, 2017 (the “Third Amendment”); WHEREAS, CITY and CONTRACTOR entered into a certain Fourth Amendment to the Franchise Agreement between The City of San Jacinto and CR&R Incorporated dated June 16, 2020 (the “Fourth Amendment”); WHEREAS, CITY and CONTRACTOR entered into a certain Fifth Amendment to the Franchise Agreement between The City of San Jacinto and CR&R Incorporated dated June 30, 2022 (the “Fifth Amendment”); WHEREAS, Section 15F of the 2005 Franchise Agreement provides that any amendment thereto must be in a written form duly executed by the parties in order to be valid; and
WHEREAS, CITY and CONTRACTOR desire to amend their 2005 Franchise Agreement, their 2010 First Amendment, their 2012 Second Amendment, their 2017 Third Amendment, their 2020 Fourth Amendment, and their 2022 Fifth Amendment in order to provide for certain service enhancements and address certain changes in the Bureau of Labor Statistics indexes.

Resolution No. 4129

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:

1. Section 8.d. “Annual Adjustment of Rates” of the 2005 Exclusive Franchise Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced as follows:

Franchise Agreement Inflationary Indices Rate Adjustments Solid Waste Charges will be adjusted annually for inflation and to pass through costs in wholesale service, commencing July 1, 2026, and any time thereafter through and including July 1, 2030, as follows:

1. Service Component Formula:
a. Residential: (Solid Waste Charge x 85.5%) x 100% of the percentage increase or decrease in the Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers within the Riverside-San BernardinoOntario, CA. areas during the prior calendar year (Series ID CUURS49CSA0) (“CPI”)
b. Commercial: (Solid Waste Charge x 79%) x CPI

2. Landfill Tipping Fee Formula:
a. Residential: (Solid Waste Charge x 14.5%) x 100% of the percentage increase or decrease in the rates adopted by the County of Riverside (“County Rate Increase”)
b. Commercial: (Solid Waste Charge x 21%) x County Rate Increase

3. Commercial Organic Rates CPI Formula:
a. Service: (Service Component Rate x CPI)
b. Digester: (Digester Component Rate x County Rate Increase) All other rates in the approved rate schedule of Solid Waste Charges including, but not limited to, various fees and roll-off haul rates, shall also be adjusted by 100% of the change in the CPI. The comparison shall be made for each calendar year (Annual Change) during the term thereof and shall be effective each July 1st. The pass-through adjustments are referred to collectively as the “Pass-Through Adjustments.”
The Pass-Through Adjustments shall be assumed for the five-year period identified above so that annual increases effective July 1, 2027 through July 1, 2031 shall be automatic upon the 30-day notice required under Government Code Section 53756(d). The Solid Waste Charges shall not increase by more than 15% in any fiscal year as a result of the Pass-Through Adjustments.

WHEREAS, the City has duly noticed the property owners and rate payers prior to 45 days of the public hearing in accordance with the noticing requirements of Proposition 218 and California Constitution article 13D. Such notice was Resolution No. 4129

delivered by regular U.S. mail to the property owners based on the latest available county tax roll and each rate payer based each known postal address. The City understands that not all property owners are users of the service; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED determined and ordered by the City Council of the City of San Jacinto, California, as follows:
1) Contractor is not in default of exclusive contract for collection and disposal of solid waste and recycling services.
2) Increase all solid waste and recycling rates as determined by the Solid Waste Recycling Rate Schedule for Billings after July 1, 2026, which is hereby attached and a part of this resolution. Beginning on July 1, 2026, and each July 1 thereafter, the fees may be increased by the City in accordance with this agreement
3) Establishment of solid waste rates in this resolution supersedes any and all prior resolutions.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the San Jacinto City Council on the 2
nd day of June, 2026 by the following vote:

AYES:

NAYS:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

CITY OF SAN JACINTO:
______________
Crystal Ruiz, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________
Julia Espinoza, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Best Best and Krieger, LLP
___________________________
Craig Hayes, City Attorney

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
Resolution No. 4129

COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE)ss

CITY OF SAN JACINTO )

CERTIFICATION
I, Julia Espinoza, City Clerk of the City of San Jacinto, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 4129 was passed, adopted, and approved at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of San Jacinto held on the 2nd day of June, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NAYS:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL this 2
nd day of June 2026.
______________________________
Julia Espinoza, City Clerk
City of San Jacinto
June 2, 2026
TO: City Council

REQUESTED
BY:

Stuart McKibbin

APPROVED
BY:

Robert A. Johnson, City Manager
SUBJECT: FY 26/27 Capital Improvement Program Engineering Update RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file an update of the City's Capital Improvement Program for FY 26/27.

DISCUSSION:

The City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is an important mechanism for implementing the goals, policies, and recommendations of the General Plan. The City has a 5-year CIP that covers Fiscal Year (FY) 2026-27 through FY 2030-31.

This presentation serves to update the Council on recently constructed CIP projects, planned projects for FY 26-27, and to highlight certain projects for later Fiscal Years.

OVERVIEW:

The purpose of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is to summarize the milestone activities for the five (5) year CIP, starting in FY 26/27 and ending FY 30/31. The CIP Program guide provides a general overview of the CIP by highlighting significant projects, CIP process improvements, accomplishments, and provides a preview of upcoming projects.

The City’s CIP is a compilation of Engineering’s improvement projects financed by City Council adopted funding source budgets. CIP projects provide improvements and/or expansions to the City’s existing infrastructure, assets, and systems. Projects are designed to enhance the overall quality of life, improve the public right of way and facilities, improve safety, and meet the goals of the City’s Circulation Element.

Completed CIP Projects in FY 25/26
Ongoing Projects (Currently Under Construction)
Upcoming Projects

Upcoming Projects
FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact to the general fund at this time.

ATTACHMENTS:

San Jacinto Council FY26_27 CIP Slideshow
Attachments
San Jacinto CIP FY26_27 Slideshow.pdf
City of San Jacinto
Engineering Department
Capital Improvement Program
Fiscal Year 2026-2027
Capital Improvement Program
Overview
Fiscal Year
2025/2026
Fiscal Year
2026/2027
Beyond Fiscal Year
2026/2027
$5,225,000 $29,500,000 $49,250,000
Completed Projects in FY 2025/2026
23-003 Mistletoe Park
Restroom Improvements
• Bid Amount: $560,000
• Actual cost: $600,000
• Completed: December 2025
• Funding Source: CDBG
23-003 Mistletoe Park
Restroom Improvements
24-001 State Street
Improvements from 9th
Street to Idyllwild Drive
Street Improvement Project
& Shaver St/San Jacinto Ave.

Pavement Rehabilitation
• Bid Amount: $4,439,230
• Actual cost: $4,279,000
• Completed: September 2025
• Funding Source: Measure A
ARPA
DIF: Streets
24-001 State Street
Improvements from 9th
Street to Idyllwild Drive
Street Improvement Project
& Shaver St/San Jacinto Ave.

Pavement Rehabilitation
24-002 Warren Road Minor
Drainage Improvement
Project
• Bid Amount: $331,750
• Actual cost: $342,190
• Completed: May 2025
• Funding Source: Special Subdivision
Fund (KB Homes)
RCFCD
24-002 Warren Road Minor Drainage
Improvement Project
Construction Phase
Ongoing Projects
06-145 Esplanade
Avenue Widening
• Bid Amount: $8,083,000
• Estimated Total: $8,300,000
• Anticipated Completion: January 2027
• Funding Source: TUMF, Measure A,
City of Hemet, MARA,
EMWD

Upcoming Projects FY 2026/2027
15-003 San Jacinto MDP
Line E-2 Storm Drain
Improvement Project
• Budgeted Amount: $4,858,871
• Estimated Cost: $8,900,00
• Anticipated Completion: Spring 2027
• Funding Source: Flood Control Fund,
DIF: Streets
22-002 Lyon Ave
Pedestrian Safety
Improvement Project
(Phase 2)
• Budgeted Amount: $856,000
• Estimated Cost: $820,000
• Anticipated Completion: Winter 2026/27
• Funding Source: SB821, Measure A
22-004 Warren Road
Widening: Upperline
Dr to Ramona Blvd
Improvement Project
(TUMF)
• Budgeted Amount: $4,692,980
• Estimated Cost: $10,400,000
• Anticipated Completion: Summer 2027
• Funding Source: TUMF, Measure A
22-012 Sanderson
Ave Culvert Repair
• Budgeted Amount: $175,000
• Estimated Cost: $254,000
• Anticipated Completion: Spring 2027
• Funding Source: RCFCD
25-003 Cottonwood
Ave Rehab Between
State St and Palm Ave
• Budgeted Amount: $765,000
• Estimated Cost: $766,000
• Anticipated Completion: Winter 2026/27
• Funding Source: Measure A
26-005 Crosswalk
Improvements at
1st St/Estudillo Ave and
1st St/Pico Ave
• Budgeted Amount: $252,000
• Estimated Cost: $252,000
• Anticipated Completion: Summer 2026
• Funding Source: Measure A
Upcoming Projects Beyond
FY 2026/2027
20-002 Citywide
Traffic Signal Update
Project (Phase 2)
• Budgeted Amount: $189,000
• Estimated Cost: $980,000
• Anticipated Completion: Fall 2027
• Funding Source: DIF: Streets
21-002 State Street
Widening Project:

Quandt Ranch Rd to San
Jacinto River (TUMF)
• Budgeted Amount: $1,045,543
• Estimated Cost: $4,430,500
• Anticipated Completion: Fall 2027
• Funding Source: TUMF, Measure A
• Construction contract will include San
Jacinto MDP Line H
21-005 San Jacinto Ave
Safety Improvement
Project: Walmart
Entrance to Menlo
• Budgeted Amount: $766,000
• Estimated Cost: $879,000
• Anticipated Completion: Spring 2027
• Funding Source: HSIP, Measure A, RMRA
22-001 San Jacinto MDP
Line G-3 Channel
Improvement Project
• Budgeted Amount: $1,780,000
• Estimated Cost: $1,850,000
• Anticipated Completion: TBD
• Funding Source: RCFCD
22-003 Parkside
Minor Drainage
Improvement Project
• Budgeted Amount: $238,000
• Estimated Cost: $255,000
• Anticipated Completion: Fall 2027
• Funding Source: LLPD Zone 46, RCFCD
25-002 Esplanade Ave
Rehab Between State
St and San Jacinto
Ave
• Budgeted Amount: $1,410,000
• Estimated Cost: $1,410,000
• Anticipated Completion: Fall 2027
• Funding Source: Measure A
25-004 Main St Rehab
between Ramona
Expwy and Hewitt St
• Budgeted Amount: $986,000
• Estimated Cost: $986,000
• Anticipated Completion: Fall 2027
• Funding Source: Measure A
26-004 Rue Pinot Blanc
and Rue Merlot Traffic
Signal
• Budgeted Amount: $350,000
• Estimated Cost: $350,000
• Anticipated Completion: TBD
• Funding Source: DIF: Signal Fund 149
26-006 Cottonwood
and Lyon Traffic Signal
• Budgeted Amount: $755,000
• Estimated Cost: $755,000
• Anticipated Completion: TBD
• Funding Source: Measure A
26-007 Ramona Expwy
Repave from
Sanderson to Warren
• Budgeted Amount: $2,000,000.00
• Estimated Cost: $12,000,000
• Anticipated Completion: TBD
• Funding Source: County, RCTC, RMRA, Measure A
• This is a joint project with RCTC,
Riverside County Transportation Dept,
and City of San Jacinto. San Jacinto will
be responsible for 20% of construction
cost within City right-of-way.
26-008 Ramona Blvd
Rehab From State St to
5 Points Intersection
• Budgeted Amount: $1,450,000.00
• Estimated Cost: $1,410,000
• Anticipated Completion: Summer 2028
• Funding Source: RMRA
26-009 San Jacinto
MDP Line E-4 Channel
Improvement Project
• Budgeted Amount: $1,040,000
• Estimated Cost: $3,600,000
• Anticipated Completion: TBD
• Funding Source: RCFCD
• City to request extra funds from
Flood Control for expanded scope.
26-010 San Jacinto
MDP Line J Channel
Improvement Project
• Budgeted Amount: $4,040,000
• Estimated Cost: $4,038,000
• Anticipated Completion: TBD
• Funding Source: RCFCD
26-011 Esplanade Ave
and Las Rosas Dr
Improvements
• Budgeted Amount: $751,000
• Estimated Cost: $752,000
• Anticipated Completion: Fall 2028
• Funding Source: RMRA
New CIP Projects
San Jacinto MDP
Line H Storm Drain
Improvement Project
• Budgeted Amount: $6,010,000
• Estimated Cost: $6,050,000
• Anticipated Completion: Fall 2027
• Funding Source: RCFCD
• Construction contract will include CIP# 21-002
State Street Widening Project
State St Streetlight
Improvements Project
• Budgeted Amount: N/A
• Estimated Cost: $1,090,000
• Anticipated Completion: Fall 2028
• Funding Source: Need to identify
funding sources.

Hewitt St & 7th St
Traffic Signal
• Budgeted Amount: $350,000
• Estimated Cost: $600,000
• Anticipated Completion: TBD
• Funding Source: Developer $350K
Kesha Ct, Wente Ct,
and Napa Ct Pavement
Rehab
• Budgeted Amount: N/A
• Estimated Cost: $630,000
• Anticipated Completion: TBD
• Funding Source: Need to identify
funding sources.

Ramona Expy Rehab
Between Sanderson
Ave and Lyon Ave
• Budgeted Amount: N/A
• Estimated Cost: $3,675,000
• Anticipated Completion: TBD
• Funding Source: Need to identify
funding sources.

Eagle Road & Community
College Drive Pavement
Improvements
• Budgeted Amount: N/A
• Estimated Cost: $693,000
• Anticipated Completion: TBD
• Funding Source: RMRA
2026 San Jacinto
Striping & Safety
Improvements
• Budgeted Amount: N/A
• Estimated Cost: $400,000
• Anticipated Completion: TBD
• Funding Source: RMRA, Measure A
San Jacinto Catch
Basin Retrofit Project
• Budgeted Amount: N/A
• Estimated Cost: $321,000
• Anticipated Completion: TBD
• Funding Source: Public Utilities
Budget
San Jacinto MDP Line
E-1 Channel
Improvement Project
• Budgeted Amount: N/A
• Estimated Cost: $372,000
• Anticipated Completion: TBD
• Funding Source: City will apply for
RCFD funding.

Park Avenue
Pavement Rehab
• Budgeted Amount: N/A
• Estimated Cost: $734,000
• Anticipated Completion: TBD
• Funding Source: Need to identify
funding sources.

Ramona Expressway
Stage 4
• Budgeted Amount: N/A
• Estimated Cost: $1,000,000
• Anticipated Completion: TBD
• Funding Source: TUMF (pending approval)
Questions?
June 2, 2026
TO: City Council

REQUESTED
BY:

Stuart McKibbin

APPROVED
BY:

Robert A. Johnson, City Manager
SUBJECT: Revision to Line E of the San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council:

1. DETERMINE that, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164, that the proposed Addendum to the previously adopted Environmental Impact Report for the San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan (MDP) adequately addresses the Revision to Line E of the MDP, and that no subsequent or supplemental environmental review is required because the revision to Line E would not result in new or more significant environmental impacts than those previously analyzed and no substantial changes in circumstances have occurred that would create new or more significant environmental impacts.

2. APPROVE the revision to Line E of the San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan, in conformance with the Preliminary Design Report;

3. DIRECT Staff to revise the San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan Map to reflect the modifications in the Preliminary Design Report.

DISCUSSION:

The Master Drainage Plan for the San Jacinto Valley (SJV-MDP) was adopted in October 2015 by the Board of Supervisors for the Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD). The SJV-MDP revised and replaced the San Jacinto Master Drainage Plan (SJMDP) and Northwest Hemet Master Drainage Plan (NW Hemet MDP) with a new master drainage plan for those areas plus additional areas to the west and north of the SJMDP and NW Hemet MDP. The boundaries of the SJV-MDP encompass approximately 27.4 square miles and are generally bounded by the San Jacinto River to the north, Meridian Street to the east, Florida Avenue to the south, and Warren Road to the west. The SJV-MDP includes land within the cities of San Jacinto and Hemet, in addition to unincorporated Riverside County.

Master Drainage Plans by their very nature, are living documents. They provide a baseline strategy that can be modified as areas build out. Such is the case with the SJV-MDP, which identifies, at a conceptual level, general alignments and locations of drainage facilities. Precise facility locations are dictated by conditions existing at the time each facility is designed. Likewise, the facility sizes identified in the SJV-MDP are preliminary.

An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the SJV- MDP and the San Jacinto Regional Area Drainage Plan (ADP) Amendment was certified by the San Jacinto City Council on January 14, 2013. The certified EIR analyzed the current alignment of MDP facilities (State Clearinghouse No. 2009041077).

On January 14, 2013, the San Jacinto City Council adopted Resolution No. 3454; certifying the SJV-MDP EIR, adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), and adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations. That same date, the City Council also adopted Resolution No. 3455; adopting the San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan, San Jacinto Regional Area Drainage Plan Amendment, and a revised interim drainage fee.

The SJV-MDP EIR provides a programmatic level analysis of the SJV-MDP and San Jacinto Valley Regional Area Drainage Plan Amendment (SJV-ADP Amendment) based on the conceptual location of the facilities identified in the SJV-MDP. Pursuant to Section 15168 of the State CEQA Guidelines, a program level environmental analysis enabled the City to examine the overall effects of implementing the SJV-MDP and SJV-ADP Amendment and approve that project. Following this approach, when individual SJV-MDP Facilities, also referred to as implementing projects, are proposed, the City, and/or RCFCWCD are required to examine each MDP Facility to determine if its effects were fully analyzed in the SJV-MDP EIR or if an additional facility-specific environmental document is required.

Line E is a planned regional drainage facility within the SJV-MDP that would provide a service to an approximately 1,870-acre tributary area. Construction of Line E does not remove properties from the 100-Year floodplain of the San Jacinto River. This will be accomplished by elevating them from the San Jacinto River Floodplain. Line E as identified in the SJV-MDP and evaluated in the SJV-MDP EIR is an earthen lined channel, extending upstream and north from the San Jacinto Reservoir west of Sanderson Avenue, turning west crossing Sanderson Avenue west continuing west parallel to and south of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California’s (Metropolitan’s) Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 easement to SJV-MDP Line Z. The Line E-Y-Z Confluence Basin is identified in the SJVMDP and evaluated in the SJV-MDP EIR as an unlined basin.

A Preliminary Design Report (PDR) and 30% long-axis plan were initiated for the construction of Line E. As the Project is within the jurisdiction of City of San Jacinto, Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District, and impacts major existing or planned facilities operated by Eastern Municipal Water District (“EMWD”), Municipal Water District (“MWD”), and Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), detailed coordination between all 5 agencies was required. During these meetings constraints were identified and an alternative alignment was identified during a process to avoid these constraints. Specifically, the proposed project alignment intentionally avoids the EMWD and MWD easements for pipelines located near the Project inlet, and, at the same time avoids the riparian habitat around the north side of the San Jacinto Reservoir. This has resulted in no hard connection between Line E and the San Jacinto Reservoir Spillway, as well as no hard connection between Line E and Line E-2. Maintenance access within private property has been considered and provided for in the Project.

There is preliminary evidence of biological resources on the Chen Fei property (APN 436-010-003) located north of the proposed Golden Ocean Realty properties (APNs 436-030-001 and 436-170-001), as well as potentially environmentally sensitive areas along the south side of the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 MWD right-of-way west of Sanderson Avenue, both of which the Project will avoid with the proposed design. The proposed Project also took into consideration several future projects planned by public agencies in the same area, such as RCTC and EMWD and was realigned to avoid conflicts with major sewer infrastructure located where the MDP planned a crossing of Sanderson Avenue near the De Anza Lift Station. Furthermore, the property, right-of-way acquisition is simplified and better controlled with the proposed alignment.

From upstream to downstream, the proposed Line E Channel begins north (downstream) of the San Jacinto Reservoir Spillway and north of Metropolitan’s Casa Loma Barrel No. 2 easement, continuing north as an earthen trapezoidal channel parallel to, and east of, Sanderson Avenue through an agricultural parcel (APN 436-030-004), turning west underneath Sanderson Avenue through APN 436-010-003 and turning north, then west before future Record Road through APNs 432-030-010, 432-030-012, and 432-030-006 to the proposed Confluence Basin. The outflows from the proposed Confluence Basin would be conveyed northerly across Metropolitan’s Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 and outflow at the terminus of Line E to an existing low-flow drainage channel that would, at some point in the future, be constructed as an ultimate MDP facility (“Line Z”), but is currently in interim condition.

As part of the design of the proposed Project, multiple meetings were conducted to solicit input on the proposed design. In addition, the alignment, hydraulics, and hydrology for the Project underwent two rounds of review with RCFC&WCD prior to the final PDR; the first in October of 2023 and second in December of 2023. RCFC&WCD reviewed the full PDR in February of 2024. An additional review was completed in April of 2024. A maintenance, revised alignment, and hydraulics review was completed by RCFC&WCD in October of 2024.

There have been 2 reviews conducted by MWD. The first in November of 2024, where MWD reviewed the PDR, Geotechnical Report, and Structural Report and the second in February of 2025, with MWD approval on March 3, 2025.

Because the Line E Channel would be a regional flood control facility pursuant to the adopted SJV-MDP, the RCFC&WCD would need to be able to maintain the Line E Channel and corresponding access roads throughout the life of the facility. Specifically, RCFC&WCD would maintain the training berms and inlet line and grade via a drainage easement and slope easement for the portion of the Line E channel, plus access roads, RCBs and drop structures, located within right-of-way that would be owned by RCFC&WCD within APNs 436-170-001, 436-030- 004, 436-010-003, and 430-100-016. RCFC&WCD would maintain the portion of Line E, that crosses over the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 and Metropolitan right-of-way via a maintenance easement. Alignment of the Line E Channel through private property will require dedication from applicable property owners as a condition of development, consent of applicable property owners, or formal acquisition, The City of San Jacinto would maintain the Confluence Basin and pump, and the segment of the Line E Channel with 15-foot access roads within APNs 432-030-011, 432-030-012 and 432-030-010.

The result of the proposed Project meets the objective to remove flooding risk to the area from the upstream tributary area, and Line E conveys the modeled 100-Year flow rates within the design parameters required by RCFC&WCD.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code Sections 21000– 21177), the City of San Jacinto (hereinafter “San Jacinto” or “the City”), as Lead Agency, the City of Hemet and Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, as Responsible Agencies, prepared the SJV-MDP EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 200904177). The SJV-MDP EIR was circulated for a 30-day public review period from May 17, 2010 to June 30, 2010, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15073. On January 14, 2013, the San Jacinto City Council adopted Resolution No. 3454; certifying the SJV-MDP EIR, adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), and adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations. That same date, the City Council also adopted Resolution No. 3455; adopting the San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan, San Jacinto Regional Area Drainage Plan Amendment, and a revised interim drainage fee.

On October 6, 2015, Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Board of Supervisors, as Responsible Agency, adopted Resolution F2015-06 which, considered the SJV-MDP EIR certified by the City, made Responsible Agency Findings, adopted the City’s MMRP, and adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations.

This resolution also rescinded the San Jacinto Area Master Drainage Plan and the Northwest Hemet Master Drainage Plan, and approved the SJV-MDP.

The SJV-MDP EIR provides a programmatic level analysis of the SJV-MDP and San Jacinto Valley Regional Area Drainage Plan Amendment (SJV-ADP Amendment) based on the conceptual location of the facilities identified in the SJV-MDP. Pursuant to Section 15168 of the State CEQA Guidelines, a program level environmental analysis enabled the City to examine the overall effects of implementing the SJV-MDP and SJV-ADP Amendment and approve that project. Following this approach, when individual SJV-MDP Facilities, also referred to as implementing projects or MDP Facilities. are proposed, the City, Hemet, and/or RCFCWCD are required to examine each MDP Facility to determine if its effects were fully analyzed in the SJV-MDP EIR or if an additional facility-specific environmental document, such as a Notice of Exemption (NOE), Addendum, Initial Study leading to a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration, Supplemental EIR, or Subsequent EIR is required. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 1.0-7.)
The process for preparing an Addendum to a previously certified EIR is set forth in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15164. Addendum No. 1 to the SJV MDP EIR is included as Appendix A to the Staff Report. Based on the Findings included in Section 3 of the Addendum, the City has reviewed the Line E Project design report in light of the requirements defined under the State CEQA Guidelines using the Supplemental Environmental Checklist Form in Section 4 of the Addendum. The City, as the CEQA lead agency, has determined that none of the above conditions requiring preparation of a subsequent or supplemental MND or EIR apply. Therefore, an Addendum to the San Jacinto Master Drainage Plan (MDP) EIR is the appropriate environmental documentation for the Line E Project.

ATTACHMENTS:

Final SJV MDP Line E EIR Addendum - May 2026
Appendix A.1 - Structures Report
Appendix A.2 Graft Geotechnical Investigation
Appendix B - Long Axis Plan
Appendix C - CalEEMod Output
Appendix D.1 - Biological Technical Report (no appendices) Appendix D.2 - DBESP Analysis
Appendix D.2.1 - Line E DEBSP Approval Email 4-27-2026
Appendix D.3 - CBB Survey Results Report
Appendix E - Cultural Resources Report
Appendix F - Paleontological Resources Assessment
Appendix G - Energy Tables
Appendix H.1 - Phase I ESA
Appendix H.2 - Phase II ESA
FINAL PDR REPORT MDP LINE E 5-2025
Attachments
Final SJV MDP Line E EIR Addendum - May 2026.pdf
Appendix A.1 - Structures Report.pdf
Appendix A.2 Graft Geotechnical Investigation.pdf
Appendix B - Long Axis Plan.pdf
Appendix C - CalEEMod Output.pdf
Appendix D.1 - Biological Technical Report (no appendices).pdf Appendix D.2 - DBESP Analysis.pdf
Appendix D.2.1 - Line E DEBSP Approval Email 4-27-2026.pdf Appendix D.3 - CBB Survey Results Report.pdf
Appendix E - Cultural Resources Report.pdf
Appendix F - Paleontological Resources Assessment.pdf
Appendix G - Energy Tables.pdf
Appendix H.1 - Phase I ESA.pdf
Appendix H.2 - Phase II ESA.pdf
FINAL PDR REPORT MDP LINE E 5-2025.pdf
Addendum No.1
to the
Environmental Impact Report
for the
San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan and
San Jacinto Regional Area Drainage Plan Amendment
(SCH # 2009041077)
for the
San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan Line E Project
Lead Agency:

City of San Jacinto
595 S. San Jacinto Avenue
San Jacinto, CA 92583
(951) 487-7330
Contact: Kevin White, Planning Manager
[email protected]
Prepared by:

Albert A. WEBB Associates
3788 McCray Avenue
Riverside CA 92506
(951) 686-1070
May 2026
Addendum No. 1 to the EIR for the San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan and San Jacinto Regional Area Drainage Plan Amendment for the Line E Project City of San Jacinto May 2026
i
Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND .........................................................................................1 PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT ........................................................................................1 SAN JACINTO VALLEY MASTER DRAINAGE PLAN ............................................................................. 2

2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................7 DRAINAGE FACILITIES......................................................................................................................7 CASA LOMA BARREL NO. 1 CROSSING........................................................................................... 11 PROPOSED LINE E ALIGNMENT COMPARED TO THE CONCEPTUAL MDP ALIGNMENT ................... 15 PROPOSED LINE E PROJECT HYDROLOGY COMPARED TO SJV-MDP HYDROLOGY....................... 17 MAINTENANCE ...............................................................................................................................24

3. REGULATORY BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS ......................................................................... 28

4. SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM ........................................................... 53

NEW SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OR SUBSTANTIALLY MORE SEVERE SIGNIFICANT

ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS COMPARED TO THOSE IDENTIFIED IN THE PREVIOUS CEQA DOCUMENT ....................................................................................................................................58 DETERMINATION: ...........................................................................................................................58 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ................................................................................. 60 A. AESTHETICS........................................................................................................................62 B. AGRICULTURE & FOREST RESOURCES............................................................................... 66 C. AIR QUALITY ........................................................................................................................................ 71 D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ................................................................................................... 78 E. CULTURAL RESOURCES.................................................................................................... 114 F. ENERGY ............................................................................................................................ 120 G. GEOLOGY AND SOILS ...................................................................................................................... 122 H. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ..................................................................................................... 132 I. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS........................................................................... 135 J. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY................................................................................... 143 K. LAND USE/PLANNING......................................................................................................... 151 L. MINERAL RESOURCES ...................................................................................................... 154 M. NOISE ................................................................................................................................................. 156 N. POPULATION AND HOUSING........................................................................................................... 160 O. PUBLIC SERVICES ............................................................................................................................ 162 P. RECREATION ..................................................................................................................... 165 Q. TRANSPORTATION ........................................................................................................................... 167 R. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES........................................................................................ 170 S. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS .................................................................................... 172 T. WILDFIRE........................................................................................................................... 175 U. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE .................................................................................. 178

5. EARLIER ANALYSIS/REFERENCES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE ................................... 182 Addendum No. 1 to the EIR for the San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan and San Jacinto Regional Area Drainage Plan Amendment for the Line E Project City of San Jacinto May 2026
ii
List of Figures
Figure 1 – San Jacinto Valley MDP Boundary ........................................................................................................ 3 Figure 2 – San Jacinto Valley MDP Facilities ......................................................................................................... 5 Figure 3 – Regional Map......................................................................................................................................... 8 Figure 4 – Project Map ............................................................................................................................................ 9 Figure 5 – Project Components ............................................................................................................................ 10 Figure 6 – MDP EIR Alignment Compared to Addendum Alignment ................................................................... 16 Figure 7 – Original MDP Hydrology & Facilities .................................................................................................... 18 Figure 8 – Revised MDP Hydrology & Facilities ................................................................................................... 19 Figure 9 – Local Flow Analysis ............................................................................................................................. 22 Figure 10 – Existing Local Drainage Patterns....................................................................................................... 23 Figure 11 – Lower Reach Maintenance Delineation ............................................................................................. 25 Figure 12 – Upper Reach Maintenance Delineation ............................................................................................. 26 Figure 13 – USGS Topographic Map.................................................................................................................... 55 Figure 14 – General Plan Land Use Designations................................................................................................ 56 Figure 15 – Zoning Designations .......................................................................................................................... 57 Figure 16 – Farmland Map.................................................................................................................................... 70 Figure 17– Smooth Tarplant................................................................................................................................ 102 Figure 18a-18e - Fairy Shrimp Survey Results ................................................................................................... 103 Figure 19 – LBV Survey Map .............................................................................................................................. 108 Figure 20 – BUOW Survey Map.......................................................................................................................... 109 Figure 21 – Vegetation Map................................................................................................................................ 110 Figure 22 – CDFW Jurisdictional Area................................................................................................................ 111 Figure 23 – Regional Board Jurisdictional Area.................................................................................................. 112 Figure 24 – MSHCP Riverine Areas ................................................................................................................... 113 Figure 25– Fault Location Map............................................................................................................................ 131 Figure 26– Existing Development ....................................................................................................................... 153 List of Tables
Table A – Acreage and Municipalities within the SJV-MDP.................................................................................... 4 Table B – Existing MDP Hydrology Compared to Proposed Line E Project Hydrology........................................ 17 Table C – Mitigation Measures.............................................................................................................................. 31 Table D – General Plan Land Use Designations .................................................................................................. 54 Table E – Zoning Designations ............................................................................................................................. 54 Table F – Estimated Maximum Daily Construction Emissions.............................................................................. 74 Table G – LST Results for Daily Construction Emissions..................................................................................... 76 Table H – Summary of Regional Board Jurisdiction ............................................................................................. 93 Table I – Summary of CDFW Jurisdiction ............................................................................................................. 94 Table J – Project Construction Equipment GHG Emissions ............................................................................... 133 Appendices
Appendix A.1 Structures Report
Appendix A.2 Draft Geotechnical Investigation
Appendix B Long Axis Plan
Appendix C CalEEMod Output
Appendix D.1 Biological Resource Technical Report
Appendix D.2 Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation Appendix D.2.1 DBESP Approval Email
Appendix D.3 CBB Focused Survey Report
Appendix E Cultural Resource Study
Appendix F Paleontological Assessment
Appendix G Energy Tables
Appendix H.1 Phase I Environmental Site Assessments
Addendum No. 1 to the EIR for the San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan and San Jacinto Regional Area Drainage Plan Amendment for the Line E Project City of San Jacinto May 2026
iii
Appendix H.2 Phase II Environmental Site Assessments
Addendum No. 1 to the EIR for the San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan and San Jacinto Regional Area Drainage Plan Amendment for the Line E Project City of San Jacinto May 2026
iv
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronyms Abbreviations
AB Assembly Bill
AE Applied Earthworks
ACOE U.S Army Corps of Engineers
AMSL Above Mean Sea Level
APE Area of Potential Effect
AQMP Air Quality Management Plan
Basin South Coast Air Basin
BMP Best Management Practices
BTR Biological Technical Report
CAPSSA Criteria Area Plant Species Survey Area
CARB California Air Resources Board
CBB Crotch’s bumble bee
CCR California Code of Regulations
CDFG California Porter-Cologne Act
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CESA California Endangered Species Act
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CG Commercial General
CGP Construction General Permit
CIDH Cast-in-drilled-hole
CNDDB California Natural Diversity Data Base
CRS Cultural Resources Study
CWA Clean Water Act
DBESP Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation CRHR California Register of Historical Resources
EDR Environmental Data Resources, Inc
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EMWD Eastern Municipal Water District
EPA California Environmental Protection Agency
ESAs Environmental Site Assessments
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
GHG Greenhouse Gases
HSJ Hemet-San Jacinto
HMMP Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan
HSC State Health and Safety Code
ITP Incidental Take Permit
LAPM Los Angeles pocket mouse
LBV Least Bell’s vireo
LST Localized Significance Thresholds
MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
MRZ Mineral Resource Zone
MSHCP Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan MWD or Metropolitan The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NCCP Natural Communities Conservation Plan
Addendum No. 1 to the EIR for the San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan and San Jacinto Regional Area Drainage Plan Amendment for the Line E Project City of San Jacinto May 2026
v
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronyms Abbreviations
NEPSSA Narrow Endemic Plants Species Survey Area
NHMLAC Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County
NOE Notice of Exemption
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
NW Hemet MDP Northwest Hemet Master Drainage Plan
OHWM Ordinary high water mark
OP Office Park
PBDB Paleobiology Database
PDR Preliminary Design Report
PRC Public Resources Code
PRMMP Paleontological Resources Mitigation Monitoring Plan RCA Regional Conservation Authority
RCB Reinforced concrete box
RCFCWCD Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District RCTC Riverside County Transportation Commission
RL Residential – Low Density
RM Residential Medium
ROW Right-of-way
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SBKR San Bernardino kangaroo rat
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SCE Southern California Edison
SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer
SJDC San Jacinto Development Code
SJFZ San Jacinto Fault Zone
SJMDP San Jacinto Master Drainage Plan
SJV-ADP San Jacinto Valley Regional Area Drainage Plan Amendment SJV-MDP San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan
SKR HCP Stephens’ Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan SLF Sacred Lands File
SP Specific Plan
SRA Source Receptor Area
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
TDA Treatment and Disposition Agreement
UCMP University of California Museum of Paleontology
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
VMT Vehicle miles traveled
WBWG Western Bat Working Group
WEAP Worker Environmental Awareness Program
WDR Waste Discharge Permit
WSC Western Science Center
WQMP Water Quality Management Plan
WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant
Addendum No. 1 to the EIR for the San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan and San Jacinto Regional Area Drainage Plan Amendment for the Line E Project City of San Jacinto May 2026
vi
Units of Measurement and Chemical Symbols
Unit/Symbol Measurement
CH4 Methane
CO Carbon monoxide
CO2E carbon dioxide equivalent
CY Cubic yards
hp horsepower
kW kilowatt
MTCO2E metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents
NOX Oxides of nitrogen
N2O Nitrous Oxide
PM-10 Particulate matter 2.5 to 10 microns in diameter
PM-2.5 Particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter 1 1. Introduction and Background
Addendum No. 1 to the EIR for the San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan and San Jacinto Regional Area Drainage Plan Amendment for the Line E Project analyzes the impacts associated with construction and operation of two of the facilities identified in the San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan (SJV-MDP), Line E and the Line E-Y-Z Confluence Basin, which are hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Line E Project” or “Project” in this Addendum. A full description of the proposed Line E Project is provided in Section 2, Project Description and Setting. The following paragraphs describe the approvals of the San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan and San Jacinto Regional Area Drainage Plan Amendment EIR (hereinafter “SJV-MDP EIR.”)
Previous Environmental Document
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code Sections 21000–21177), the City of San Jacinto (hereinafter “San Jacinto” or “the City”), as Lead Agency, the City of Hemet and Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, as Responsible Agencies, prepared the SJV-MDP EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 200904177). The SJV-MDP EIR was circulated for a 30-day public review period from May 17, 2010 to June 30, 2010, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15073. On January 14, 2013, the San Jacinto City Council adopted Resolution No. 3454; certifying the SJV-MDP EIR, adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), and adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations. That same date, the City Council also adopted Resolution No. 3455; adopting the San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan, San Jacinto Regional Area Drainage Plan Amendment, and a revised interim drainage fee. The SJV-MDP EIR and MMRP are available for review at the following locations:

City of San Jacinto
595 S. San Jacinto Ave.,
San Jacinto, CA 92583
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District 1995 Market St.

Riverside, CA 92501
On October 6, 2015, Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Board of Supervisors, as Responsible Agency, adopted Resolution F2015-06 which, considered the SJV-MDP EIR certified by the City, made Responsible Agency Findings, adopted the City’s MMRP, and adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations. This resolution also rescinded the San Jacinto Area Master Drainage Plan and the Northwest Hemet Master Drainage Plan, and approved the SJV-MDP.

The SJV-MDP EIR provides a programmatic level analysis of the SJV-MDP and San Jacinto Valley Regional Area Drainage Plan Amendment (SJV-ADP Amendment) based on the conceptual location of the facilities identified in the SJV-MDP. Pursuant to Section 15168 of the State CEQA Guidelines, a program level environmental analysis enabled the City to examine the overall effects of implementing the SJV-MDP and SJV-ADP Amendment and approve that project. Following this approach, when individual SJV-MDP Facilities, also referred to as implementing projects or MDP Facilities. are proposed, the City, Hemet, and/or RCFCWCD are required to examine each MDP Facility to determine if its effects were fully analyzed in the SJV-MDP EIR or if an additional facility-specific environmental document, such as a Notice of Exemption (NOE), Addendum, Initial Study leading to a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration, Supplemental EIR, or Subsequent EIR is required. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 1.0-7.) The SJV-MDP EIR identified the following impacts as significant and unavoidable: agricultural resources, air quality, and population/housing. Impacts to agricultural resources were determined to be significant and unavoidable because implementation of the SJV-MDP could support and encourage planned development per the San Jacinto, Riverside County, and Hemet General Plans within the boundaries of 2 the SJV-MDP. Based on the conceptual locations of MDP facilities, construction of the Line D Basin, which is anticipated to encompass approximately 15 acres, in addition to the open channels designated as Lines 1, 2, E, G-3, H, J-3, K, W, and X, which are anticipated to encompass approximately 122 acres would result in the direct conversion of approximately 137 acres of Important Farmland to a nonagricultural use by converting the property to flood control facilities. All of these facilities are within the City of San Jacinto except a small portion of Line 1, a portion of Line 2, most of Line J-3, and Line K, which were in unincorporated Riverside County at the time the SJV-MDP EIR was prepared.

Implementation of the SJV-MDP would also facilitate development consistent with the San Jacinto, Riverside County, and Hemet General Plans, which could indirectly convert Important Farmland to nonagricultural uses. (SJV-MDP EIR, pp. 3.2-12 – 3.12-13, 5.0-18.) Impacts to air quality resulting from implementation of the SJV-MDP were determined to be significant and unavoidable because depending on the facility or combination of MDP facilities constructed at any given time, SCAQMD regional significance thresholds for NOx, PM-10, and PM-2.5 and SCAQMD LSTs for PM-10 and PM-2.5 could be exceeded during construction. Although these are direct, short-term impacts that will cease once construction is complete, they remain unavoidable and are unmitigable because neither the City, Riverside County, or Hemet can control the number of facilities constructed at a given time. (SJV-MDP EIR, pp. 3.3-42 – 3.3-43,5.10-18.) Regarding impacts to population/housing, the SJV-MDP could indirectly induce growth by removing one potential barrier to growth through the provision of flood control infrastructure. The Hemet, San Jacinto, and Riverside County General Plans identify the type of development and growth that would be allowed within the boundaries of the SJV-MDP. The SJV-MDP does not propose any changes to the land uses from what is identified in the aforementioned General Plans; thus, potential indirect impacts from development in the MDP project area are not expected to exceed the potential impacts that have already been disclosed in the EIRs prepared for the Hemet, San Jacinto, and Riverside County General Plans.

However, because implementation of the SJV-MDP could indirectly induce substantial population growth in the MDP project area, impacts are considered significant. (SJV-MDP EIR, pp. 3.8-8, 5.0-18.) San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan Description
The SJV-MDP revised and replaced the San Jacinto Master Drainage Plan (SJMDP) and Northwest Hemet Master Drainage Plan (NW Hemet MDP) with a new master drainage plan for those areas plus additional areas to the west and north of the SJMDP and NW Hemet MDP. The boundaries of the SJVMDP encompass approximately 27.4 square miles and are generally bounded by the San Jacinto River to the north, Meridian Street to the east, Florida Avenue to the south, and Warren Road to the west as shown on Figure 1 – San Jacinto Valley MDP Boundary. The SJV-MDP includes land within the cities of San Jacinto and Hemet, in addition to unincorporated Riverside County as summarized in Table A – Acreages and Municipalities within the SJV-MDP on the page following Figure 1. \\brkpan01.webb.lan\WO4\2023\23-0007\GIS\PRO\Line E Addendum\project_map\project_map.aprx Map created 08 Jan 2025 Source: Digital Globe, March 2008.

Line E Addendum
Figure 1 - San Jacinto Valley MDP Boundary
I
San Jacinto River

WARREN RD

RAMONA EXPY

SANDERSON AVE

FLORIDA AVE

STATE ST

RAMONA BLVD

MENLO AVE

ESPLANADE AVE

PARK AVE

MERIDIAN ST

MAIN ST
RAMONA
EXPY

SOBOBA RD

GILMAN SPRINGS RD
² Imagery: Digital Globe, March 2008.

G:\2005\05-0519E\GIS\EIR_M
DP_Boundary.mxd
LEGEND
San Jacinto Valley MDP Boundary
Northwest Hemet MDP Boundary
San Jacinto MDP Boundary
4 Table A – Acreage and Municipalities within the SJV-MDP Municipality Approximate Acreage Portion of Total MDP Area San Jacinto 12,812 73.3%
Hemet 3,216 18.4%
Unincorporated County 1,449 8.3%
Total 17,476 100.0%
Source: SJV-MDP EIR, p. 2.0-1
The SJV-MDP presents an overview of the drainage problems within its boundaries and provides a conceptual solution to those problems. The SJV-MDP proposes a system of open channels (lined and unlined), underground storm drains, and four detention basins as shown on Figure 2 – San Jacinto Valley MDP Facilities. Master Drainage Plans by their very nature, are living documents. They provide a baseline strategy that can be modified as areas build out. Such is the case with the SJV-MDP, which identifies, at a conceptual level, general alignments and locations of drainage facilities; the precise alignments of which would be determined at the time an individual facility is designed. Precise facility locations would be dictated by conditions existing at the time each facility is designed. Likewise, the facility sizes identified in the SJV-MDP are preliminary. Final sizing would be determined based on detailed analysis performed at the design stage. The SJV-MDP proposes the construction of approximately 50 miles of drainage facilities. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 2.0-8.) The proposed SJV-MDP facilities, when constructed, would require maintenance in order to retain flood control capacity. Following construction of the facilities, it is expected that RCFCWCD would operate and maintain most of the SJV-MDP storm drains, channels, and basins. Maintenance of storm drains and concrete channels typically consists of keeping these facilities and their side drains clear of debris and sediment, as well as annual repair of access roads (at a rate of two miles per day), repair of fences (approximately three to four times per year), and removing graffiti. On rare occasions, major repairs may be required following damaging storm events. Thus, major grading would not routinely occur while maintaining the underground storm drains and open concrete channels. To maintain the constructed facilities, RCFCWCD would occasionally use equipment similar to the types used to construct the proposed facilities. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 2.0-14.)
RCFCWCD inspects earthen channels and basins approximately six to eight times per year. The routine maintenance of the earthen channels and basins would likely require the following activities: removal of deposition, repair of eroded slopes, and reduction of fire hazard by annually mowing and application of herbicides (approximately four to six times per year) as well as the maintenance activities described in the previous paragraph. Vegetation must be removed or mowed annually (or as necessary) to provide the designed hydraulic capacity. Any vegetation that may pose a fire hazard to adjacent structures must also be maintained. The design capacity of the facility and the frequency, duration, and velocity of runoff usually dictate the frequency of vegetation maintenance. Most facilities require some annual vegetation control.

Maintenance of the earthen facilities would also include occasional erosion repair and sediment removal.

Sources: County of Riverside, 2009;
G:\2005\05-0519E\GIS\EIR_prop_proj.mxd
San Jacinto River
A¹E
A±E
WA
R
R
EN
R
D
SA
N
D
E
RSO
N
A
VE
KIR
B
Y ST

MENLO AVE

SOBOBA RD

MAIN ST

ESPLANADE AVE

SEVENTH ST
CA
WSTO
N
A
VE

RAMONA BLVD
7TH ST

RAMONA EXPY
PALM
A
VE

COTTONWOOD
AVE

EATON AVE

DE ANZA DR
SA

N JACINTO
A
VE

PARK AVE
COLUM
BIA ST
HE

W TI T ST

GILMAN SPRINGS RD
FIS
H
E
R
S
T
FL

STETSON AVE
M
ERIDIA
N ST

RECORD RD
RAMONA
EXPY

STATE ST
LYO
N
A
VE
Line
Y
Line
Z
Line 1
Line 2
Line 6
Line 4
Line Y
Line
X
Line W
Line Y-1
Casa Loma Basin
Line D
Basin
Line
D
N Line A-1
Line 5
North
Basin
Line 3
Line 4
Lat Y1
Lat Y2 Lat Y3
Lat Y4 Lat Y5
Lat Y6 Lat Y7
Lat Y8 Lat Y9
Lat Y-10 Lat Y-11
Lat Y-12 Lat Y-13
Lat X-1
Lat D-1
N
Line
A-2
N
Line
A-3
N
Line
A-4
N
Line
A-5
N
Line
B-5
N
Line
B-4
N
Line
B-3
N
Line
B-2
F
N Line B-1 U
T
U
R
E
N
LIN
E
C
N
Line
E-2 N Line
E-2
N Line
E-2A
Line
E-6
Line
E-5
Line E-4
Line
E-3
Line
E-2 Line
E-2a
Line
C-5
Line
C
Line
E-1
Line
D-4
LineD-3
Line D-1
Line
C-4
Line
B
Line B-1
H
E
WIT
T
S
T
S
D
Line J-3
Line K
Line J Line J-2
Line J
Line J-1 Line G-1
Line G
Line G
Line
G-2
Line H
Line
H-1
Line
H
Line
H-2
Line
G-3
Line G-3
L
A
T.
4-A

LINE E-Y-Z

CONFLUENCE
BASIN Line E
Line
G
Line
V
Line
E
²
LEGEND
MDP Boundary
Proposed Storm Drains
Proposed Channels
Proposed Basins
Existing Facilities
6 The frequency of these maintenance activities is a function of storm flows, and is difficult to estimate.

RCFCWCD would occasionally need to substantially grade and repair the earthen facilities. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 2.0-14.)
Line E as identified in the SJV-MDP and evaluated in the SJV-MDP EIR is earthen lined channel, extending upstream and north from the San Jacinto Reservoir west of Sanderson Avenue, turning west crossing Sanderson Avenue west continuing west parallel to and south of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California’s (Metropolitan’s) Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 easement1 to SJV-MDP Line Z. The Line E-Y-Z Confluence Basin is identified in the SJV-MDP and evaluated in the SJV-MDP EIR as an unlined basin.
1 Casa Loma Barrel (or “Siphon”) Nos. 1 and 2 are buried water pipelines owned and operated by The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan).
7 2. Project Description
The proposed SJV-MDP Line E Channel and Line E-Y-Z Confluence Basin Project are located within San Jacinto (Figure 3 – Regional Map). As previously stated, the SJV-MDP identifies conceptual alignments, locations, and sizes of proposed drainage facilities with precise locations and sizes dictated by conditions existing at the time each facility is designed. Line E (hereinafter “Line E Channel”) is one of the regional drainage facilities planned by the SJV-MDP that would serve an approximately 1,870-acre tributary area.

The Line E-Y-Z Confluence Basin (hereinafter “Confluence Basin”) is also a planned SJV-MDP facility to collect flows in a large basin from future SJV-MDP Lines E, Y, and Z. For purposes of this Addendum, the Line E Channel and Confluence Basin are collectively referred to as the “Project” or “Line E Project.” Drainage Facilities
From upstream to downstream, the Line E Channel begins north (downstream) of the San Jacinto Reservoir Spillway and north of Metropolitan’s Casa Loma Barrel No. 2 easement, continuing north as an earthen trapezoidal channel parallel to, and east of, Sanderson Avenue through an agricultural parcel (APN 436-030-004), turning west underneath Sanderson Avenue through APN 436-010-003 and turning north, then west before future Record Road through APNs 432-030-010, 432-030-012, and 432-030-006 to the proposed Confluence Basin. The outflows from the proposed Confluence Basin would be conveyed northerly across Metropolitan’s Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 and outflow at the terminus of Line E to an existing low-flow drainage channel that would, at some point in the future, be constructed as an ultimate MDP facility (“Line Z”), but is currently in interim condition. Refer to Figure 4 – Project Map and Figure 5 – Project Components.

The Line E Project components are shown on Figure 5 – Project Components and summarized as follows, from upstream (south) to downstream (north):
• Two earthen training berms with 20-foot-wide access roads on the top of each, with a 2:1 slope on the wet side of each training berms and a 20:1 slope on the dry side of each training berm.

The Westerly Training Berm is 900 linear feet long and the Easterly Training Berm is approximately 1,514 linear feet long.
• Approximately 1,398 linear feet of earthen trapezoidal channel with 20-foot-wide access roads on both sides of the channel, a channel base width of 65-feet, channel height of up to 10-feet and channel side slopes with 4:1 ratio, and a total right-of-way width of 200-feet east of Sanderson Avenue within APNs 436-030-004 and 436-010-003. This portion of the channel includes three sets of six-cell 12-feet wide by 7-feet high reinforced concrete box (RCB) and concrete transition structures, each for future road crossings. This portion of the channel also includes three sloped rip-rap drop structures.
• One 14-feet wide by 7-feet high stub-out RCB connection for future SJV-MDP Line G, including channel paving and scour protection.
• Approximately 4,468 linear feet of earthen trapezoidal channel within APNs 432-030-010, 432-030-012, and 432-030-006 with 15-foot-wide access roads on both sides of the channel, a channel base width of 65-feet, channel height of up to 10-feet, channel side slopes with 4:1 ratio, and total right-of-way width of 200 feet. This segment of channel includes three sets of four-cell 20-feet wide by 9-feet high RCB and concrete transition structures and two sloped rip-rap drop structures.

Figure 3 - Regional Map
N
Sanderson
Ave
Ramona Expy
N Sanderson Ave
Ramona Expy
Col. Lewis
Millett Park
\\chqpan01.webb.lan\WO4\2023\23-0007\GIS\PRO\Line E Addendum\project_map\project_map.aprx Map created 25 Nov 2024 Source: Esri Hybrid Reference Layer, 2024; Nearmap, 2024.

Line E Addendum
Figure 4 - Project Map
0 500
I
1,000 1,500
Feet
LEGEND
Permanent Impact Boundary
Temporary Impact Boundary
Confluence
Basin
Ramona Blvd / Record Rd

F U T U R E R E C O R D R D
Line 2
LINE G
LINE Y

EXISTING LOW

FLOW CHANNELLINE Z
CASA LOMA BARREL NO. 1
CASA LOMA BARREL NO. 2

SAN DIEGO PIPELINE

EMWD FACILITY

SAN JACINTO

RESERVOIR
LINE E-2
ONSITE
BASIN
Line 3 Line 4
LINE W

CONFLUENCE
BASIN

WEIR & PUMP STATION
BERM

W'LY TRAINING

E'LY TRAINING
BERM
INLET
EX. 60" CULVERT
LINE V
3550 cfs 3550 cfs
3035 cfs
3035 cfs
2970 cfs
2970 cfs

SPILLWAY
3800 cfs
5440 cfs

R A M O N A E X P Y

W A R R E N R D

S A N D E R S O N A V E

D E A N Z A D R

F U T U R E

D E A N Z A S T

B Y R D S T
FIGURE 5 - PROJECT COMPONENTS Sources: Riverside Co. GIS, 2020; USDA NAIP, 2016.

H:\2023\23-0008\GIS\Drainage\PDF Figures\2025 PDR\FIGURE 4 PROJECT COMPONENTS ENV.aprx; Map created 14 May 2026 Line E Addendum
0 500 1,000 1,500
I
Feet
Legend
EX. CULVERT

DROP STRUCTURE
(4) 20'(W)X9'(H)
(6) 12'(W)X7'(H)
(8) 20'(W)X7'(H)

CONCRETE CHANNEL

EARTHEN CHANNEL
CASA LOMA BARREL NO. 1
CASA LOMA BARREL NO. 2

EMWD EASEMENT

MWD EASEMENT

MWD ROW

SAN DIEGO PIPELINE
EMWD_LIFT_STATION

FUTURE MDP FACILITES

ORGINAL MDP LINE E ALIGNMENT
100-YEAR SAN JACINTO RIVER &

RESERVOIR FLOODPLAIN
MCP & SR-79 EXPANSION

PROPOSED MDP LINE E
100 Q = XX cfs
11 • Approximately 1,122 linear feet of concrete trapezoidal channel with 20-foot-wide access roads on both sides of channel, a channel base width of 155-feet, channel height of up to 5.5-feet, and channel side slopes with 1.5:1 ratio, and total right-of-way width of 270-feet for the channel segment, within APN 430-100-018, from future Record Road to the Metropolitan right-of-way.

This segment includes one set of eight-cell 20-feet wide by 7-feet high RCB crossing Record Road (Ramona Boulevard).
• One unlined SJV-MDP Confluence Basin with 57.5 acre-feet capacity over an area of 6.25 acres on APN 432-030-006, with a 72-hour drawdown. A City-maintained pump station would also be located on the Confluence Basin parcel (APN 432-030-006) to drain the Confluence Basin as well as a basin proposed by a separate project south of the Confluence Basin on APN 432-030-006. • North of the Confluence Basin, across APNs 430-100-018, 430-100-012, and 430-100-013, approximately 200 linear feet of concrete trapezoidal channel crossing the Metropolitan Water District Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 right-of-way with 20-foot-wide access roads on both sides of the channel, a channel base width that 155 feet, channel height of up to 5.5-feet, channel side slopes that vary from a 10:1 ratio to a 23:1 ratio, and a 560-feet Metropolitan easement width. This segment of channel will provide access to easterly and westerly Metropolitan access roads from Record Road.

Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 Crossing
The Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 is an approximately 14.5-foot diameter reinforced concrete pipe. (Kleinfelder-B, p. 1.) Metropolitan has design policies for structures built over their buried pipelines. Given that the Line E Channel would cross over Casa Loma Barrel No. 1, two designs are being analyzed in this Addendum. Both design concepts support a reinforced concrete slab isolated from the soil above the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 by a 6-inch layer of polystyrene foam. Concept 1 supports the concrete slab on shallow spread footing foundations and Concept 2 supports the concrete slab on cast-in-drilled-hole (CIDH) concrete piles drilled into deeper soil layers. The purpose of these designs is to prevent additional weight on the existing Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 from the proposed Line E channel, including the weight of maintenance vehicles and channel water. The crossing structure will be placed where soil cover over the existing Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 is less than four feet, or where needed according to soil settlement tests. (Kleinfelder-A.) An easement application with Metropolitan is being processed by RCFC&WCD for review and approval of the crossing of Metropolitan’s Casa Loma Barrel No. 1. This easement would be in place prior to any construction in this right-of-way. Metropolitan approved the geotechnical and structural reports for the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 Crossing in March 2025.

Concept 1: Relieving Slab on Spread Footings
A cross-section of the Concept 1 crossing, which is the preferred structural design, is shown on the following page.
12 Concept 1 is more consistent with the Detail SK-1 from Metropolitan’s Guidelines for Improvements and Construction Projects Proposed in the Area of Metropolitan’s Facilities and Right-of-Way. (Kleinfelder-A, pp. 1–2.)
Concept 2: Relieving Slab on Cast-in-Drilled-Hole Concrete Piles A cross-section of the Concept 2 crossing is shown below.

Concept 2 is supported on CIDH concrete piles that rely on skin friction along the length of the pile. The top portion of these concrete piles are cased in a smooth steel casing to limit the transfer of the forces from the piles to the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1.

The Structures Report, which presents the design criteria, plans for the preliminary crossing, and preliminary design calculations for crossing the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 is included as Appendix A.1 to this Addendum.

Geotechnical Recommendations for Crossing the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1.

Geotechnical recommendations for earthwork, design, and construction considerations for the Line E Channel crossing the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 are set forth in the Draft Geotechnical Investigation Report, San Jacinto Line E Strom Drain, San Jacinto California, February 13, 2025, prepared by Klienfelder and included as Appendix A.2 to this Addendum.

Construction of the Line E Channel would involve cuts and fills over the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1. Grade changes, construction sequencing, flooding, and crossing structure footings could subject this pipeline to change in loads that could cause settlement due to an increase in overburden stress or heave due to a decrease in overburden stress. Metropolitan requires proposed improvements in the vicinity of their pipe to not induce displacements on their pipe of more than ¼-inch per 100 feet. As part of the Draft 13 Geotechnical Investigation Report, Kleinfelder performed numerical modeling of the subsurface conditions and proposed structures .The results of this analysis indicate the proposed improvements will meet Metropolitan’s tolerance provided the key recommendations and assumptions presented below shall be implemented in the design and construction of the Casa Barrel No. 1 crossing and Line E Channel. (Kleinfelder-B, p. 18.) These recommendations are hereby made part of the Project Description. • Excavations would not be completed at a time when Metropolitan has emptied the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 (i.e. this pipeline is not in-service).
• The crossing structure footings are constructed following the 1/3 sequence of excavation and footing placement.
o Excavation of the subsequent 1/3 shall not progress until the footing for the previous 1/3 is inplace. o Excavation slopes and benches shall not be flatter than 1.5H:1V. • Excavation and footing construction sequence shall be completed simultaneously on the upstream and downstream sides of the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1. Simultaneously shall mean:
o Elevations in excavations on either side shall not be more than 1 ft different. o The concrete footings shall be poured on both sides at the same time. • Excavations shall not be backfilled until the full footing construction sequence is completed. o Backfill will consist of a medium weight flowable fill material (e.g. LCC) with a unit weight of approximately 85 pcf which does not require high vibration compactor equipment during placement. The medium weight flowable fill should have a friction angle of at least 30 degrees and cohesion of at least 50 pounds per square foot. o Backfill shall be completed simultaneously on the upstream and downstream sides of Casa Loma Barrel No. 1. Simultaneously shall mean elevations of the backfill on each side shall not be more than 1 ft different.
• Lightweight flowable fill shall be used for embankments within 50 feet from the edge of the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1. Embankment fill shall consist of lightweight flowable fill material (e.g. LCC) not to exceed a unit weight of 30 pcf and does not require compaction to limit vibration impacts. • Embankment fill shall be placed such that the elevation difference across (upstream to downstream sides) the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 is not greater than one foot at any time until final grades are established.
• The Line E Channel section shall limit the 100-yr flood event to a peak water elevation of 1453.47 feet.
• Vibrations on the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 should be less than 0.5 inches/second for “continuous” sources based on guidance provided by Metropolitan. Based on Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual (2020), vibratory rollers or similar equipment should not be used within 20 feet of the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 to meet Metropolitan’s limit. • Any excavation within two feet of the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 should be performed by “hand” equipment as approved by Metropolitan.
• Areas to receive fill that are not specified to require flowable fill as described above may utilize the on-site soil or import soil as structural fill in accordance with Section 6.9 of the Draft Geotechnical Investigation Report.
14 • Appropriate observations and inspections should be completed to ensure that the recommendations and assumptions made in the Draft Geotechnical Investigation Report. are followed during construction. Construction within Metropolitan’s right-of-way should conform to the relevant Metropolitan construction standards, observations and inspections. 15 Proposed Line E Alignment Compared to the Conceptual MDP Alignment The location of the proposed Line E Project alignment is compared with the conceptual SJV-MDP alignment on Figure 6 – MDP EIR Alignment Compared to Addendum Alignment. The Project is an improved design and the result of an iterative process to engineer around constraints that were identified during many stakeholder meetings including representatives from the City, RCFC&WCD, Metropolitan, Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD), San Jacinto Master Developer, LLC (SJMD LLC),2 and Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC). In addition, the alignment, hydraulics, and hydrology for the Project underwent three rounds of review with RCFC&WCD prior to preparation of the Preliminary Design Report (PDR) dated May 15, 2025. Two reviews have been conducted by Metropolitan. Metropolitan’s substructures group approved the proposed Line E Alignment on March 3, 2025. (PDR, p. 4.) The PDR is available for review at the RCFC&WCD office.

Specifically, the Project alignment intentionally avoids EMWD and Metropolitan easements for pipelines located near the Line E Project inlet, and, at the same time avoids the riparian habitat around the north side of the San Jacinto Reservoir. This has resulted in no hard connection between Line E and the San Jacinto Reservoir Spillway, as well as no hard connection between Line E and Line E-2 (Figure 5 – Project Components). Maintenance access for RCFC&WCD within private property has been considered and provided for in the Project, as discussed herein. The Project design also avoids potentially environmentally sensitive areas on neighboring properties and along the south side of the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 Metropolitan right-of-way west of Sanderson Avenue. The locations of several future projects planned by public agencies in the same area were also accounted for by the Line E Project. The Line E Channel was realigned to avoid conflicts with major sewer infrastructure located at the SJV-MDP planned crossing of Sanderson Avenue near the De Anza Lift Station. There are existing utilities that conflict with the proposed Line E Channel alignment, specifically the proposed RCB’s that cross Sanderson Avenue. These utilities would be relocated as part of the Project and proposed utility crossings would be coordinated with adjacent developers and projects. Finally, by locating a portion of the Line E Channel on APNs 432-030-012, 432-030-011, and 432-030-010, which is owned by a willing property owner (SJMD, LLC), right-of-way acquisition is simplified. (PDR, pp. 7 – 8.) The location of existing utilities are shown on the Long-Axis Plan included in Appendix B of this Addendum.

Remainder of page intentionally blank
2 San Jacinto Master Developer LLC, (SJMD, LLC) is the owner of approximately 514 acres within the SJV-MDP boundary consisting of APNs 432-030-006, 432-030-012, 432-030-010, and 432-030-011.

Byrd St
Odel St
Casa Loma
San Jacinto River
N Ly
on Ave
N Sanderson Ave
N Ramona Blvd
Record R
Ramona Expy
Ramona Expy
N
Sanderson Ave
Golden Era Golf
Course
N Sanderson Ave
N Lyon Ave
Cottonwood Ave
\\brkpan01.webb.lan\WO4\2023\23-0007\GIS\PRO\Line E Addendum\project_map\project_map.aprx Map created 10 Feb 2025 Source: EIR Figure 2.0-2 - Alignment
Line E Addendum
Figure 6 - MDP EIR Alignment
Compared to Addendum Alignment
0 1,000
I
2,000 3,000
Feet
LEGEND
Line E Original
Permanent Impact Boundary
Temporary Impact Boundary
Project Alignment
Addendum
Confluence
Basin
Ramona Blvd / Record Rd

MDP EIR
Confluence
Basin
17 Proposed Line E Project Hydrology Compared to SJV-MDP Hydrology The existing SJV-MDP hydrology is based on the Master Drainage Plan Update for San Jacinto Valley West Area, updated October 2008. Contributing flows to Line E include overflows from the San Jacinto Reservoir, tributary flows from SJV-MDP N Line E-2 located south of Line E, future SJV-MDP Line G, future SJV-MDP Line V, and future SJV-MDP Line Y. (PDR, p. 15.) The existing conditions for Line E flow rates have accounted for the contributing flows shown in Table B –Existing MDP Hydrology Compared to Proposed Line E Project Hydrology and on Figure 7 – Original MDP Hydrology & Facilities.

Table B – Existing MDP Hydrology Compared to Proposed Line E Project Hydrology SJV-MDP Components Existing MDP Flow Rates Revised Flow Rates Overflow from San Jacinto
Reservoir
Q100 = 2,148 cfs Q100 = 2,148 cfs
SJV-MDP N Line E-2 Q100 = 686 cfs
Trap B=6 ft, D=6 ft, Z=1.5
Q100 = 527 cfs
Trap B=6 ft, D=6 ft, Z=1.5
APN 436-170-001 contribution Q100 = 521 cfs,
RCP 14 ft (W) x 7 ft (H),
assuming slope = 0.1%
Q100 = 295 cfs
RCP 14 ft (W) x 7 ft (H),
assuming slope = 0.1%
SJV-MDP Line G Q100 = 518 cfs;
RCB 8 ft (W) x 4 ft (H)
Q100 = 580 cfs;
RCB 14 ft (W) x 6 ft (H)
SJV-MDP Line V On-Site System Q100 = 962 cfs;
Trap B=60 ft, D=5 ft, Z=4
Q100 = 1,440 cfs;
Onsite drainage system and
detention basin
SJV-MDP Line Y Q100 = 1,646 cfs Q100 = 1,646 cfs
Source: PDR, Table 1 and Table 2
Note: cfs = cubic feet per second; MDP = Master Drainage Plan; RCP = reinforced concrete pipe; RCB = reinforced concrete box; W = width; H = height; Trap = trapezoidal; Q100 means the flow rate in a 100-Year storm event.

The proposed Line E Project hydrology analysis is based on the same watershed subareas delineated in the original SJV-MDP Master Drainage Plan Update for San Jacinto Valley West Area. However three adjustments have been made to the Line E hydrology analysis: 1) land use revisions in Subarea E-2 to reflect actual land use conditions of APN 436-170-016, 2) changes in land use from residential to commercial for property , and 3) the removal of Subarea D north of the existing EMWD wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) because runoff from this area would be collected and treated by EMWD on their WWTP boundary. The land uses in the current condition have changed since the SJV MDP was prepared. The land uses changes outlined in number 1 and 2 above, results in the amount of stormwater comes off those sites, therefore the flow rates needed to be modified. Item number 3 above means that the storm water flows from Subarea D are now not a part of the flows that would influence Line E, therefore flow rates were adjusted down to accommodate for this change since the SJV MDP was prepared. These three conditions reflect the current conditions, which affect how the baseline hydrology analysis is conducted to design master plan level flood control facilities. Therefore, revised flow rates based on these three changed conditions were incorporated into the Line E Project analysis. The revised flow rates for the Line E Project are shown above in Table B and on Figure 8– Revised MDP Hydrology & Facilities . The results of these updates to the hydrology modeling represent a decreased flow rate reaching Line E than was previously analyzed in the SJV-MDP. (PDR, p. 17.) FIGURE 7 - ORGINAL MDP HYDROLOGY & FACILITIES Sources: Riverside Co. GIS, 2020; USDA NAIP, 2016.

EMWD
Line 2
LINE G
LINE Y

EXISTING LOW

FLOW CHANNEL
LINE Z
EMWD

RECHARGE PONDS

SAN JACINTO

RESERVOIR
LINE E-2
LINE W
EX. 60" CULVERT
LINE V
4,179 cfs
5,825 cfs
3,939 cfs
2,861 cfs
2,729 cfs
2,598 cfs
2,148 cfs

R A M O N A E X P Y

W A R R E N R D

S A N D E R S O N A V E

D E A N Z A D R

F U T U R E

D E A N Z A S T

F U T U R E R E C O R D R D
D4
D-North
W8
W9
City
E-North
G-Downstream
Confluence
W7
SJ-RES
W10
G-South
E-2
W5-Cove
G-3
LEGEND

CULVERT

FUTURE MDP FACILITES

CONCRETE CHANNEL

EARTHEN CHANNEL

INLET-SPILLWAY

TRM CHANNEL
Hydrology Subarea Boundary

ORIGINAL MDP LINE E

FLOW PATH
H:\2023\23-0008\GIS\Drainage\PDF Figures\2025 PDR\FIGURE 8 ORGINAL MDP HYD ENV.aprx; Map created 14 May 2026 Line E Addendum
0 500 1,0001,500
I
Feet
100
Q = XX cfs
FIGURE 8 - REVISED MDP HYDROLOGY & FACILITIES Sources: Riverside Co. GIS, 2020; USDA NAIP, 2016.

W10
Confluence
W9
W8
W7
W5-Cove
D4
E-2 SJ-RES
E-North G-South
G-Downstream
D-North-A
EMWD
D-North-B

R A M O N A E X P Y

W A R R E N R D

S A N D E R S O N A V E

D E A N Z A D R

F U T U R E

D E A N Z A S T

F U T U R E R E C O R D R D LINE G
LINE Y
LINE Z
EMWD

FACILITY

SAN JACINTO

RESERVOIR
LINE E-2
LINE W
Line 2

EXISTING LOW

FLOW CHANNEL
3,550 cfs
5,440 cfs
3,550 cfs
3,800 cfs
3,035 cfs
2,970 cfs
2,970 cfs
LEGEND

CONCRETE CHANNEL

EARTHEN CHANNEL

FLOW PATH

FUTURE MDP FACILITES

MDP LINE E
Hydrology Subarea Boundary
H:\2023\23-0008\GIS\Drainage\PDF Figures\2025 PDR\FIGURE 8 PROP HYD ENV.aprx; Map created 14 May 2026 Line E Addendum
0 500 1,0001,500
I
Feet
100
Q = XX cfs
20 The proposed Line E design resulted in a need to confirm that the other facility connections into Line E could still be achieved. Therefore, the following facilities in the SJV MDP were rearranged from the original assumptions in the SJV-MDP. No changes to these other MDP facilities outlined below are being proposed; rather the list below demonstrates that these facilities can still function in the future even with the Line E alignment as proposed.
• Tributary flows from the south are directed to Subarea D-North-A and then into the proposed Confluence Basin or a basin proposed by a separate project south of the Confluence Basin on APN 432-030-010 to be pumped out to the Line E Channel north of Record Road (Figure 8 – Revised MDP Hydrology & Facilities);
• Proposed MDP Line Y would no longer join the Confluence Basin and would instead join Line E upstream of Casa Loma Barrel No. 1;
• Flows from the Confluence Subarea are being added to the Line E Channel in the area of Casa Loma Barrel No. 1, which was previously coming into Line E at Sanderson Avenue under the SJV MDP as originally proposed; and
• Line G is proposed on the opposite side of Sanderson Avenue as compared to the conceptual location shown in the SJV-MDP. (PDR, p. 17.)
The changes to SJV-MDP Facilities identified above, are not a part of the Line E Project evaluated in this Addendum because, there are no plans or funding to construct these facilities nor are the necessary for the Line E facility to function as proposed.
21 Local Hydrology at Sanderson Avenue
Currently, in the non- SJV-MDP implementation condition, a roadside ditch conveys stormwater along the east side of Sanderson Avenue as shown in the image below.

Because the proposed Line E Channel would cross Sanderson Avenue and intersect with this existing ditch, the contribution of flow from this roadside ditch to the Line E Channel was analyzed in the PDR.

Results suggest that 49 acres drain to this roadside ditch, as shown on Figure 9 – Local Flow Analysis.

The hydrology subareas are already accounted for in the overall SJV-MDP hydrology analysis. Therefore, the Line E Channel has been designed to accommodate the confluence of this ditch. A rate of 95 cubic feet per second (cfs) of runoff is generated and was used to size an inlet and lateral to Line E Channel. (PDR, p. 19.)
Local Flow Pattern at Casa Loma Barrel No. 1
The existing local drainage pattern is represented by the flow paths shown on Figure 10 – Existing Local Drainage Patterns. During small rain events, a significant amount of runoff sheet flows to either side of Sanderson Avenue and is conveyed northerly. As shown on Figure 10, the local existing drainage pattern flows northeasterly from the area south of Record Road (Ramona Boulevard) eventually to two existing culverts that cross the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 right-of-way. Both culverts are 24-inch diameter corrugated metal pipes that sit atop the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1. During any rain event that generates flooding, these culverts are responsible for draining the area south of the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 and bounded by Sanderson Avenue and the EMWD WWTP. In the post-Line E Project condition, the existing drainage patterns north of Record Road and east of Sanderson Avenue (i.e., east of the Line E Channel) would remain. The Line E Project would replace the existing low flow 24-inch diameter corrugated metal pipes that cross the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 easement with two 24-inch diameter reinforced concrete pipes (RCPs) that outlet into Line E. (PDR, p. 21.)
Remainder of page intentionally blank
H:\2023\23-0007\GIS\PRO\Line E Addendum\hydro figures\hydro figures.aprx Map created 25 Mar 2025 Source: PDR, 2025.

Line E Addendum
Figure 9 - Local Flow Analysis
I

KIRBY ST

SANDERSON AVE

DE ANZA DR
H:\2023\23-0008\GIS\Drainage\PDF Figures\2025 PDR - ARC PRO CONVERSIONS\FIGURE 10 LOCAL HYDROLOGY 3-2025.aprx; Map created 19 Mar 2025 NODE 100
ELEV = 1501 HP
A=9.5 AC
L= 660 FT
!(
!(
NODE 400
ELEV = 1468
Tc=15.9 min
Q100= 94.2 cfs
A=18.5 AC
L= 1260 FT
A= 21 AC
L= 1430 FT
NODE 200
ELEV = 1489 HP !(
!(
NODE 300
ELEV = 1477 HP
Legend

FLOW PATH

LOCAL HYD BOUNDARY

ROAD CL

MDP LINE E
H:\2023\23-0007\GIS\PRO\Line E Addendum\hydro figures\hydro figures.aprx Map created 25 Mar 2025 Source: PDR, 2025.

Line E Addendum
Figure 10 - Existing Local Drainage Patterns
I
24 Maintenance
Because the Line E Channel would be a regional flood control facility pursuant to the adopted SJV-MDP, the RCFC&WCD would need to be able to maintain the Line E Channel and corresponding access roads throughout the life of the facility. Specifically, RCFC&WCD would maintain the training berms and inlet line and grade via a drainage easement and slope easement for the portion of the Line E channel, plus access roads, RCBs and drop structures, located within right-of-way that would be owned by RCFC&WCD within APNs 436-170-001, 436-030-004, 436-010-003, and 430-100-016. RCFC&WCD would maintain the portion of Line E, that crosses over the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 and Metropolitan right-of-way via a maintenance easement. (PDR, p. 38.)
Maintenance activities to be undertaken by RCF&WCD include vegetation management, clean out of debris, slope and bottom repairs, access road maintenance and repair. Given the presence of potentially sensitive biological resources in the Line E Project area, the RCFC&WCD would not use rodenticides or pesticides for vegetation management. Mechanical and hand removal of vegetation would be used.

The City of San Jacinto would maintain the Confluence Basin and pump, and the segment of the Line E Channel with 15-foot access roads within APNs 432-030-011, 432-030-012 and 432-030-010. The City of San Jacinto would conduct the same types of maintenance activities as needed for the Line E Channel. (PDR, p. 38.)
Figure 11 – Lower Reach Maintenance Delineation and Figure 12 –Upper Reach Maintenance Delineation shows the overall maintenance and easement areas for the Line E Project. The activities needed to construct and the maintenance activities outlined above have been analyzed in this Addendum.

Discretionary Approvals by the City of San Jacinto
• As the CEQA Lead Agency, the City would approve the Line E Project Design Report (PDR) and adopt this Addendum for the Line E Project.
• At such time the City determines the entity to construct the Line E Project, per the SJV MDP EIR, “… all new facilities constructed by developers, San Jacinto, or Hemet, that require maintenance by RCFCWCD, would require RCFCWCD execution of a cooperative agreement and approval of plans and specifications”.

Figure 11 - Lower Reach Maintenance Delineation Source: PDR, 2025.

RAMONA BLVD

FUTURE RECORD RD

SANDERSON AVE

DE ANZA DR

KIRBY ST
H:\2023\23-0008\GIS\Drainage\PDF Figures\2025 PDR - ARC PRO CONVERSIONS\FIGURE 17 MAINTENANCE 3-2025.aprx; Map created 11 May 2026 0 500
I
1,000 1,500
Feet
Line E Addendum
SEE EXHIBIT 18 FOR INLET
Legend

CITY OF SAN JACINTO EASEMENT

RCFC&WCD MWD EASEMENT

RCTC FUTURE RIGHT OF WAY

RCFC&WCD PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY
SR79
MWD
CASA LOMA BARREL NO. 1

MWD RIGHT OF WAY

MDP LINE E
100-YR PRELIMINARY POST PROJECT FLOODPLAIN
Figure 12 - Upper Reach Maintenance Delineation Source: PDR, 2025. KIRBY ST SANDERSON AVE

EMWD FACILITY

SAN JACINTO RESERVOIR
H:\2023\23-0008\GIS\Drainage\PDF Figures\2025 PDR - ARC PRO CONVERSIONS\FIGURE 18 MAINTENANCE 3-2025.aprx; Map created 11 May 2026 0 250
I
500 750
Feet
A

TRAINING BERM EXTENTS
LEGEND

RCTC FUTURE RIGHT OF WAY

RCFC&WCD MAINTENANCE EASEMENT

RCFC&WCD SLOPE EASEMENT

MWD & EMWD EASEMENTS

RCFC&WCD PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY

ROAD CL
100-YR PRELIMINARY POST PROJECT FLOODPLAIN

MDP LINE E
Line E Addendum
A
SEE EXHIBIT 16 FOR OUTLET
27 Required Permits and/or Approvals, Trustee and Responsible Agencies Implementation of the Line E project would require permits or other forms of approval from the following public agencies prior to construction.

Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District As with the SJV-MDP EIR, RCFC&WCD would be a CEQA Responsible Agency for the Line E Project because RCFC&WCD would approve a cooperative agreement with the City of San Jacinto as well as any private entity that might be constructing the Line E facility. RCFC&WCD would ultimately own and maintain the portions of Line E described under the Maintenance subheading above and shown on Figure 11 – Lower Reach Maintenance Delineation and Figure 12 –Upper Reach Maintenance Delineation. RCFC&WCD would also have to approve all Line E-related plans and specifications prior to construction. As a CEQA responsible Agency, RCFC&WCD would utilize this Addendum for these subsequent approvals.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife
In addition to being a Trustee Agency for all wildlife resources in California, CDFW would be a Responsible Agency for the Line E Project. As discussed in the response to item D.3, implementation of the Line E Project would impact non-riparian streambed regulated by CDFW; therefore, a Section 1600 Streambed Alteration Agreement is required from CDFW per SJV-MDP EIR MM Bio 3.

Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region (RWQCB) As discussed in the response to item D.3, implementation of the Line E Project would impact of non-wetland waters regulated by the Regional Board; therefore, a Waste Discharge Permit (WDR) would be required prior to construction. is required from the Regional Board and a Section 1600 Streambed Alteration Agreement is required from CDFW per SJV-MDP EIR MM Bio 3. Additionally, a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Permit would be required since the Project entails more than on acre of grading.

Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
Encroachment permits will be required to construct SJV-MDP facilities within the rights-of-way of the Colorado River Aqueduct, Casa Loma Siphons 1 and 2, Casa Loma Canal, San Diego Pipelines 1 and 2, San Diego Canal, Lakeview Pipeline, San Jacinto Pipeline, and the Inland Feeder. As part of that process, Metropolitan would also have to review the plans and specifications for the portion of Line E within its rightsof-way.

County of Riverside, City of San Jacinto
Encroachment permits would be required to construct any portion of the Line E Project within road rightsof-way. Obtaining right-of-way on private property would also be required. 28 3. Regulatory Background and Addendum CEQA Findings
This section sets forth the regulatory authority for the preparation of an Addendum and makes the findings necessary for consideration by San Jacinto, as lead agency, or any responsible agency, to adopt this Addendum. The process for preparing an Addendum to a previously certified EIR is set forth in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15164. Sections 15164(a) and (b) state:
(a) The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. (b). An addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.

The Line E Project proposes drainage facilities, specifically the Line E channel and Line E-Y-Z Confluence Basin identified in the SJV-MDP and evaluated at a program level in the certified SJV-MDP EIR. As demonstrated in the following analysis, no new significant impacts will result from implementing the Line E Project.

State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a) lists the specific conditions that require preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration rather than an addendum. These include one or more of the following:
(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new, significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; (2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
(3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
(A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration;
(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
(C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
29 The following discussion presents a summary of each condition in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 and how the Line E Project is consistent with such condition.

Section 15162(a)1: Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new, significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.

No major changes or revisions, nor new significant effects or an increase in severity of previously identified significant effects in the SJV-MDP EIR have occurred. As outlined in the original SJV-MDP EIR, the SJV-MDP identifies a general alignment and location of the proposed MDP facilities, including Line E. Precise facility locations and final sizing would be dictated by conditions existing at the time each facility is designed based on detailed analysis performed at the design stage. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 2.0-8.) The Project is an improved design vs. the conceptual design set forth in the SJV-MDP. The Project design being evaluated herein is the result of an iterative process to engineer around constraints that were identified during many stakeholder meetings with representatives from the City, RCFC&WCD, Metropolitan, Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD), the adjacent property owner (SJMD LLC), and the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) once the need for implementation of Line E was identified. In addition, the proposed alignment, hydraulics, and hydrology for the Line E Project underwent three rounds of review with RCFC&WCD as part of the Preliminary Design Report (PDR) preparation. Figure 6 – MDP EIR Alignment Compared to Addendum Alignment shows the locational refinements to the Line E Channel based on the design rationale discussed below as compared to the conceptual alignment identified in the SJV-MDP.

Specifically, the Line E Project alignment intentionally avoids EMWD and Metropolitan easements near the Project inlet, and, at the same time avoids riparian habitat around the north side of the San Jacinto Reservoir. This has resulted in no hard connection between Line E and the San Jacinto Reservoir Spillway, as well as no hard connection between Line E and Line E-2, which in turn has resulted in less biological impacts than was previously identified in the SJV-MDP EIR. Therefore, related to biological resources, the Proposed Project now lessens what could have been significant biological impacts associated with the hard connection of Line E to the San Jacinto Reservoir and Line E-2 (see Figure 6).

The Project design also avoids potentially environmentally sensitive areas on neighboring properties and along the south side of the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 Metropolitan right-of-way west of Sanderson Avenue.

The locations of several future projects planned by public agencies in the same area were also accounted for in the alignment now presented for the Line E Project. The Line E Channel was realigned to avoid conflicts with major sewer infrastructure located where the original SJV-MDP conceptual alignment planned a crossing of Sanderson Avenue near the De Anza Lift Station. There are also existing utilities that conflict with the proposed Project alignment, specifically the proposed RCBs that cross Sanderson Avenue. These utilities would be relocated as part of the area analyzed for the Line E Project and proposed utility crossings would be coordinated with adjacent developers and projects.

As shown by the analysis in Section 4 Supplemental Environmental Checklist Form, the shift in the proposed alignment of the Line E Channel namely the elimination of hard connections between Line E and the San Jacinto Reservoir Spillway and Line E-2, avoids potentially sensitive environmental areas, as well as major sewer infrastructure. These modifications now reflected in the Line E Project do not constitute a substantial change that would require major revisions of the SJV-MDP EIR due to the involvement of new, significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.
30 Section 15162(a)2: Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
There are no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken compared to the analysis in the SJV-MDP EIR. There are no new significant environmental effects in the Line E Project area that have a substantial increase in severity. As shown in the analysis in Section 4 Supplemental Environmental Checklist Form herein, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in new significant environmental effects or any increase in the severity of previously identified environmental effects.

Section 15162(a)3: New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
(A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration;
The significant effects found in the SJV-MDP EIR were related to agricultural resources, air quality and population/housing. There are no new issues or areas of substantial importance related to these issue areas that would constitute new information. Since the SJV-MDP EIR was prepared and certified, one new species has been listed as Candidate Species per the California Department of Fish and Wildlife; the Crotch’s Bumble bee is now a species that under CEQA has to be considered and impacts evaluated and mitigated for as appropriate. The results of the analysis in Section 4 Supplemental Environmental Checklist Form, which includes current biological studies, indicates that no new significant effects related to biological resources will result from Line E implementation. It is settled law in California that subsequent changes to the guidelines or other regulations are not “new information” triggering section 21166(c). (Concerned Dublin Citizens v. City of Dublin (2013) 214 Cal.App.4th 1301, 1318-1320.) Accordingly, the listing of Crotch’s Bumble bee does not necessitate the preparation of subsequent EIR or negative declaration.
(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
The significant effects found in the SJV-MDP EIR were related to agricultural resources, air quality, and population/housing. The City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for these areas. (SJV MDP EIR, p. 1.0-9.)
Direct impacts regarding agricultural resources were determined to be significant because implementation of the SJV-MDP would result in the conversion of approximately 122 acres of Farmland to flood control facilities. Indirect impacts to agricultural resources were determined to be significant because implementation of the SJV-MDP could support and encourage planned development per the Riverside County, San Jacinto, and Hemet General Plans within the boundaries of the SJV-MDP. This area contains approximately 4,600 acres of Agricultural Land as defined in CEQA Section 210060.1. Potential direct and indirect impacts associated with the loss of Farmland remains unavoidable and are unmitigable. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 5.0-18.) Direct impacts regarding air quality were determined to be significant because depending on the MDP Facility or combination of Facilities constructed at any given time, construction emissions may exceed the regional significance thresholds established by the South Coast Air Quality 31 Management District (SCAQMD) for oxides of nitrogen (NOx,) particulate matter that is 10 microns or less in diameter (PM-10) and particulate matter that is 2.5 microns or less in size (PM2.5.) SCAQMD local significance thresholds (LSTs) for PM-10 and PM-2.5 could be exceeded during construction. Although these are direct, short-term impacts that will cease once construction is complete; they remain unavoidable and are unmitigable. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 5.0-

18.)
Implementation of the SJV-MDP could indirectly induce growth by removing one potential barrier to growth through the provision of flood control infrastructure. The Hemet, San Jacinto, and Riverside County General Plans identify the type of development and growth that would be allowed within the boundaries of the SJV-MDP. The SJV-MDP does not propose any changes to the land uses from what is identified in the aforementioned General Plans; thus, potential indirect impacts from development in the Project area are not expected to exceed the potential impacts that have already been disclosed in the EIRs prepared for the Hemet, San Jacinto, and Riverside County General Plans. However, because implementation of the proposed Project could indirectly induce substantial population growth in the Project area, impacts regarding population/housing are considered significant. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 5.0-18.)
The following issue areas were found to be less than significant with or without mitigation:
aesthetics, biological resources, cultural resources, geology/soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology/water quality, land use/planning, mineral resources, noise, public services, recreation, transportation/traffic, and utilities/service systems. (SJV MDP EIR, p. 1.0-9.) As shown in the analysis in Section 4 Supplemental Environmental Checklist Form, no new significant impacts to areas previously determined to be less than significant, nor any of the previously identified significant impact areas will be more severe, as a result of implementation of the proposed Project.
(C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or Table C – Mitigation Measures identifies the mitigation measures adopted as part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the SJV-MDP, the applicability to the Line E Project, and, in certain instances, a clarified or new mitigation measure.

Table C – Mitigation Measures
SJV MDP EIR Mitigation Measure
Applicability to
Line E Project
Line E Project
Mitigation Measure
MM Air 1: During construction,
ozone precursor emissions from all
vehicles and construction
equipment shall be controlled by
maintaining equipment engines in
good condition and in proper tune
per manufacturers’ specifications to
the satisfaction of the jurisdiction in
which the construction is taking
Not Applicable MM Air 1 through MM Air 4 do not
apply to the Line E Project because
the Line E Project emissions are
below the SCAQMD thresholds.
32 Table C – Mitigation Measures
SJV MDP EIR Mitigation Measure
Applicability to
Line E Project
Line E Project
Mitigation Measure
place, i.e., San Jacinto Public
Works Department, Hemet Public
Works Department, Riverside
County Department of Building and
Safety, or RCFCWCD. Equipment
maintenance records and
equipment design specification data
sheets shall be kept on site during
construction. Compliance with this
measure shall be subject to periodic
verification by the Jacinto Public
Works Department, Hemet Public
Works Department, or RCFCWCD
MM Air 2: Signs shall be posted
stating that all vehicles are
prohibited from idling in excess of
five minutes, both on and off site.

Not Applicable
MM Air 3: Electricity from power
poles shall be used instead of
temporary diesel- or gasolinepowered generators to reduce the associated emissions.

Not Applicable
MM Air 4: To reduce construction
vehicle (truck) and equipment idling
while waiting to enter/exit the site,
the contractor shall submit a traffic
control plan that will describe in
detail safe detours to prevent traffic
congestion to the best of the
Project’s ability, and provide
temporary traffic control measures.

To reduce traffic congestion, and
therefore NOx, the plan shall
include, as necessary, appropriate,
and practicable the following:
dedicated turn lanes for movement
of construction trucks and
equipment on and off site,
scheduling of construction activities
that affect traffic flow on the arterial
system to off-peak hour, rerouting of
construction trucks away from
Not Applicable
33 Table C – Mitigation Measures
SJV MDP EIR Mitigation Measure
Applicability to
Line E Project
Line E Project
Mitigation Measure
congested streets or sensitive
receptors, and/or signal
synchronization to improve traffic
flow.

MM Bio 1: In order to avoid violation
of the MBTA and California Fish and
Game Code, site-preparation
activities (removal of trees and
vegetation) shall be avoided, to the
greatest extent possible, during the
nesting season (generally February
1 to August 31) of potentially
occurring native and migratory bird
species.

If site-preparation activities are
proposed during the
nesting/breeding season (February
1 to August 31), a pre-activity field
survey shall be conducted by a
qualified biologist prior to the
issuance of grading permits, for
private development projects, or
prior to construction for public
agency contracts, to determine if
active nests of species protected by
the MBTA or the California Fish and
Game Code are present in the
construction zone. If active nests
are not located within the Project
area and appropriate buffer, 500
feet of an active listed species or
raptor nest, 300 feet of other
sensitive or protected bird nests
(non-listed), or within 100 feet of
sensitive or protected songbird
nests, construction may be
conducted during the
nesting/breeding season. However,
Revised/Clarified CMM3 Bio 1: In order to avoid
violation of the MBTA and California
Fish and Game Code, sitepreparation activities (removal of trees and vegetation) shall be
avoided, to the greatest extent
possible, during the nesting season
(generally February 1 to September
15 August 31) of potentially
occurring native and migratory bird
species. If site-preparation activities
are proposed during the
nesting/breeding season (February
1 to September 15 August 31), a
pre-activity field survey shall be
conducted by a qualified biologist be
to the issuance of grading permits,
for private development projects, or
prior to construction for public
agency contracts, within three days
prior to any disturbance of the Line
E Project site, including disking,
demolition activities, and grading, to
determine if active nests of species
protected by the MBTA or the
California Fish and Game Code are
present in the construction zone. If
active nests are not located within
the Project area and appropriate
buffer, 500 feet of an active listed
species or raptor nest, 300 feet of
other sensitive or protected bird
nests (non-listed), or within 100 feet
of sensitive or protected songbird
nests, construction may be
3 CMM – Clarified Mitigation Measure
34 Table C – Mitigation Measures
SJV MDP EIR Mitigation Measure
Applicability to
Line E Project
Line E Project
Mitigation Measure
if active nests are located during the
pre-activity field survey, no grading
or heavy equipment activity shall
take place within at least 500 feet of
an active listed species or raptor
nest, 300 feet of other sensitive or
protected (under MBTA or California
Fish and Game Code) bird nests
(non-listed), or within 100 feet of
sensitive or protected songbird
nests until the nest is no longer
active.
conducted during the
nesting/breeding season. However,
i If active nests are located during
the pre-activity field survey, no
grading or heavy equipment activity
shall take place within at least 500
feet of an active listed species or
raptor nest, 300 feet of other
sensitive or protected (under MBTA
or California Fish and Game Code)
bird nests (non-listed), or within 100
feet of sensitive or protected
songbird nests the biologist shall
establish suitable buffers around the
nests, and the buffer areas shall be
avoided until the nest is no longer
occupied and juvenile birds can
survive independently from the
nests. active.

MM Bio 2: Facility-specific habitat
assessments and focused surveys
for burrowing owls will be conducted
within burrowing owl survey areas.

A pre-construction survey for
resident burrowing owls will also be
conducted by a qualified biologist
within 30 days prior to
commencement of grading and
construction activities within those
portions of the Project site
containing suitable burrowing owl
habitat. If ground-disturbing
activities in these areas are delayed
or suspended for more than 30 days
after the pre-construction survey,
the area shall be resurveyed for
owls. Take of active nests shall be
avoided. The pre-construction
survey and any relocation activity
Satisfied Because a portion of SJV-MDP EIR
MM Bio 2 has already been fulfilled
through preparation of the Biological
Technical Report for San Jacinto
Valley Master Drainage Plan Line E,
Located in the City of San Jacinto,
Riverside County, California,
January 28, 2025, which is included
as Appendix D.1 to this Addendum.

Mitigation measure MM Bio E7,
which amplifies the requirements of
the preconstruction survey clarifies
and replaces SJV-MDP MM Bio 2
for the Line E Project.

MM Bio E74: Burrowing Owl
Preconstruction Survey: To avoid
direct impacts to burrowing owls
and comply with MSHCP Objective
6 for burrowing owls, a 30-day pre4 E – New Line E Mitigation Measure 35 Table C – Mitigation Measures
SJV MDP EIR Mitigation Measure
Applicability to
Line E Project
Line E Project
Mitigation Measure
will be conducted in accordance
with MSHCP instructions and/or
guidelines.
construction survey for burrowing
owls shall be conducted prior to any
future Project-related grounddisturbing activities (e.g., vegetation clearing, clearing and grubbing, tree
removal, site watering, equipment
staging, etc.) to ensure that no owls
have colonized the Project site in
the days or weeks preceding the
ground-disturbing activities. If
burrowing owls have colonized the
Project site prior to the initiation of
ground-disturbing activities, the
Project proponent shall immediately
inform the Regional Conservation
Authority (RCA) and the Wildlife
Agencies and shall coordinate with
the RCA and the Wildlife Agencies
(CDFW and United States Fish and
Wildlife Service), including the
possibility of preparing a Burrowing
Owl Protection and Relocation Plan,
prior to initiating ground
disturbance. If ground disturbing
activities take place, but the Project
site is left undisturbed for more than
30 days, another preconstruction
survey shall be conducted to ensure
that burrowing owl have not
colonized the Project site since it
was last disturbed. If burrowing owls
are found, the Project proponent
shall immediately inform the RCA
and the Wildlife Agencies and shall
coordinate with the RCA and the
Wildlife Agencies, including the
possibility of preparing a Burrowing
Owl Protection and Relocation Plan
before construction resumes.

MM Bio 3: Project-specific
delineations will be required to
determine the limits of the U.S.

Army Corp of Engineers (ACOE),
Satisfied This mitigation measure has been
satisfied by preparation of the
Jurisdictional Delineation of the
Master Drainage Plan (MDP) Line E
36 Table C – Mitigation Measures
SJV MDP EIR Mitigation Measure
Applicability to
Line E Project
Line E Project
Mitigation Measure
RWQCB, and CDFG jurisdiction.

Impacts to jurisdictional waters will
require authorization by the
corresponding regulatory agency. If
impacts are indicated, then
jurisdictional water will either a) be
avoided or b) necessary permits
from requisite jurisdictions will be
obtained.

Project, an Approximately 14,000
Linear-Foot Drainage Alignment in
the City of San Jacinto, Riverside
County, California, October 30,
2024, prepared by Glenn Lukos
Associates, Inc. which is included
as Appendix H to the Biological
Technical Report, which is Appendix
D.1 to this Addendum.

MM Bio 4: The project-specific
mapping of riparian and
unvegetated riverine features will be
required pursuant to Section 6.1.2
of the MSHCP. For areas not
excluded as artificially created, the
MSHCP requires 100 percent
avoidance of riparian/riverine areas.

If avoidance is not feasible, then
individual projects will require the
approval of a DBESP including
appropriate mitigation to offset the
loss of functions and values as they
pertain to the MSHCP-covered
species. Riparian vegetation will
also need to be evaluated for the
least Bell’s vireo, southwestern
willow flycatcher, and western
yellow-billed cuckoo. If suitable
habitat is present, focused surveys
for the species will be required. If
avoidance is not feasible, then
individual projects will require the
approval of a DBESP including
appropriate mitigation, i.e., on-site
or off-site enhancement, restoration,
establishment (creation),
preservation, payment into habitat
mitigation banks or in lieu fee
programs, or a combination of one
or more of these options.

Satisfied This mitigation measure has been
satisfied by preparation of the
Biological Technical Report for San
Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan
Line E, Located in the City of San
Jacinto, Riverside County,
California, January 28, 2025, which
is included as Appendix D.1 to this
Addendum.

MM Bio 5: The project-specific
mapping of vernal pools will be
required pursuant to Section 6.1.2
Satisfied This mitigation measure has been
satisfied by preparation of the
Biological Technical Report for San
37 Table C – Mitigation Measures
SJV MDP EIR Mitigation Measure
Applicability to
Line E Project
Line E Project
Mitigation Measure
of the MSHCP. As noted above,
vernal pools (or similar seasonal
ponding alkali playa areas) are
expected to occur at least in the
area comprising Cell Group V, but
have the potential to occur
elsewhere within the Project area.

For areas not excluded as artificially
created, the MSHCP requires 100
percent avoidance of vernal pools
areas. If avoidance is not feasible,
then individual projects will require
the approval of a DBESP including
appropriate mitigation to offset the
loss of functions and values as they
pertain to the MSHCP covered
species. Vernal pools and other
seasonal ponding depressions will
also need to be evaluated for
Riverside and Vernal pool fairy
shrimp.

Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan
Line E, Located in the City of San
Jacinto, Riverside County,
California, January 28, 2025, which
is included as Appendix D.1 to this
Addendum.

MM Bio 6: Within areas of suitable
habitat associated with the Narrow
Endemic Plant Species Survey Area
(NEPSSA) and Criteria Area Plant
Species Survey Area (CAPSSA),
facility-specific focused plants
surveys will be required. Including
the smooth tarplant mapped as part
of this study, the MSHCP requires
at least 90 percent avoidance of
areas providing long-term
conservation value for the NEPSSA
and CAPSSA target species. If
avoidance is not feasible, then
individual projects will require the
approval of a DBESP, including
appropriate mitigation, i.e., on-site
or off-site enhancement, restoration,
establishment (creation),
preservation, payment into habitat
mitigation banks or in lieu fee
programs, or a combination of one
Satisfied This mitigation measure has been
satisfied by preparation of Biological
Technical Report for San Jacinto
Valley Master Drainage Plan Line E,
Located in the City of San Jacinto,
Riverside County, California,
January 28, 2025, which is included
as Appendix D.1 to this Addendum.

NEPSSA surveys were conducted
for the Line E Project and no
NEPSSA plant species were
detected during the focused
surveys.

While smooth tarplant is specifically
called out in the original MM, this
species is not subject to focused
surveys because the project site is
not located within the CASSA.

However, smooth tarplant will be
mitigated as part of MM Bio E8.
38 Table C – Mitigation Measures
SJV MDP EIR Mitigation Measure
Applicability to
Line E Project
Line E Project
Mitigation Measure
or more of these options.

Furthermore, the smooth tarplant
mapped within Cell Group V is
expected to be required for
conservation as part of the Cell
Group V criteria.

MM Bio 7: Focused surveys shall
be conducted within potentially
suitable habitat for Chaparral sandverbena and South coast salt scale by a qualified biologist during the
flowering season of these species
and prior to construction activities. If
special status plant species are
found to be present in the footprint,
further measures as recommended
by a qualified biologist shall be
taken to avoid or minimize adverse
project effects to these species and
their habitat. If avoidance is not
feasible, then individual projects will
require the approval of a DBESP
including appropriate mitigation.

Not Applicable This mitigation measure is not
applicable, as the Line E Project
does not have habitat for Chaparral
sand-verbena or South coast salt
scale.

MM Bio 8: Focused surveys shall
be conducted within potentially
suitable habitat for the San
Bernardino kangaroo rat and Los
Angeles pocket mouse by a
qualified biologist during the
appropriate season of these species
and prior to construction activities. If
these species are found to be
present in the footprint, occupied
habitat shall be fenced and avoided.

If occupied habitat cannot be
avoided, further measures as
recommended by a qualified
biologist and in consultation with the
California Department of Fish and
Game, shall to be taken to avoid or
minimize adverse project effects to
these species and their habitat.

Not Applicable This mitigation measure is not
applicable because there is no
SBKR or LAPM habitat within the
limits of the Line E Project.
39 Table C – Mitigation Measures
SJV MDP EIR Mitigation Measure
Applicability to
Line E Project
Line E Project
Mitigation Measure
The SJV MDP EIR did not
specifically require LBV focused
surveys, but in order to be compliant
with the MSHCP, as required by the
SJV MDP, the Line E Project does
need to do additional mitigation
related to LBV.

Added/Clarified
The SJV MDP EIR did not
specifically require preparation of a
Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring
Plan (HMMP); however, in order to
be compliant with the MSHCP, as
required by the SJV MDP, an
HMMP will be required to reduce
direct impacts to non-wetland
waters of the Regional Board and
non-riparian stream under California
Department of Fish and Wildlife
jurisdiction.

Added/Clarified MM Bio E8: Habitat Mitigation
and Monitoring Plan. In order to
mitigate the 4.03 acres of riverine
resources, including impacts
associated with smooth tarplant
found in these riverine areas, the
Project proponent shall prepare a
Habitat and Mitigation and
Monitoring Plan (HMMP) and
secure conservation property to be
restored for alkali playa/meadow
resources, including smooth
tarplant. The HMMP shall be
prepared on a property that is to be
secured for conservation in
perpetuity which will support at least

8.06 acres (2:1) of restored riverine
alkali playa/meadow. The HMMP
shall be submitted to the City of San
Jacinto, CDFW and USFWS for
review and approval. The HMMP
will be used to support the
mitigation necessary for impacts to
the Waters of the State which
require permits through the CDFW
and Regional Board. The property
shall be conveyed to a conservation
entity such as Rivers and Lands
Conservancy or other such entity as
approved by CDFW and USFWS.

The Project proponent will provide a
non-wasting endowment to fund the
management of the
conservation/mitigation property in
perpetuity.
40 Table C – Mitigation Measures
SJV MDP EIR Mitigation Measure
Applicability to
Line E Project
Line E Project
Mitigation Measure
MM Cultural 1: A paleontological
resources field survey (or surveys)
shall be completed prior to the
earlier of issuance of a grading
permit or construction of any SJVMDP facility subject to further CEQA analysis. If the results of such
survey (or surveys) identify the
presence of potentially significant
paleontological resources,
avoidance or other appropriate
measures (such as excavation,
analysis, and interpretation of
resources) potentially leading to
curation in perpetuity in a facility
that meets the standards of the
State of California Guidelines for the
Curation of Archaeological
Collections (OHP 1993) and 36
CFR 79, shall be implemented.

Satisfied This mitigation measure has been
satisfied by preparation of the
Paleontological Resource
Assessment for the San Jacinto
Master Drainage Plan Line E, City
of San Jacinto, Riverside County,
California, January 2024, prepared
by Applied Earthworks (AE) and
included as Appendix F of this
Addendum.

MM Cultural 2a: Prior to the earlier
of issuance of a grading permit or
construction of any SJV MDP facility
subject to further CEQA analysis,
the San Jacinto Public Works
Department, Hemet Public Works
Department, or RCFCWCD shall
require the Project applicant to
commission an assessment of the
potential for archeological and
cultural resources to be performed
by a qualified archaeologist in
conjunction with recognized Native
American tribes, including the
Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians
(Soboba), in order to determine the
presence and extent of any such
resources within the Project area
and evaluate the significance of
such resources. The assessment
shall include a NAHC and CHRIS
records search, a Phase I walkover
survey, and preparation of an
Satisfied This mitigation measure has been
satisfied by preparation of the
Cultural Resource Study for the San
Jacinto Master Drainage Plan Line
E, City of San Jacinto, Riverside
County, California, January 2024,
prepared by Applied Earthworks for
the Line E Project and is included
as Appendix E to this Addendum.
41 Table C – Mitigation Measures
SJV MDP EIR Mitigation Measure
Applicability to
Line E Project
Line E Project
Mitigation Measure
archaeological report containing the
results of this assessment. Phase II
archaeological evaluations will be
completed prior to project approval
if recommended in the assessment.

MM Cultural 2b: The San Jacinto
Public Works Department, Hemet
Public Works Department, or
RCFCWCD shall enter into a
Treatment and Disposition
Agreement (TDA) with Soboba to
address treatment and disposition of
archaeological and cultural
resources and human remains
associated with Soboba that may be
uncovered or otherwise discovered
during construction within the
jurisdiction of the San Jacinto Public
Works Department, Hemet Public
Works Department, or RCFCWCD.

The TDA may establish provisions
for tribal monitors. Following
execution of the TDA by the San
Jacinto Public Works Department or
Hemet Public Works Department
and Soboba, the TDA will be
incorporated by reference into
individual grading permits for
portions of the Project that are
within the jurisdiction of San Jacinto
Public Works Department or Hemet
Public Works Department; TDAs
executed between RCFCWCD and
Soboba will be incorporated into the
construction specifications.

Revised/Clarified CMM Cultural-2b: Archaeological
Monitoring, Cultural Resources
Worker Sensitivity Training, and
Treatment and Disposition Plan.

Prior to the initiation of any Line EProject-related surface grubbing or clearing and initial grading, the
entity carrying out the project the
San Jacinto Public Works
Department, Hemet Public Works
Department, or RCFCWCD shall
retain a qualified professional
archaeologist (the “Project
Archaeologist”) meeting the
Secretary of the Interior’s
Professional Qualifications
Standards for archaeology as
defined at 36 CFR Part 61,
Appendix A. The primary task of the
Project Archaeologist shall be to
monitor the initial ground-disturbing
activities at the Line E Project site
for the identification of any
previously unknown archaeological
and/or cultural resources.

The Project Archeologist shall
attend the pre-grading meeting with
the City of San Jacinto Staff, the
Line E Project construction
manager, and any Line E Project
contractors to conduct a mandatory
Cultural Resources Worker
Sensitivity Training to those in
attendance. The Project
Archaeologist or designated
archaeological monitor shall have
the authority to temporarily halt and
redirect earth moving activities in
42 Table C – Mitigation Measures
SJV MDP EIR Mitigation Measure
Applicability to
Line E Project
Line E Project
Mitigation Measure
the affected area if suspected
archaeological resources are
unearthed.

Also prior to the initiation of any Line
E Project-related surface grubbing
or clearing and initial grading, the
entity carrying out the project San
Jacinto Public Works Department,
shall enter into a Treatment and
Disposition Agreement (TDA) with
the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians
to address treatment and disposition
of archaeological and cultural
resources and human remains
associated with the Soboba Band of
Luiseño Indians that may be
uncovered or otherwise discovered
during construction within the
jurisdiction of the San Jacinto Public
Works Department, Hemet Public
Works Department, or RCFCWCD.

The TDA may establish provisions
for tribal monitors. Following
execution of the TDA by the San
Jacinto Public Works Department
and Soboba, the TDA be
incorporated by reference into
individual grading permits for
portions of the Project that are
within the jurisdiction of San Jacinto
Public Works Department or Hemet
Public Works Department; TDAs
executed between RCFCWCD and
Soboba will be incorporated into the
Line E Project construction
specifications.

MM Cultural 2c: If the
archaeological/cultural resources
assessment described in MM
Cultural 2a demonstrates the
potential for archaeological/cultural
resources to occur on the Project
site, tribal monitors, including those
Revised/Clarified CMM Cultural 2c: Inadvertent
Finds. If the archaeological/cultural
resources assessment described in
MM Cultural 2a demonstrates the
potential for archaeological/cultural
resources to occur on the Project
site, tribal monitors, including those
43 Table C – Mitigation Measures
SJV MDP EIR Mitigation Measure
Applicability to
Line E Project
Line E Project
Mitigation Measure
from Soboba, may be allowed to
monitor, at such tribe’s sole cost
and expense, all grading,
excavation, and ground-disturbing
activities, including further surveys.

Following the agreement of the San
Jacinto Public Works Department,
Hemet Public Works Department, or
RCFCWCD, the designated
archaeologist, the tribal monitor,
and any applicable responsible or
trustee agencies, grading,
excavation, ground-disturbing
activities shall be halted temporarily,
and redirected in the event that any
archaeological/cultural resources
are discovered, in order to evaluate
the significance of said
archaeological /cultural resources.

Any artifacts collected or recovered
shall be cleaned, identified,
catalogued, analyzed, and prepared
for curation at an appropriate
repository with permanent
retrievable storage to allow for
additional research in the future.

Site records or site record updates
(as appropriate) shall be prepared
and submitted to the Eastern
Information Center as a permanent
record of the discovery.
from Soboba, may be allowed to
monitor, at such tribe’s sole cost
and expense, all grading,
excavation, and ground-disturbing
activities, including further surveys.

Following the agreement of the San
Jacinto Public Works Department,
Hemet Public Works Department, or
RCFCWCD, the designated
archaeologist, the tribal monitor,
and any applicable responsible or
trustee agencies, Grading,
excavation, ground-disturbing
activities shall be halted temporarily
by the Project Archaeologist, and
redirected in the event that any
archaeological/cultural resources
are discovered during initial ground
disturbing activities, in order to
evaluate the significance of said
archaeological/cultural resources.

Any artifacts collected or recovered
shall be cleaned, identified,
catalogued, analyzed, and prepared
for curation at an appropriate
repository with permanent
retrievable storage to allow for
additional research in the future.

Site records or site record updates
(as appropriate) shall be prepared
and submitted to the Eastern
Information Center South Coastal
Information Center as a permanent
record of the discovery.

MM Cultural 3: Earth-moving
activities encountering soils that are
identified as Pleistocene-age or
older alluvium, by the soils
engineer, shall be monitored by a
qualified paleontological monitor.

Continuous monitoring shall be
restricted to undisturbed older
alluvium, which might be present
Revised/Clarified CMM Cultural 3: Paleontological
Resources Mitigation Monitoring
Plan. Prior to the commencement
of ground-disturbing activities, the
City (or designee) shall retain a
Project Paleontologist to prepare
and implement a Paleontological
Resources Mitigation Monitoring
Plan (PRMMP) for the Line E
44 Table C – Mitigation Measures
SJV MDP EIR Mitigation Measure
Applicability to
Line E Project
Line E Project
Mitigation Measure
below the surface. To avoid
construction delays, the monitor
shall be prepared to quickly salvage
fossils, as they are unearthed. The
monitor shall remove samples of
sediments that are likely to contain
the remains of small fossil
invertebrates and vertebrates. The
monitor shall have the authority to
temporarily halt or divert grading
equipment to allow for the removal
of abundant or large specimens.

Project. The PRMMP shall include
preparation and presentation of
Paleontological Resources Workers
Environmental Awareness Program
(WEAP) to educate construction
crews about the types of
paleontological resources that may
be encountered at the Line E
Project site. The Paleontological
Resources WEAP shall provide a
description of the laws and
ordinances protecting fossil
resources, the types of fossil
resources that may be encountered
in the area, the role of the
paleontological monitor, outline
steps to follow in the event that a
fossil discovery is made and provide
contact information for the Project
Paleontologist. The Project
Paleontologist or designee(s) shall
present the Paleontological
Resources WEAP to the
construction contractor and each of
the construction crews working on
the Project during a preconstruction
meeting. The Paleontological
Resources WEAP shall be taped
and presented to any construction
crew members who were not
present at the preconstruction
meeting during which it was initially
presented prior to such crew
members working on the Project.

This training may be conducted
concurrent with other
preconstruction training (e.g.,
biological resources, safety).

Earth-moving activities encountering
soils that are identified as
Pleistocene-age or older alluvium,
by the soils engineer, shall be
monitored by a qualified
45 Table C – Mitigation Measures
SJV MDP EIR Mitigation Measure
Applicability to
Line E Project
Line E Project
Mitigation Measure
paleontological monitor as set forth
in the PRMMP. Continuous
monitoring shall be restricted to
undisturbed older alluvium, which
might be present below the surface.

To avoid construction delays, the
monitor shall be prepared to quickly
salvage fossils, as they are
unearthed. The monitor shall
remove samples of sediments that
are likely to contain the remains of
small fossil invertebrates and
vertebrates. The monitor shall have
the authority to temporarily halt or
divert grading equipment to allow for
the removal large specimens.

MM Cultural 4: All recovered
specimens shall be prepared and
stabilized for identification and
permanent preservation, including
the washing of sediment samples to
recover small invertebrates and
vertebrates.

Revised/Clarified CMM Cultural 4: All recovered
specimens shall be prepared and
stabilized for identification and
permanent preservation as set forth
in the PRMMP prepared under
CMM Cultural 3, including the
washing of sediment samples to
recover small invertebrates and
vertebrates.

MM Cultural 5: Identification and
curation of specimens into an
established accredited museum
repository with permanent
retrievable paleontological storage
shall be required. Mitigation of
adverse impacts to significant
paleontological resources is not
complete until the curation process
has been fully completed and
documented.

Revised/Clarified CMM Cultural 5: Identification and
curation of recovered specimens
into an established accredited
museum repository with permanent
retrievable paleontological storage
shall be required as set forth in the
PRMMP prepared under CMM
Cultural 3. Mitigation of adverse
impacts to significant
paleontological resources is not
complete until the curation process
has been fully completed and
documented.

MM Cultural 6: Preparation of a
report of findings with an appended
itemized inventory of specimens
Revised/Clarified CMM Cultural 6: Preparation of a
report of findings with an appended
itemized inventory of specimens
46 Table C – Mitigation Measures
SJV MDP EIR Mitigation Measure
Applicability to
Line E Project
Line E Project
Mitigation Measure
shall be required. The submittal of
the report to the Lead Agency and
the curation of recovered specimens
into an established, accredited
museum repository would signify
the completion of the mitigation
program.
shall be required as set forth in the
PRMMP prepared under CMM
Cultural 3. The submittal of the
report to the Lead Agency and the
curation of recovered specimens
into an established, accredited
museum repository would signify
the completion of the mitigation
program.

MM Haz 1: As part of the final
design of each SJV-MDP facility,
the design engineer or designee
shall check proposed sites for listing
on the most recent Hazardous
Waste and Substances List
provided by the Riverside County
Department of Environmental
Health pursuant to Section 65962.5
of the Government Code. If the
location of said facility is on the
Hazardous Waste and Substances
List, avoidance of that property or
properties will be the first
consideration; if avoidance is
infeasible, MM Haz 2 shall be
implemented.

Satisfied As required by SJV-MDP EIR MM
Haz 1, the list compiled by
Government Code Section 65962.5,
known as the Cortese List, was
reviewed to determine if any portion
of the Line E Project site is on this
list. None of the sites listed on the
Cortese List are within or near the
Line E Project disturbance area.

This mitigation measure has been
satisfied.

MM Haz 2: If the selected facility
traverses a site listed on the
Hazardous Waste and Substances
List, and avoidance is not feasible
or if there are other indications that
a site could be contaminated, a
Phase 1 Environmental Site
Assessment (ESA) for such facility
will be prepared. If the Phase 1 ESA
identifies possible contamination
along the facility alignment, then all
recommended subsurface
investigation measures listed in the
Phase I ESA will be implemented.

Based on subsurface investigations
characterizing subsurface
contamination, remediation
Not Applicable This mitigation measure is not
applicable, as the Line E Project is
not on or in proximity to any known
hazardous materials sites..
47 Table C – Mitigation Measures
SJV MDP EIR Mitigation Measure
Applicability to
Line E Project
Line E Project
Mitigation Measure
measures (such as excavation of
contaminated soil, bioremediation,
or soil-vapor extraction), shall be
implemented for the applicable
facility or an alternative facility
alignment will be chosen.

MM Haz 3: All environmental
investigation and/or remediation
shall be conducted under a
Workplan approved by jurisdictional
regulatory agencies overseeing
hazardous waste cleanups until the
applicable regulatory standard is
met.

Not Applicable This mitigation measure is not
applicable because a Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment
(ESA) and Phase II ESA were
prepared for the Line E Project
(Appendices H.1 and H.2). Based
on the findings of the Phase I ESA
and Phase II ESA it was determined
that no further environmental
investigation or remediation is
required.

MM Haz 4: Prior to any excavation
or soil removal on known
contaminated sites, or if
contaminated soil (i.e., soil with a
visible sheen or detectable odor) is
encountered, a complete
characterization of the soil will be
conducted. Appropriate sampling
shall be conducted prior to disposal
of the excavated soil. If the soil is
contaminated, it shall be properly
disposed of according to California’s
Land Disposal restrictions
(California Code of Regulations,
Chapter 18, Title 22). If site
remediation involves the removal of
contamination, then contaminated
material shall be transported off site
by a licensed handler/hauler to a
licensed hazardous waste disposal
facility.

Not Applicable This mitigation measure is not
applicable as there are no known
contaminated sites within the Line E
Project site according to a recent
Phase I ESA. Furthermore, a Phase
II ESA was prepared for the Project
which determined that no further
environmental investigation is
required.

MM Haz 5: If soil import is required
for construction of a specific facility,
proper sampling shall be conducted
prior to the use of such imported soil
Not Applicable This mitigation measure is not
applicable because soil import is not
required to construct the Line E.
48 Table C – Mitigation Measures
SJV MDP EIR Mitigation Measure
Applicability to
Line E Project
Line E Project
Mitigation Measure
to make sure that the imported soil
is free of contamination.

MM Haz 6: If during construction of
a specific facility, soil and/or
groundwater contamination is
suspected, construction in the area
of the suspected contamination
shall cease and appropriate health
and safety measures shall be
implemented. The construction
contractor shall contact the
respective jurisdictional
enforcement agency (i.e., San
Jacinto, Hemet, Riverside County,
RCFCWCD) to obtain the necessary
information on appropriate
measures and their implementation.

The measures recommended by the
applicable enforcement agency will
be implemented.

Not Applicable This mitigation measure is not
applicable because the Phase I
ESA did not identify ground water
contamination and Phase II ESA did
not identify soil contamination within
the Project footprint.

Since the SJV-MDP EIR was
prepared and certified, one new
species has been listed as
Candidate Species per the
California Department of Fish and
Wildlife; the Crotch’s bumble bee
(CBB) is now a species that under
CEQA has to be considered and
impacts evaluated and mitigated for
as appropriate. Therefore, in order
to be compliant, the Line E Project
does need to do additional
mitigation related to CBB.

Added MM Bio E1: Crotch’s Bumble Bee
Pre-Construction Survey and
Construction Monitoring. In order
to avoid direct and indirect impacts
to Crotch’s bumble bee (CBB) which
could establish themselves on the
Project site before construction
starts, prior to the start of any
Project-related ground-disturbing
activities a qualified CBB biologist
(i.e., 1-2 years of experience
performing CBB surveys, or, has a
Memorandum of Understanding
[MOU] with CDFW), shall perform
the records searches and site
surveys according to the methods
set forth in the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife
Survey Considerations for California
Endangered Species Act Candidate
Bumble Bee Species, June 6, 2023
(the “2023 CDFW Survey
Considerations”). The literature
49 Table C – Mitigation Measures
SJV MDP EIR Mitigation Measure
Applicability to
Line E Project
Line E Project
Mitigation Measure
review and records search shall
identify occurrences at the Project
site and within a 5-mile buffer. The
literature review and records search
shall include: a report from the
CDFW California Natural Diversity
Data Base for a 10-mile radius of
the project site; aerial photographs;
and iNaturalist for bee sightings and
nectar sources. Then, the qualified
CBB biologist shall conduct on-site
surveys for foraging and nesting
bees. The surveys shall begin with a
habitat assessment to evaluate the
likelihood of bumble bees occurring
within and adjacent to the project
area. Then, foraging bumble bee
and nesting surveys shall be
conducted during the peak nectar
blooming period (April through June
30). Habitat assessment and survey
results shall be submitted to CDFW
prior to the start of grounddisturbing project activities.

Vegetation removal is allowable
from November to January (note
seasonal limitations for nesting birds
in MM Bio E4). No monitoring is
required if removal of vegetation
occurs during this time period.

However, vegetation
removal/ground disturbances during
the CBB flight season, which is
February to October, will require
preemptive focused CBB surveys
and full-time biological monitoring
for CBB to take place within the
project limits. If Crotch’s bumble
bees are present, mitigation
measure MM Bio E2, which
required an avoidance plan shall be
implemented. Construction
monitoring for CBB may cease
based on the professional
50 Table C – Mitigation Measures
SJV MDP EIR Mitigation Measure
Applicability to
Line E Project
Line E Project
Mitigation Measure
judgement of the qualified CBB
biologist that construction activities
have already impacted the extent of
the planned impact footprint. If an
active CBB nest is detected during
focused surveys conducted
between April and June, or during
the construction monitoring, then
the qualified biologist shall establish
a no-disturbance buffer zone
(including foraging resources and
flight corridors essential for
supporting the colony) around the
CBB nest. The qualified biologist
and City shall notify CDFW and if
needed, process an Incidental Take
Permit (ITP) with CDFW (MM Bio
E3). If a single CBB is observed
during construction, CDFW shall be
notified, and work shall be halted in
that area until the qualified biologist
deems the CBB has left the site. It is
expected that if an ITP is needed,
that the offsite mitigation which has
similar habitat types would be
required. If offsite mitigation for CBB
is needed, then a CBB permitted
land manager shall be hired by the
City to ensure CBB habitat is intact
on the offsite mitigation property.

Added MM Bio E2: Crotch’s Bumble Bee
Avoidance Plan. If Crotch’s bumble
bee is detected during preconstruction surveys outlined above in MM Bio E1, the City in
consultation with the qualified CBB
biologist shall develop a plan to fully
avoid impacts to Crotch’s bumble
bee. The plan shall include
effective, specific, enforceable, and
feasible measures. An avoidance
plan shall be submitted to the City
51 Table C – Mitigation Measures
SJV MDP EIR Mitigation Measure
Applicability to
Line E Project
Line E Project
Mitigation Measure
prior to implementing Project-related
ground-disturbing activities and/or
vegetation removal where there
may be impacts to Crotch’s bumble
bee.

Added MM Bio E3: Incidental Take
Permit for Crotch’s Bumble Bee.

If Crotch’s bumble bee is detected
during the focused surveys and
Crotch’s bumble bee becomes
formally listed under CESA or is still
a Candidate species and if impacts
to Crotch’s bumble bee cannot be
feasibly avoided during Project
construction and activities, the
City/qualified biologist shall
coordinate with CDFW to obtain
appropriate permits for incidental
take of Crotch’s bumble bee and
provide appropriate mitigation for
impacts to Crotch’s bumble bee
habitat. CDFW recommends the
City mitigate for impacts to Crotch’s
bumble bee habitat at a ratio
comparable to the Project’s level of
impacts.

All potentially significant impacts, except for agricultural resources] and indirect growth inducing impacts to population/housing, identified in the SJV-MDP EIR were determined to be less than significant with incorporation of mitigation measures. The Line E Project incorporates feasible mitigation to reduce potential impacts to less than significant. (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.

See Table C – Mitigation Measures. All potentially significant impacts, except agricultural resources, air quality, and population/housing identified in the SJV-MDP EIR were determined to be less than significant with incorporation of mitigation measures. As shown in Table C – Mitigation Measures, certain mitigation measure have been satisfied by the preparation of Line E Project specific technical studies for air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, and searching hazardous materials databases. Other mitigation measures from the SJV-MDP EIR have been clarified to be specific to the Line E Project; however, these clarifications do not reduce 52 the effectiveness of the mitigation measures or change the significance determinations of the SJVMDP EIR. New mitigation measures for potential impacts to biological resources would be implemented by the Line E Project; however, these measures are not mitigating new significant effects on the environment; rather, they identify specific actions to implement the more general SJV-MDP EIR mitigation measures. (Mani Brothers Real Estate Group v. City of Los Angeles (2007) 153 Cal.App.4th 1385, 1403 [Mitigation measures adopted when a project is approved may be changed or deleted in an addendum if the agency states a legitimate reason for making the changes and the reason is supported by substantial evidence]; see also Napa Citizens for Honest Government v. Napa County Bd. of Supervisors (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 342, 359.) No new or more severe impacts are caused by the deletions or changes to the SJV-MDP EIR mitigation measures.

Hence, no subsequent EIR is required.

Based on the above, the City has reviewed the Line E Project in light of the requirements defined under the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 using the Supplemental Environmental Checklist Form in Section 4 of this Addendum. The City, as the CEQA lead agency, has determined that none of the above conditions requiring preparation of a subsequent or supplemental MND or EIR apply. Therefore, an addendum to the San Jacinto Master Drainage Plan (MDP) EIR is the appropriate environmental documentation for the Line E Project.
53 4. Supplemental Environmental Checklist Form
A. Project Title
San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan Line E Project
B. Lead Agency Name, Address, Contact Person, and Phone Number City of San Jacinto
595 S. San Jacinto Ave.,
San Jacinto, CA 92583
Kevin White, Planning Manager, (951) 487-7330 Ext. 306
C. Responsible Agency Name, Address, Contact Person. and Phone Number Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District 1995 Market St.

Riverside, CA 92501
Margaret Bornyasz, Senior Flood Control Planner, (951) 955-1200 D. Project Location
The proposed Project is generally located south of Ramona Expressway, north of Cottonwood Road, parallel to and east of Sanderson Avenue, in the City of San Jacinto, Riverside County, California as described in detail in Section 2 Project Description and shown on Figure 3 – Regional Map and Figure 4 - Project Map.

E. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address
City of San Jacinto
595 S. San Jacinto Ave.

San Jacinto, CA
F. Total Project Area
Approximately 137.5 acres in total
G. Assessor’s Parcel Number(s)
The Project encompasses all or portions of APNs 430-100-002, 430-100-009, 430-100-012, 430-100- 013, 430-100-018, 432-030-006, 432-030-010, 432-030-012, 432-030-013, 436-010-003, 436-010- 005, 436-030-004, 436-080-002, 436-080-003, 436-170-001, and 436-170-016.

H. Section, Township & Range
Sections 18,19, 20, and 29, Township 4 South and Range 1 West of the San Bernardino Baseline and Meridian, identified on the Lakeview, California USGS 7.5 Quadrangle Map as identified on Figure 13 – USGS Topographic Map.

I. Elevation
The Project site ranges in elevation from approximately 1,452 to 1,490 feet above mean sea level (AMSL).
54 J. General Plan Land Use Designation(s)
Table D – General Plan Land Use Designations
APN GP Land Use Designation
430-100-002
430-100-013
Commercial
430-100-012 Water
430-100-009
430-100-018
Business Park
432-030-013
436-080-002
Low Density Residential
432-030-006
432-030-010
Villages Specific Plan
432-030-012 Medium Density Residential
436-030-004
436-170-001
436-170-016
Commercial; Medium Residential
Refer to Figure 14 – General Plan Land Use Designations.

K. Existing Zoning Designation(s)
Table E – Zoning Designations
APN Zoning Designation
430-100-002
430-100-013
CG – Commercial General
430-100-012 W – Water Source
430-100-009
430-100-018
OP – Office Park
432-030-013
436-080-002
RL – Residential, Low
Density
432-030-006
432-030-010
SP – Specific Plan
432-030-012 RM – Residential, Medium
Density
436-030-004
436-170-001
436-170-016
CG - Commercial;
RM - Medium Residential
Refer to Figure 15 – Zoning Designations.

L. Project Description
The proposed Project is the construction, operation, and maintenance of the SJV MDP Line E Channel and Line E-Y-Z Confluence Basin as in detail in Section 2.0 Project Description and shown on Figure 4 – Project Map and Figure 5 – Project Components 13 N
Sanderson
Ave
Ramona Expy
N Sanderson Ave
Ramona Expy
Col. Lewis
Millett Park
AG
W
C
BP
MU
W
W
BP
BP
SPA
PI
SPA
MDR
LDR
LDR
MU
MU
PI
W
C
HDR
P
LDR
LDR
C
MDR
PI
HDR
C
MDR
C
\\brkpan01.webb.lan\WO4\2023\23-0007\GIS\PRO\Line E Addendum\project_map\project_map.aprx Map created 10 Feb 2025 Source: Esri Hybrid Reference Layer, 2024; Riverside County General Plan Land Use 2019;
City of San Jacinto General Plan Land Use 2022.

Line E Addendum
Figure 14 - General Plan
Land Use Designations
0 500
I
1,000 1,500
Feet
LEGEND
Permanent Impact Boundary
Temporary Impact Boundary
Riverside County General Plan Land Use
Agriculture
City of San Jacinto General Plan Land Use
Low Density Residential (LDR)
Medium Density Residential (MDR)
High Density Residential (HDR)
Mixed Use (MU)
Commercial (C)
Business Park (BP)
Public/Institutional (PI)
Park (P)
SPA
Water Source (W)
N Ramona Blvd
Figure 15 - Zoning Designations
58 New Significant Environmental Effects or Substantially More Severe Significant Environmental Effects Compared to those Identified in the Previous CEQA Document
The subject areas checked below (X) were determined to be new significant environmental effects or to be previously identified effects that have a substantial increase in severity either due to a change in project, change in circumstances, or new information of substantial importance, as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
☐ Aesthetics ☐ Agriculture Resources ☐ Air Quality
☐ Biological Resources ☐ Cultural Resources ☐ Energy
☐ Geology / Soils ☐ Greenhouse Gases ☐ Hazards & Hazardous Materials ☐ Hydrology / Water Quality ☐ Land Use / Planning ☐ Mineral Resources ☐ Noise ☐ Population / Housing ☐ Public Services
☐ Recreation ☐ Transportation ☐ Tribal Cultural Resources ☐ Utilities / Service Systems ☐ Wildfire ☐ Mandatory Findings of Significance
Determination:
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
☐ No substantial changes are proposed in the project and there are no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that will require major revisions to the previous approved ND or MND or certified EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Also, there is no “new information of substantial importance” as that term is used in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3). Therefore, the previously adopted ND or MND or previously certified EIR adequately discusses the potential impacts of the project without modification.
☒ No substantial changes are proposed in the project and there are no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that will require major revisions to the previous approved ND or MND or certified EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Also, there is no “new information of substantial importance” as that term is used in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3). Therefore, the previously adopted ND, MND or previously certified EIR adequately discusses the potential impacts of the project; however, minor changes require the preparation of an ADDENDUM.
☐ Substantial changes are proposed in the project or there are substantial changes in the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that will require major revisions to the previous ND, MND or EIR due to the involvement of significant new environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Or, there is “new information of substantial importance,” as that term is used in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3). However, all new potentially significant environmental effects or substantial 59 increases in the severity of previously identified significant effects are clearly reduced to below a level of significance through the incorporation of mitigation measures agreed to by the project applicant. Therefore, a SUBSEQUENT MND is required.
☐ Substantial changes are proposed in the project or there are substantial changes in the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that will require major revisions to the previous environmental document due to the involvement of significant new environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Or, there is “new information of substantial importance,” as that term is used in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3). However, only minor changes or additions or changes would be necessary to make the previous EIR adequate for the project in the changed situation. Therefore, a SUPPLEMENTAL EIR is required.
☐ Substantial changes are proposed in the project or there are substantial changes in the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that will require major revisions to the previous environmental document due to the involvement of significant new environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Or, there is “new information of substantial importance,” as that term is used in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3). Therefore, a SUBSEQUENT EIR is required.

Signature Date
.Kevin White, Planning Manager For City of San Jacinto
60 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts

1. A finding of “No New Impact/No Impact” means that the potential impact was fully analyzed and/or mitigated in the prior CEQA document and no new or different impacts will result from the proposed activity. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No New Impact/No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No New Impact/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 New Impact/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. A finding of “New Mitigation is Required” means that the project may have a new potentially significant impact on the environment or a substantially more severe impact than analyzed in the previously approved or certified CEQA document and that new mitigation is required to address the impact, but that the resultant significance is not changed from the original document.

3. A finding of “New Potentially Significant Impact” means that the project may have a new potentially significant impact on the environment or a substantially more severe impact than analyzed in the previously approved or certified CEQA document that cannot be mitigated to below a level of significance or be avoided.

4. A finding of “Reduced Impact” means that the analysis herein shows, or a previously infeasible mitigation measure is now available, or a previously infeasible alternative is now available that will reduce a significant impact identified in the previously prepared environmental document.

5. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, maintenance activities, areas needed for access, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction impacts.

6. 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:
a. Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. Describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the proposed action. c. Infeasible Mitigation Measures. Since the previous EIR was certified or previous ND or MND was adopted, discuss any mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible that would in fact be feasible or that are considerably different from those previously analyzed and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives. d. Changes in Circumstances. Since the previous EIR was certified or previous ND or MND was adopted, discuss any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under which the project is 61 undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause a change in conclusion regarding one or more effects discussed in the original document.

7. 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.

8. Supporting Information Sources. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.

9. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected.

10. The explanation of each issue should identify:
a. the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; b. differences between the proposed activity and the previously approved project described in the approved ND or MND or certified EIR; and
c. the previously approved mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
62 A. AESTHETICS
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation is
Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
Except as provided in Public Resource Code Section 21099, would the project? 1) Have a substantial effect on a scenic vista?
2) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
3) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are
experienced from publicly accessible vantage points.) If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project
conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations
governing scenic quality?
4) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Source(s): COR ORD 655; DOF; DOT
1) Have a substantial effect on a scenic vista?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact
The SJV-MDP EIR identified immediate views in the SJV-MDP area as agricultural and rural residential uses and the nearby Lakeview, Dawson, and San Jacinto Mountains. Distant views from the SJV-MDP area are the San Bernardino Mountains to the north, the Santa Ana Mountains to the west, and Palomar Mountain to the south. The mountains constitute a scenic vista. The SJV-MDP EIR Initial Study determined that implementation of the MDP would not impact scenic vistas because, to a large extent, the proposed facilities would be located at grade or below the ground surface, including underground storm drains, open channels, and detention basins. The detention basins would be incised. Above ground MDP facilities include detention basin embankments and maintenance roads adjacent to open channels. The detention basin embankments would be approximately three feet above ground and no greater than six feet above ground. Open channel maintenance roads will be located no more than a couple of feet above ground. The proposed MDP facilities would not obstruct views from the MDP project area or substantially affect scenic vistas.

Exposed surfaces, construction debris, and construction equipment may temporarily impact the aesthetic quality of the immediate area in which construction is taking place; however, these impacts would be short-term and cease upon completion of each MSP facility. Because implementation of the MDP would not have a substantial effect on a scenic vista , impacts would be less than significant. (SJV-MDP IS, p. 8.)
Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
The only scenic vista in proximity to the Project site is the San Jacinto Mountains. The only above grade component of the Project are berms, which would direct flows into the Line E channel. The berms would be small in scale, approximately 5-feet high, which is the less than the height of the embankments evaluated in the SJV-MDP EIR. The berms would be vegetated. Due to the size and scale of the berms there would be no substantial adverse effect on views of the San Jacinto Mountains. The Line E channel would mostly be located at grade or below the ground surface. As analyzed in the SJV-MDP EIR Initial Study, exposed surfaces, construction debris, and construction equipment may cause temporary impacts, from the construction of the proposed channel at or below 63 grade. The Line E Project will result in the same temporary impacts during construction as the channel, from surface exposure, construction debris, and construction equipment.

For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to scenic vistas. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required.
2) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact
There are no state designated or state eligible scenic highways in in proximity to proposed boundaries of the MDP area. The closest State Designated Scenic Highway is Highway 243 (Banning/Idyllwild Panoramic Highway), which is located over seven and one-half miles northeast of the MDP’s northeastern boundary. State Route 74 (Florida Avenue), as it passes east to west through Hemet, is considered a State Eligible Scenic Highway. State Route 74 traverses through the southernmost portion of the Project area; however, there are no facilities proposed within one quarter mile of this State Eligible Scenic Highway. The closest proposed facilities are storm drains, which would not be visible after construction. For these reasons impacts will be less than significant. (SJVMDP EIR, pp. 3.1-5 – 3.1-8.) Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
As shown on Figure 4 – Project Map, no portion of Line E would be located in or near state designated Highway 243 (Banning/Idyllwild Panoramic Highway) or state eligible scenic highway State Route 74 (Florida Avenue). No portion of the Line E project would be visible from either Highway 243 or State Route 74 due to the distance of the Line E project from these highways.

For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to scenic resources. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 3) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage points.) If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact
The proposed SJV-MDP Facilities are located in San Jacinto and unincorporated areas of Riverside County. Temporary impacts on the area's aesthetics, due to exposed surfaces, construction debris, and equipment, would be short-term and cease upon project completion, making them less than significant. Post-construction, the underground drainages would be hidden, and the visible open storm channels and detention basins would align aesthetically with the rural residential development, thus not degrading the character or quality of the project area. For these reasons impacts would be less than significant. (SJV-MDP IS, p. 8.)
64 Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
The proposed Line E Project would be constructed entirely within the incorporated area of San Jacinto. CEQA Statute section 21071(a) defines an incorporated city as being an urbanized area if it meets either of the following criteria:
(1) Has a population of at least 100,000 persons.
(2) Has a population of less than 100,000 persons if the population of that city and not more than two contiguous incorporated cities combined equals at least 100,000 persons.

Based on January 2024 Department of Finance E-1 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State data, San Jacinto has a population of 53,538 and Hemet has a population of 89,663. (DOF.) Because San Jacinto and Hemet, a contiguous city, have a combined population that adds up to more than 100,000 residents. Thus, per CEQA Statute section 21071(a)(1), the Project site is within an urbanized area. Therefore, this discussion addresses, would the Line E Project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality.

As shown on Figure 14 – General Plan Land Use Designation and Figure 15 – Zoning Designation, the Line E Project traverses land use and zoning designations that allow for a variety of urban uses including business park, commercial, and residential.

Regulations governing scenic quality in San Jacinto are contained in Title 17 of the San Jacinto Municipal Code, also known as the San Jacinto Development Code (SJDC). The SJDC provides specific development standards that influence the City’s scenic views, visual character, and restrict lighting. The SJDC implements the San Jacinto General Plan 2040 goals and policies by classifying and regulating the specific uses of land and structures within the City. Article 2, Zones, Allowable Land Uses, and Zone-Specific Standards, of the SJDC establishes development standards. None of these standards are applicable to the Line E Project.

The Line E Channel would be at and below grade level, once construction is complete the ground surface will be returned to its previous condition. Berms would be built to direct flows into the proposed Line E channel, however they will not be of significant size to degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views. Therefore, implementation of the Line E Project would not degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views or conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality.

For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to degrading the existing visual character or quality of public views or conflicting with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 4) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: No Impact
The proposed flood control facilities would not require any lighting. The project does not generate any amount of light or glare; therefore, this will not conflict with any day or nighttime views in the area.

Any lighting used during the construction phase will be temporary. The proposed flood control facilities will not create a new source of substantial light or glare. (SJV-MDP IS, pp. 8 – 9.) 65 Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
The proposed Line E Project is a flood control facility and will not require lighting. The project does not generate any amount of light or glare; therefore, this will not conflict with any day or nighttime views in the area. Any lighting used during the construction phase will be temporary and will be faced downward.

For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to new sources of light or glare. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 66 B. AGRICULTURE & FOREST RESOURCES
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Mitigation
is Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board.

Would the project:
1) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,
to non-agricultural use?
2) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract?
3) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources
Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland
Production (as defined by Govt. Code section 51104(g))? 4) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
5) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Source(s): FMMP; GP DEIR
1) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources. Agency, to nonagricultural use.

SJV- MDP EIR Conclusion: Significant and Unavoidable Impact Construction of the proposed open channels will be primarily located within or adjacent to road ROW. However, construction of SJV-MDP facilities will result in the direct conversion of approximately 122 acres of Important Farmland, comprised of 12 acres of Prime Farmland, 80 acres of Farmland of Statewide Importance, and 30 acres of Unique Farmland, to open storm channel facilities. This permanent conversion of Farmland is a potentially significant impact. (SJVMDP EIR, pp. 3.2-12 – 3.2-13.) Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
The proposed Line E Project is within Important Farmland designated land as shown on Figure 16 – Farmland Map. Construction and operation of the Line E Project would permanently convert approximately 81 acres of Farmland, comprised of 4 acres of Prime Farmland, 56 acres of Farmland of Statewide Importance, and 21 acres of Unique Farmland, to drainage facilities. This permanent conversion of Farmland is a potentially significant impact. 67 The Line E Project would not permanently convert Farmland, beyond what was analyzed in the SJV-MDP EIR. Because the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to the conversion of Farmland to a non-agricultural use, this is not considered a new significant impact. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required.
2) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act Contract.

SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Significant and Unavoidable Impact The SJV-MDP conceptual alignment, including open channels Line 1, Line 2, Line 3, Line X, and the Line E-Y-Z Confluence Basin, is within properties under Williamson Act contracts.

Construction would mainly occur within or adjacent to road rights-of-way, avoiding conflicts with Williamson Act contracts. However, converting approximately 6.3 acres of Farmland of Local Importance under a Williamson Act Contract to non-agricultural use for the Line E-Y-Z Confluence Basin would be a direct impact. Although the San Jacinto General Plan allows urban development on agricultural land, the Project’s drainage infrastructure could indirectly lead to the development of agricultural lands or lands under Williamson Act contracts for urban uses, resulting in an indirect significant impact. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 3.2-13.) Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
San Jacinto General Plan does not have land use designations exclusive for agricultural uses.

The San Jacinto Development Code does not have zoning districts exclusive for agricultural uses.

Areas in San Jacinto, identified as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance, including within approved Specific Plan areas, are mostly designated for a mix of residential and non-residential development. (SJGP EIR, pp. 5.2-8 – 5.2-10.) The San Jacinto Development code does not address regional stormwater infrastructure; therefore the Line E Project does not conflict with existing zoning for agriculture use.

The San Jacinto General Plan allows urban development on agricultural land (SJ GP EIR, pp.

5.2-8 – 5.2-10), the Line E Project’s drainage infrastructure could indirectly lead to the development of agricultural lands for urban uses, resulting in an indirect significant impact.

There are no Williamson Act contracted lands within San Jacinto. (SJGP EIR, p. 5.2-1.) Therefore, the Line E Project Site, including the Line E-Y-Z confluence basin, would not have a direct or indict conflict with a Williamson Act Contract.

For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts regarding conflicts with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required.
3) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g)), and
4) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: No impact
68 These thresholds were not a part of the State CEQA Guidelines at the time the SJV-MDP EIR was prepared. However, the General Biological Assessment, February 17, 2009, prepared for the SJV-MDP EIR did not identify forest land as present within the SJV-MDP Project area. Therefore, implementation of the SJV-MDP Project would not result in the loss of forest land or the conversion of forest land to non-forest uses. (SJV-MDP EIR, pp 3.4-38 – 3.4-39.) Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
Forest land, as defined in Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 12220(g) is land that can support 10 percent of native tree cover of any species under natural conditions and that allows for the management of one or more forest resources. Timberland, as defined in PRC section 4526, means land, other than land owned by the federal government and land designated as experimental forest land, which is capable of growing a crop of trees for any commercial species, including Christmas trees.

According to San Jacinto General Plan EIR, there are no properties within the City limits that are zoned for forest land, timberland, or timberland production. (SJGP EIR, p. 5.2-4.) Therefore, implementation of the proposed Line E Project would not conflict with existing timberland zoning or result in the loss or conversation of forest land to non-forest use.

For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to forest land or timberland. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 5) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Significant and Unavoidable Impact The proposed Project would provide drainage infrastructure that could support development of the Project area. Development of adjacent areas would result in the direct conversion of farmland (including Important Farmland) to non-agricultural uses. Consequently, the proposed SJV-MDP Project has the potential to indirectly convert farmland in the Project area. The direct conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses would likely occur in the Project area with the build out of the San Jacinto, Hemet, and Riverside County General Plans. Because the proposed Project would likely support the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses, impacts are considered significant and unavoidable. (SJV-MDP EIR, pp 3.2-13 – 3.2-14.) Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
As previously discussed in item B.1, the Line E Project would result in the direct conversion of approximately 81 acres of Farmland to storm drain facilities; which is a potentially significant impact. The drainage infrastructure proposed could support development of the Line E tributary area, which would result in the direct conversion of farmland (including Important Farmland) to non-agricultural uses. Consequently, the proposed Project has the potential to indirectly convert farmland in the within the Line E tributary area.

There is no forest land within San Jacinto; therefore, the Line E Project would not result in the conversion of forest land to a non-forest use.
69 For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to conversion of Farmland or forest land to nonagricultural or non-forest uses. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required.
\\brkpan01.webb.lan\WO4\2023\23-0007\GIS\PRO\Line E Addendum\project_map\project_map.aprx Map created 08 Jan 2025 Source: California Department of Conservation, Important Farmland, 2020.

Line E Addendum
Figure 16 - Farmland Map
0 500
I
1,000 1,500
Feet
LEGEND
Permanent Impact Boundary
Important Farmland
Prime Farmland
Farmland of Statewide Importance
Unique Farmland
Farmland of Local Importance
Other Land
Urban and Built-Up Land
71 C. AIR QUALITY
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation is
Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.

Would the project:
1) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
2) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
3) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
4) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to
odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?
Source(s): SCAQMD-A; SCAQMD-B; CARB-A; CalEEMod Output (Appendix C) 1) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? The City is located in the South Coast Air Basin (Basin). The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) prepares the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) for the Basin. The SCAQMD sets forth a comprehensive program that will lead the Basin into compliance with all federal and state air quality standards. The AQMP’s control measures and related emission reduction estimates are based upon emissions projections for a future development scenario derived from land use, population, and employment characteristics defined in consultation with local governments.

Accordingly, if a project demonstrates compliance with local land use plans and/or population projections, then the AQMP would have taken into account such uses when it was developed.

SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact
The SJV-MDP EIR determined that the proposed infrastructure will not in and of itself result in any changes to the existing land use patterns in the project area, and the implementation of this project accommodates present and future development within the San Jacinto area, the project does not conflict with or obstruct the implementation of the AQMP, and impacts will be less than significant. (SJV-MDP IS, p. 10.)
Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
The proposed Line E Project is a facility approved in the SJV-MDP EIR.

Like the SJV-MDP, construction and operation of the Line E Project would not in and of itself result in any changes to the existing land use patterns in the City; thus, implementation of the Line E Project will not conflict of obstruct implementation of the AQMP.

For the reasons discussed above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to conflicts with or obstruction of the SCAQMD Basin AQMP.

Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 72 2) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
Air quality impacts can be described in short- and long-term perspectives. Short-term impacts are anticipated to occur during grading and project construction and consist of fugitive dust and other particulate matter, as well as exhaust emissions generated by construction-related vehicles. Longterm air quality impacts would occur once a project is in operation.

SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Significant and Unavoidable Impact The portion of the Basin in which the Line E Project is located is designated as a non-attainment area for ozone, particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter (PM-10), and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM-2.5) under both state and federal standards. In addressing cumulative effects for air quality, the AQMP utilizes approved general plans; therefore, it is the most appropriate document to use in evaluating cumulative impacts of the proposed Project. As discussed in item C.1, above. the Line E Project would not conflict with or obstruct the implementation of the AQMP. The Project’s short-term construction emissions for nitrogen oxides (NOx), PM-10, and PM2.5 exceed the SCAQMD regional daily thresholds and were considered to be significant on a regional level. Implementation of mitigation measures MM Air 1 through MM Air 4 was required to reduce Project-generated emissions, however, the short-term impact after mitigation remained significant. Because it is only the Project’s short-term emissions that are above thresholds for NOx, PM-10, and PM-2.5, and the impact is temporary (approximately six months in duration), the impact is not considered to have a cumulatively considerable net increase on ozone and PM-10, which are non-attainment in the region under both state and federal standards, and is considered less than significant. Potential impacts are considered less than significant with mitigation (SJV MDP EIR, pp.

3.3-29 – 3.3-35; 3.3-38 – 3.3-39; 3.3-42.)
MM Air 1: During construction, ozone precursor emissions from all vehicles and construction equipment shall be controlled by maintaining equipment engines in good condition and in proper tune per manufacturers’ specifications to the satisfaction of the jurisdiction in which the construction is taking place, i.e., San Jacinto Public Works Department, Hemet Public Works Department, Riverside County Department of Building and Safety, or RCFCWCD. Equipment maintenance records and equipment design specification data sheets shall be kept on site during construction. Compliance with this measure shall be subject to periodic verification by the Jacinto Public Works Department, Hemet Public Works Department, or RCFCWCD.

MM Air 2: Signs shall be posted stating that all vehicles are prohibited from idling in excess of five minutes, both on and off site.

MM Air 3: Electricity from power poles shall be used instead of temporary diesel- or gasoline-powered generators to reduce the associated emissions.

MM Air 4: To reduce construction vehicle (truck) and equipment idling while waiting to enter/exit the site, the contractor shall submit a traffic control plan that will describe in detail safe detours to prevent traffic congestion to the best of the Project’s ability, and provide temporary traffic control measures. To reduce traffic congestion, and therefore NOx, the plan shall include, as necessary, appropriate, and practicable the following:
dedicated turn lanes for movement of construction trucks and equipment on and off site, scheduling of construction activities that affect traffic flow on the arterial system to off- 73 peak hour, rerouting of construction trucks away from congested streets or sensitive receptors, and/or signal synchronization to improve traffic flow.

Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
As with the SJV-MDP Project, the portion of the Basin within which the Line E Project is located is designated as a non-attainment area for PM-10 under state standards, and for ozone and PM-2.5 under both state and federal standards. (CARB-A.)
Construction of the Line E Project is also required to comply with existing SCAQMD rules for the reduction of fugitive dust emissions as established by Rule 403. Compliance with Rule 403 is achieved through application of standard best management practices (BMPs) in construction and operation activities, such as application of water or chemical stabilizers to disturbed soils, covering haul vehicles, restricting vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour, sweeping loose dirt from paved site access roadways, cessation of construction activity when winds exceed 25 miles per hour and establishing a permanent, stabilizing ground cover on finished sites. In addition, projects that disturb 50 or more acres or more of soil or move 5,000 cubic yards of materials per day are required to submit a Fugitive Dust Control Plan or a Large Operation Notification Form to SCAQMD.

Based on the size of this Project’s disturbance area (approximately 88 acres) a Fugitive Dust Control Plan or a Large Operation Notification Form would be required.

Short-term emissions from construction of the Line E Project were modeled using the CalEEMod version 2022.1 program (output included as Appendix C) using both Line E Project-specific assumptions and the default parameters within CalEEMod to evaluate whether the expected criteria air pollutant emissions generated as a result of construction of the proposed project would cause exceedances of the SCAQMD’s thresholds for air quality in the Project area. The total construction period estimated for the proposed Project is approximately three years, beginning no sooner than August 2027; the analysis considered the project would be constructed all at once (no phasing) over a three-year period. The default parameters within CalEEMod were used and these default values reflect a worst-case scenario, which means that Project emissions are expected to be equal to or less than the estimated emissions. In addition to the default values used, assumptions relevant to model inputs for short-term construction emission estimates used are:
• Construction is anticipated to begin no sooner than August 2027. The Project construction consists of grading and excavation, and construction of the confluence basin, channel, and earthen training berms and was modeled as a single linear, grading and excavation activity. The modeled construction is shown below:

Construction Activity Start Date End Date
Total
Working
Days
Grading/Excavation 08/03/2027 08/03/2030 784 days
• The off-road equipment to be used is shown below based on engineering estimates. The engine tier for each piece of equipment is calculated using CalEEMod defaults for the statewide fleet average emissions factors. Each piece of equipment is assumed to operate eight hours per day:

Construction Activity Off-Road Equipment
Unit
Amount
Grading/Excavation
Crawler Tractor 1
Excavator 3
Grader 1
Rollers 2
Rubber Tired Loader 1
74 Construction Activity Off-Road Equipment
Unit
Amount
Scrapers 2
Signal Boards 6
Tractor/Loaders/Backhoes 2
Crane1 1
Bore/Drill Rig1 1
Air Compressors 1
Plate Compactor 1
Rough Terrain Forklifts 1
Notes: 1 Equipment added for the construction at the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 crossing where the installation of either Rammed Aggregate Piers (RAP) or CIDH piles are anticipated. • Project construction will require the export of approximately 515,734 cubic yards (CY) of soil.

Using the CalEEMod default truck capacity of 16 cubic yards, this results in an estimated 82 oneway trips per day for soil export. The soil export site is the vacant land located south of Ramona/Record Road and west of Sanderson Avenue. Therefore, a hauling trip length of approximately three miles per trip was assumed.
• Six (6) one way vendor trips per day were added to the grading activity to account for material delivery of concrete and riprap per engineering estimates, using the CalEEMod default vendor trip length of 10.20 miles per one‑way trip.
• To evaluate Project compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 for fugitive dust control, the Project utilized the option of watering the Project site three times daily which achieves a control efficiency of 74 percent for PM-10 and PM-2.5 emissions. Two (2) daily vendor trips per day were added to account for water truck trips.

The results of this analysis are presented in Table F – Estimated Maximum Daily Construction Emissions in addition to the maximum emissions from the Line E facility evaluated in the SJV-MDP EIR.

Table F – Estimated Maximum Daily Construction Emissions Activity
Peak Daily Emissions (lb/day)
VOC NOX CO SO2 PM-10 PM-2.5
SCAQMD Daily
Construction Thresholds1 75 100 550 150 150 55
2027 3.86 32.80 43.10 0.09 3.10 1.48
2028 3.72 31.00 42.70 0.09 3.00 1.38
2029 3.59 29.30 42.20 0.09 2.91 1.30
2030 3.45 28.10 41.80 0.09 2.86 1.24
Maximum1 3.86 32.80 43.10 0.09 3.10 1.48
Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No
Line E in SJV-MDP Project
EIR2 8.42 67.73 39.03 0.00 455.83 97.73
Note: See the detailed model output reports, included as Appendix C. Numbers are the maximum of summer or winter emissions in a given year and may not match due to rounding within the model. 1 SCAQMD thresholds available at Air Quality Analysis Handbook (aqmd.gov) 2 SJV-MDP EIR, Table 3.3-E As shown in Table F, the construction emissions from the Line E Project are below the applicable SCAQMD thresholds and lower than the emissions reported for the Line E facility in the SJV-MDP EIR. The emissions estimates for this MDP Line Project are lower than those reported in the SJVMDP EIR because of changes in the available modeling program that utilizes updated emission factors (newer equipment generates fewer emissions due to the implementation of newer regulatory requirements), emissions calculation methodologies, and default data. Because the Line E Project 75 emissions are below the SCAQMD thresholds, MM Air 1 through MM Air 4 do not apply to the Line E Project.

Operational emissions sources from the Line E Project are limited because the basin pumps are electric. The primary source of operational emissions is the routine visits by vehicles driven by maintenance personnel and are considered negligible. As with the SJV-MDP Project, long-term SJVMDP operational emissions are considered negligible because the proposed SJV-MDP will not result in a change from the operation of the Existing MDPs (i.e., the San Jacinto MDP and the NW Hemet MDP) for the Project area.

For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would result in lower emissions than those reported in the SJV-MDP EIR and would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 3) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? A sensitive receptor is a person in the population who is particularly susceptible to health effects due to exposure to an air contaminant including children, the elderly, and persons with pre-existing respiratory and/or cardiovascular illness. SCAQMD defines a “sensitive receptor” as a land use or facility such as residences, schools, childcare centers, athletic facilities, playgrounds, retirement homes, and convalescent homes where these persons are typically located. (SCAQMD-A) As part of the SCAQMD’s environmental justice program, attention has been focused on localized effects of air quality. Staff at SCAQMD has developed localized significance threshold (LST) methodology that can be used by public agencies to determine whether a project may generate significant adverse localized air quality impacts (both short- and long-term). (SCAQMD-B). LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that will not cause or contribute to an exceedance of the state ambient air quality standard, and are developed based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant for each source receptor area (SRA). The SJV-MDP boundaries are within SRA 28.

SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Significant and Unavoidable Impact The short-term construction of the SJV-MDP facilities will not result in any localized air quality impacts to sensitive receptors within the Project area for NOx or CO, during construction of Project facilities; however, emissions of PM-10 and PM-2.5 during construction are above SCAQMD recommended daily localized thresholds. Therefore, exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollution concentrations from short-term construction emissions is considered significant. Implementation of mitigation measures MM Air 1 through MM Air 4 was required to reduce Project-generated emissions, however, the short-term impact after mitigation remained significant. Due to the lack of stationary source emissions; no long-term localized significance threshold analysis is needed, and exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollution concentrations from long-term operational impacts is considered less than significant. (SJV MDP EIR, pp. 3.3-37; 3.3-41.) Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
An LST analysis was prepared in accordance with the SCAQMD LST Methodology (SCAQMD-B) using the CalEEMod output included in Appendix C and is summarized below.

According to the LST methodology, only on-site emissions need to be analyzed. Emissions associated with vendor and worker trips are mobile source emissions that occur off site and are 76 therefore excluded. The emissions analyzed under the LST methodology are NO2, CO, PM-10, and PM-2.5. SCAQMD has provided LST lookup tables to allow users to readily determine if the daily emissions for proposed construction or operational activities could result in significant localized air quality impacts for projects five acres or smaller. (SCAQMD-B). Although the Project disturbs approximately 88 acres in total, the Project is linear and will progress in a linear fashion and disturb a smaller area per day. To be conservative, the one-acre LST lookup tables were utilized to estimate the construction emissions.

The closest sensitive receptors are an existing residence southeast of the intersection of Sanderson Avenue and Record Road. The distance to the property line for this residence across Sanderson Avenue is approximately 88 feet (27 meters). LST Methodology states that Project’s with boundaries located closer than 25 meters to the nearest receptor should use the LST distance of 25 meters for the analysis. The results are shown in the following table.

Table G – LST Results for Daily Construction Emissions
Activity Peak Daily Emissions (lb/day)
NOX CO PM-10 PM-2.5
LST for 1-acre at 25
meters 162 750 4 3
Grading/Excavation 30.40 38.30 2.04 1.20
Exceeds Threshold? No No No No
Line E in SJV-MDP
Project EIR1 102.3 49.7 6.7 5.1
Note: The emissions reported are peak daily emissions from all years of Project construction. Detailed model reports included in Appendix C 1 SJV-MDP EIR, Table 3.3-H As shown in Table G, short-term emissions from the Line E Project are below the applicable SCAQMD thresholds and lower than the emissions reported for the Line E facility in the SJV-MDP EIR for the reasons cited in item C.2, above. Because the short-term construction emissions are below SCAQMD thresholds, SJV-MDP EIR mitigation measures MM Air 1 through MM Air 4 do not apply to the Line E Project.

The long-term sources of localized emissions from operation of the Line E Project are primarily from the electric pumps and in the form of mobile source emissions from the routine visits by vehicles driven by maintenance personnel, with no stationary sources of emissions present. The confluence basin will have four electric pumps that are used during storms and a backup diesel generator that is estimated to be no more than 250 horsepower (hp). According to SCAQMD LST methodology, LSTs would apply to the operational phase if a project includes stationary sources or on-site mobile equipment generating on-site emissions. Because the emergency generator will only be used during emergency power outages and routine testing, emissions would be negligible. The City of San Jacinto will be required to obtain an SCAQMD permit to install and operate the emergency generator. The SCAQMD permitting process would ensure that the Project meets regulatory requirements through the application review process and by placing specific operating conditions on the permit such as operating hour limits. As such, no further analysis of the emergency generator was prepared. For these reasons, the localized operational emissions will be less than significant.

Construction and operational emissions were also found to be less than significant, as indicated above. Therefore, the Line E Project will not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations and impacts are considered less than significant without mitigation required. 77 For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would result in lower emissions than those reported in the SJV-MDP EIR and would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 4) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact
The project presents the potential for generation of objectionable odors during project construction.

Recognizing the relative location and distance of the surrounding residential development along the majority of the proposed MDP facilities, and the short-term duration of construction, the project will not subject a substantial number of people to objectionable odors. Potential impacts are considered less than significant. (SJV MDP IS, p. 11.)
Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
Implementation of the Line E Project presents the potential for generation of other emissions (such as those leading to odors) in the form of diesel exhaust during construction in the immediate vicinity of the Project site. Odors generated during construction will be short-term and will move along the alignment of the Project footprint as construction takes place and would cease to occur after construction is completed. Operation and maintenance of the Line E Project would also present the potential for odors from diesel exhaust from the maintenance vehicles and the emergency backup diesel generator; there would be no additional sources of odor related to operation of the electric pumps at the confluence basin. The routine visits by vehicles driven by maintenance personnel are not anticipated to increase in the Project vicinity; however, any potential odors resulting from routine maintenance would disperse quickly and cease after maintenance activities are completed. Similarly, operation of the backup generator will only be used during emergency power outages and routine testing, and any potential odors would disperse quickly. The long-term emissions, from the electric pumps, mobile sources, and a backup diesel generator, Thus, construction and operation of the Line E Project will not result in other emissions such as those leading to odors affecting a substantial number of people.

For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts regarding the creation of objectionable odors that would affect a substantial number of people. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required.
78 D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation is
Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
Would the project:
1) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U. S.

Wildlife Service?
2) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U. S.

Fish and Wildlife Service?
3) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
4) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
5) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
6) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state
conservation plan?
Source(s): GLA-A, NWI; RCA; SJV-MDP EIR
1) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U. S.

Wildlife Service?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant with Mitigation Special-Status Plant Species
Twelve of the proposed linear facilities, Line Y, Lat Y-2 through Lat Y-11, and Line V are partially or entirely located within the Criteria Area Plant Species Survey Area (CAPSSA) 3. Several specialstatus plant species have low to high potential for occurrence along alignments within the MDP Project area. The construction of MDP Facilities is anticipated to result in direct impacts to smooth tarplant and Coulter’s goldfields. Approximately 25,000 tarplant individual were counted within the conceptual alignments of the MDP Facilities, in addition to tens of thousands more in the areas adjacent to the MDP survey alignment. Specifically, the California Natural Diversity Database (CNNDB) showed records of smooth tarplant adjacent to the conceptual alignments of Lat Y-1, Lat Y2, Lat Y-4, Line Z, Line E, and Line Y. The CNDDB showed records of Coulter’s goldfields within the 79 vicinity of the conceptual alignment of Line Z. (SJV MDP EIR, p. 3.4-22.) Implementation of the proposed MDP Project would result in direct impacts to two special-status plant species not covered by the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), but listed by the California Native Plant Society, Chaparral sand-verbena and South coast saltscale, However, due to the disturbed nature of conceptual alignment of the MDP Facilities and the limited area of linear construction impact, implementation of the SJV MDP is not anticipated to result in a significant loss of habitat for either of these species. (SJV MDP EIR, p. 3.4-24.) Nonetheless, to further identify the potential direct impacts to these species (number of plants and/or area impacted), focused surveys are required for these species during their flowering season and prior to construction. If these plants occur within the construction footprint, impacts to these species may be considered significant.

However, with implementation of SJV MDP EIR MM Bio 7, impacts to special status plant species would be less than significant. (SJV MDP EIR, p. 3.4-22.) MM Bio 7: Focused surveys shall be conducted within potentially suitable habitat for Chaparral sand-verbena and South coast salt scale by a qualified biologist during the flowering season of these species and prior to construction activities. If special status plant species are found to be present in the footprint, further measures as recommended by a qualified biologist shall be taken to avoid or minimize adverse project effects to these species and their habitat. If avoidance is not feasible, then individual projects will require the approval of a DBESP including appropriate mitigation. (SJV MDP EIR, p.

3.441 – 3.4-42.)
Implementation of the SJV MDP is not anticipated to result in direct impacts to Munz’s onion or manystemmed dudleya. However, MDP Facility-specific surveys would be required during the appropriate time of the year to determine the presence/absence of all Narrow Endemic Plants and Criteria Area Plants within the construction footprint prior to installation of facilities. Implementation of SJV MDP EIR MM Bio 6 is required to reduce potential impacts to sensitive plant species to less than significant levels. (SJV MDP EIR, pp. 3.4-22–3.4-25.)
MM Bio 6: Within areas of suitable habitat associated with the Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Area (NEPSSA) and Criteria Area Plant Species Survey Area (CAPSSA), facility-specific focused plants surveys will be required. Including the smooth tarplant mapped as part of this study, the MSHCP requires at least 90 percent avoidance of areas providing long-term conservation value for the NEPSSA and CAPSSA target species. If avoidance is not feasible, then individual projects will require the approval of a DBESP including appropriate mitigation, i.e., on-site or off-site enhancement, restoration, establishment (creation), preservation, payment into habitat mitigation banks or in lieu fee programs, or a combination of one or more of these options.

Furthermore, the smooth tarplant mapped within Cell Group V is expected to be required for conservation as part of the Cell Group V criteria. (SJV MDP EIR, p. 6.) Special-Status Wildlife Species
Despite the fact that the MDP area is located in a predominately agricultural and disturbed environment, special-status native species, primarily birds, may occur in less than optimal and/or disturbed conditions, and may forage over agricultural habitats present in the Project area.

Construction of proposed MDP Facilities would impact disturbed habitats potentially suitable for several species of raptors (e.g., white-tailed kite, northern harrier, Cooper’s hawk, golden eagle, and burrowing owl). Because most potentially-occurring raptor species are very widespread and roam over large areas of foraging territory, these losses would amount to a relatively small, incremental reduction of seasonal foraging habitat and occasional use areas. Impacts to disturbed foraging 80 habitats would not constitute significant adverse impacts to any of the affected species, locally or regionally. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 3.4-25.)
The MDP area contains trees, shrubs, ground cover, and structures that provide suitable habitat for nesting migratory birds, including raptors. If any vegetation or structures are to be removed during the nesting season (February 1 to August 31), MDP Facility-specific nesting bird surveys shall be conducted first to determine the presence/absence of active nests and if active nests are identified, appropriate avoidance buffers should be established in the nesting activity has completed, and fledglings have left the nest and are no longer dependent on the parents as required by SJV MDP EIR MM Bio 1. With implementation of this mitigation measure, potential impacts to sensitive and protected bird species would be less than significant. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 3.4-25.) MM Bio 1: In order to avoid violation of the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code, site-preparation activities (removal of trees and vegetation) shall be avoided, to the greatest extent possible, during the nesting season (generally February 1 to August 31) of potentially occurring native and migratory bird species. If site-preparation activities are proposed during the nesting/breeding season (February 1 to August 31), a pre-activity field survey shall be to the issuance of grading permits, for private development projects, or prior to construction for public agency contracts, to determine if active nests of species protected by the MBTA or the California Fish and Game Code are present in the construction zone. If active nests are not located within the Project area and appropriate buffer, 500 feet of an active listed species or raptor nest, 300 feet of other sensitive or protected bird nests (non-listed), or within 100 feet of sensitive or protected songbird nests, construction may be conducted during the nesting/breeding season. However, if active nests are located during the pre-activity field survey, no grading or heavy equipment activity shall take place within at least 500 feet of an active listed species or raptor nest, 300 feet of other sensitive or protected (under MBTA or California Fish and Game Code) bird nests (non-listed), or within 100 feet of sensitive or protected songbird nests until the nest is no longer active.

Portions of the MDP area may provide suitable nesting habitat for burrowing owls. Although no burrowing owls were detected within the conceptual MDP Facility alignments or basin locations during the focused surveys conducted in 2008, much of the MDP area has a moderate to high probability to support owls, whether breeding pairs, resident individuals, or transient individuals. Construction noise and activity may disrupt normal breeding and nesting patterns or other activities and adversely impact burrowing owls if active nests are located near the proposed MDP Facilities at the time of construction. Therefore, mitigation measure SVJ-MDP EIR MM Bio 2 would be implemented to reduce potential impacts from the construction of MDP Facilities to less than significant. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 3.4-26.)
MM Bio 2: Facility-specific habitat assessments and focused surveys for burrowing owls will be conducted within burrowing owl survey areas. A pre-construction survey for resident burrowing owls will also be conducted by a qualified biologist within 30 days prior to commencement of grading and construction activities within those portions of the Project site containing suitable burrowing owl habitat. If ground-disturbing activities in these areas are delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the pre-construction survey, the area shall be resurveyed for owls. Take of active nests shall be avoided. The pre-construction survey and any relocation activity will be conducted in accordance with MSHCP instructions and/or guidelines. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 3.4-40.) 81 San Bernardino kangaroo rat (SBKR) (Dipodomys merriami parvus) was determined to have a low potential to occur within the MDP area. Los Angeles pocket mouse (LAPM) (Perognathus longimembris brevinasus) was also determined to have a low potential to occur within the Project area. The extreme northern end of the conceptual alignment of Line K terminates at the end of the mammal survey area for SBKR and LAPM, however the conceptual alignments of all of the other MDP Facilities are located outside the mammal survey areas. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 3.4-26.) Line E Project: New Mitigation is Required
This discussion is based on the Biological Technical Report for San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan Line E, Located in the City of San Jacinto, Riverside County, California, January 28, 2025 prepared by Glenn Lukos Associates, Inc. This document is hereinafter referred to as the BTR and is included as Appendix D.1 to this Addendum. Preparation of the BTR and focused surveys satisfies SJV-MDP EIR mitigation measures MM Bio 2, MM Bio 3, MM Bio 4, MM Bio 5, and MM Bio 6.

Special-Status Plant Species
The Line E Project is mostly within the NEPSSA survey area outlined in Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP (GLA-A, p. 4.) The BTR evaluated a total of 49 special status plant species through general biological surveys, habitat assessments, and focused surveys. Species were evaluated based on the following factors: (i) species identified by the CNDDB and CNPS as occurring (either currently or historically) on or in the vicinity of the Project site, (iii) applicable MSHCP survey areas, and (iii) any other special status plants that are known to occur within the vicinity of the Line E Project site, or for which potentially suitable habitat occurs within the site. Of the 49 special status species evaluated, 32 species do not occur5 on the Line E Project site, 15 species were confirmed absent,6 and one species was present, smooth tarplant (Centromadia pungens ssp. Laevis). Refer to Table 4-2 of the BTR for a complete listing of the species evaluated. (GLA-A, pp. 31 – 36.) The proposed Line E Project would impact one special-status plant species, smooth tarplant (Centromadia pungens ssp. laevis). A population of approximately 2,500 individuals were detected within the Project site during the 2024 focused plant surveys conducted for the BTR. The smooth tarplant found during focused plant surveys were located within disturbed areas adjacent to agricultural fields and/or roadways as shown on Figure 17 – Smooth Tarplant.7 (GLA-A, pp. 36, 57.) The MSHCP provides coverage for impacts to smooth tarplant, provided that a project is consistent with requirements pertaining to the species. Because the Line E Project site is not located within an MSHCP survey area for smooth tarplant, MSHCP avoidance/conservation requirements pursuant to MSHCP Section 6.3.2 do not apply to this Project. The Project site is not in the CAPSSA, so impacts to smooth tarplant are covered without project-specific avoidance or mitigation requirements pursuant to Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP. However, approximately 1,670 smooth tarplant individuals were documented as occurring within portions of the Project site associated with riverine resources pursuant to MSHCP Section 6.1.2. (GLA-B, pp. 4, 15.) Therefore, impacts to the smooth tarplant resulting from construction and operation of the Line E Project would be less than significant through implementation of MM Bio E8.
5 Does not occur means the site does not contain habitat for the species and/or the site does not occur within the geographic range for the species.
6 Confirmed absent means the site contains suitable habitat for the species, but the species has been confirmed absent through focused surveys
7 Figures commence on page 101, following the Biological Resources discussion. 82 Special-Status Wildlife Species
The BTR evaluated a total of 45 special status animal species through general biological surveys, habitat assessments, and focused surveys, four invertebrates, 12 amphibians, 18 birds, and 11 mammals. Species were evaluated based on the following factors: (i) species identified by the CNDDB as occurring (either currently or historically) on or in the vicinity of the Line E Project site, (ii) applicable MSHCP survey areas, and (iii) any other special status animals that are known to occur within the vicinity of the Project site, or for which potentially suitable habitat occurs within the site. (GLA-A, pp. 36 – 37.) Of the four special status invertebrate species evaluated, one species does not occur on the Line E Project site, two species were confirmed absent, and one species has the potential to occur, Crotch’s bumble bee (Bombus crotchii). (GLA-A, p. 37.) Of the 12 special status amphibian species evaluated, five species do not occur on the Line E Project site and 7 species are not expected to occur.8 (GLA-A, pp. 37 – 38.) Of the 18 special status bird species evaluated, five species do not occur on the Line E Project site, one species was confirmed absent, and 12 species are either not on the Project site due to lack of habitat but were detected immediately offsite, or do not nest on the Project site but have the potential to forage. (GLA-A, pp. 38 – 40.) Of the 11 special status mammalian species evaluated, 7 species do not occur on the Line E Project site, two species are not expected to occur due to high levels of soil disturbance associated with past and current agricultural operations, and two bat species do not roost on the Project site but were detected offsite acoustically during focused surveys. (GLA-A, pp. 40 – 41.) Refer to Table 4-3 of the BTR for a complete listing of the species evaluated. (GLA-A, pp. 37 – 71.) Special Status Invertebrate Species
Four special status invertebrate species were evaluated for the Project site: Crotch’s bumble bee (Bom bus crotchii ) Quino checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino), Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni), and Vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi). The Quino checkerspot butterfly does not occur on the Project Site. (GLA-A, p. 37.) The other three species are discussed below.

Crotch’s Bumble Bee: Crotch’s bumble bee (CBB), is designated as a State Candidate species under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) and is not a covered species under the MSHCP.

Focused surveys were conducted during peak bloom periods that encompass the queen flight season (February through March) as well as the Colony Active Period (April through August) for the Project site. A total of 6 surveys were conducted through the months of March to June to take advantage of the different blooming periods of floral resources. The CBB surveys were conducted in accordance with CDFW’s 2023 Survey Considerations for California Endangered Species Act (CESA) Candidate Bumble Bee Species. (GLA-D, pp. 2-3.) Most of the Line E Project’s disturbance limits are not suitable for this species due to historic and current agricultural uses, which results in regular disturbances. However, smaller portions of the Project site, which largely consist of disturbed/ruderal areas adjacent to the agricultural fields, contain annual floral resources that could be used by CBB individuals, if present. (GLA-A, p. 42.) The CBB was not detected during the focused surveys for the Project site.

Lesser portions of the Project site support annual floral resources that could be visited by CBB individuals, and the Project site contains small mammal burrows that could be used for nesting by 8 Not expected to occur means the species is not expected to occur on the site due to low habitat quality; however, absence cannot be ruled out.
83 active CBB colonies or used for overwintering. Additionally, CBB was incidentally detected outside of the Line E Project impact area, but adjacent to the Project site during focused riparian bird surveys conducted by GLA biologists on June 27, 2024. A single CBB was observed utilizing branching phacelia (Phacelia ramosissima) adjacent to the willow riparian habitat. (GLA-A, p. 42.) This incidental detection, is not evidence that CBB occupies the Project site; however, the confirmed presence of CBB near the Project site reinforces the potential use of limited portions of the Project site by CBB. During the 2025 focused survey period, one bumble bee species, the California bumble bee (Bombus fervidus californicus) was observed during the June 12, 2025 survey using the branching phacelia which is located immediately offsite No bumble bee species, including the CBB were detected on the Project site. (GLA-D, p. 4). However, implementation of the Line E Project has the potential to impact CBB. As a State Candidate Species, if implementation of the Line E Project results in a direct take of CBB, and Incidental Take Permit (ITP) could be required under CESA through coordination with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). If present, mitigation for the loss of CBB habitat would consist of the preservation of habitat known to support CBB at a biological value equal or greater to any habitat impacted by the Project. The preserved habitat might be enhanced and/or restored, as applicable, and the habitat would be managed in perpetuity with a long-term endowment. (GLA-A, pp. 58-59.) Thus, to reduce impacts to CBB to less than significant, the Line E Project would implement mitigation measures MM Bio E1, MM Bio E2, and MM Bio E3.

MM Bio E1: Crotch’s Bumble Bee Pre-Construction Survey and Construction Monitoring. In order to avoid direct and indirect impacts to Crotch’s bumble bee (CBB) which could establish themselves on the Project site before construction starts, prior to the start of any Project-related ground-disturbing activities a qualified CBB biologist (i.e., 1-2 years of experience performing CBB surveys, or, has a Memorandum of Understanding [MOU] with CDFW), shall perform the records searches and site surveys according to the methods set forth in the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Survey Considerations for California Endangered Species Act Candidate Bumble Bee Species, June 6, 2023 (the “2023 CDFW Survey Considerations”). The literature review and records search shall identify occurrences at the Project site and within a 5-mile buffer. The literature review and records search shall include: a report from the CDFW California Natural Diversity Data Base for a 10-mile radius of the project site; aerial photographs; and iNaturalist for bee sightings and nectar sources. Then, the qualified CBB biologist shall conduct on-site surveys for foraging and nesting bees. The surveys shall begin with a habitat assessment to evaluate the likelihood of bumble bees occurring within and adjacent to the project area. Then, foraging bumble bee and nesting surveys shall be conducted during the peak nectar blooming period (April through June 30).

Habitat assessment and survey results shall be submitted to CDFW prior to the start of ground-disturbing project activities. Vegetation removal is allowable from November to January (note seasonal limitations for nesting birds in MM Bio E4). No monitoring is required if removal of vegetation occurs during this time period. However, vegetation removal/ground disturbances during the CBB flight season, which is February to October, will require preemptive focused CBB surveys and full-time biological monitoring for CBB to take place within the project limits. If Crotch’s bumble bees are present, mitigation measure MM Bio E2, which required an avoidance plan shall be implemented.

Construction monitoring for CBB may cease based on the professional judgement of the qualified CBB biologist that construction activities have already impacted the extent of the planned impact footprint. If an active CBB nest is detected during focused surveys conducted between April and June, or during the construction monitoring, then the 84 qualified biologist shall establish a no-disturbance buffer zone (including foraging resources and flight corridors essential for supporting the colony) around the CBB nest.

The qualified biologist and City shall notify CDFW and if needed, process an Incidental Take Permit (ITP) with CDFW (MM Bio E3). If a single CBB is observed during construction, CDFW shall be notified, and work shall be halted in that area until the qualified biologist deems the CBB has left the site. It is expected that if an ITP is needed, that the offsite mitigation which has similar habitat types would be required. If offsite mitigation for CBB is needed, then a CBB permitted land manager shall be hired by the City to ensure CBB habitat is intact on the offsite mitigation property.

MM Bio E2: Crotch’s Bumble Bee Avoidance Plan. If Crotch’s bumble bee is detected during pre-construction surveys outlined above in MM Bio E1, the City in consultation with the qualified CBB biologist shall develop a plan to fully avoid impacts to Crotch’s bumble bee. The plan shall include effective, specific, enforceable, and feasible measures. An avoidance plan shall be submitted to the City prior to implementing Project-related ground-disturbing activities and/or vegetation removal where there may be impacts to Crotch’s bumble bee.

MM Bio E3: Incidental Take Permit for Crotch’s Bumble Bee. If Crotch’s bumble bee is detected during the focused surveys and Crotch’s bumble bee becomes formally listed under CESA or is still a Candidate species and if impacts to Crotch’s bumble bee cannot be feasibly avoided during Project construction and activities, the City/qualified biologist shall coordinate with CDFW to obtain appropriate permits for incidental take of Crotch’s bumble bee and provide appropriate mitigation for impacts to Crotch’s bumble bee habitat. CDFW recommends the City mitigate for impacts to Crotch’s bumble bee habitat at a ratio comparable to the Project’s level of impacts.

Fairy Shrimp: The Line E Project site contains five features that pond seasonally and were surveyed by GLA to determine the presence/absence of federally-listed fairy shrimp, federally-listed Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni), San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegonensis), and vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi). The surveyed features are identified on Figures 18a through 18e – Fairy Shrimp Results Map as E-1, 46, 5, 4, and E-2, respectively. The fairy shrimp surveys were conducted in accordance with the USFWS Survey Guidelines for the Listed Large Branchiopods (Survey Guidelines) dated November 13, 2017.

The non-listed versatile fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lindahli) was detected in just one of the five features during the wet season survey, feature 5, which consists of vehicle ruts within a dirt road. The dry season survey of Feature 5 detected Branchinecta cysts, which were successfully hatched and reared to identify individuals as the versatile fairy shrimp, thus corroborating the results of the wet season survey. (GLA-A, p. 46.)
No fairy shrimp were detected in the other five features (features E-1, 46, 4, and E-2) during the wet season surveys. Features 4, 46 and E-2 also consist of vehicle ruts in dirt roads. Feature E-1 corresponds with the large inundation area associated with Drainage Area A.9 No Branchinecta cysts were detected within features 4 and 46 during the 2023 dry season surveys. The results of dry season surveys are pending for features E-1 and E-2; however, based on the negative results of the 9 Drainage area A is shown on Figure 22 – CDFW Jurisdictional Area and discussed in the response to item D.3. 85 wet season surveys fairy shrimp cysts are not expected to be present. (GLA-A, p. 46.) Thus, implementation of the Line E project would not impact listed fairy shrimp. (GLA-A, p. 74.) Special Status Amphibian Species
The Line E Project is not located within an amphibian species survey area pursuant to Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP. No special status amphibian species occur or are expected to occur within the disturbance limits of the Line E Project site, due to lack of suitable habitat. (GLA-A, p. 74.) Special Status Bird Species
No special status bird species were detected within the Line E Project disturbance area, however four species were detected adjacent to the southern portion of the Project site: Least Bell’s Vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus), Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia), Northern Harrier (Circus cyaneus), Yellowbreasted chat (Icteria virens), and Yellow warbler (Setophagia petechia). (GLA-A, pp. 42 – 45.) Least Bell’s Vireo: The least Bell’s vireo (LBV) is state and federally listed as endangered, and is covered under the MSHCP. The Line E Project footprint does not contain riparian habitat to support the LBV. As shown on Figure 19 – Least Bell’s Vireo Survey Results, the southern (upstream) end of the proposed Project however, is adjacent to habitat occupied by LBV where overflows from the San Jacinto Reservoir would enter Line E. Construction of the Line E Project would not remove any riparian habitat associated with the area of LBV habitat; therefore, there would be no direct impacts to LBV. However, because of the proximity of the LBV territory to the Project site, there is a potential for temporary noise impacts during construction adjacent to the riparian habitat if work were to occur while LBV are present.

Objective 3 of the MSHCP Species Conservation Objectives for LBV states that avoidance of occupied LBV habitat must include a 100-meter (approximately 300 feet) buffer, which is meant to address the potential for edge effects from development. The proposed Line E Project limits are within 100 feet of the nearest occupied habitat for LBV, temporary indirect effects are possible if construction activities occur within 300 feet. No indirect impacts to LBV would occur once construction within 300 feet of occupied habitat ceases. (GLA-A, p. 59.) To reduce potential temporary noise impacts resulting from Project construction to less than significant, mitigation measures MM Bio E4, MM Bio E5, and/or MM Bio E6 shall be implemented.

MM Bio E4: Establishment of Least Bell’s Vireo Construction Buffer: To avoid indirect impacts to least Bell’s vireo (LBV), Project construction and site preparation activities including, but not limited to vegetation clearing and grubbing within 300 feet of LBV habitat, shall be conducted outside of the LBV breeding season (March 15 to September 30), if feasible. Prior to construction outside of the breeding season, a qualified biologist shall oversee the establishment of a highly visible and maintained 300- foot buffer. Inspection and maintenance of the buffer shall be performed at a minimum of once a weekly, but more often if needed.

MM Bio E5: Least Bell’s Vireo Pre-Construction Surveys and Monitoring: If construction activities must occur during the LBV breeding season (March 15 to September 30) and have not yet already begun within the 300-foot buffer by March 15 of any given year, pre-construction surveys shall commence after March 15 and shall occur once a week for three consecutive weeks prior to commencement of construction activities to confirm the presence of LBV. The last visit shall occur no more than three (3) days prior to commencement of construction activities. The preconstruction survey visits 86 shall be conducted by a qualified biologist familiar with songs, whisper songs, calls, scolds, and plumage characteristics of adult and juvenile vireos. Surveys shall be conducted between dawn and 11:00 am. Surveys shall not be conducted during periods of excessive or abnormal cold, heat, wind, rain, or other inclement weather that individually or collectively may reduce the likelihood of detection. Prior to performing the preconstruction surveys, a map shall be created illustrating the LBV habitat and all detections of LBV shall be mapped and tracked.

If LBV are not detected during the initial three preconstruction surveys, then weekly clearance surveys shall continue following the same methodology as the preconstruction surveys. All detections of LBV shall be mapped with behavior tracked across detections/sightings. The qualified biologist must have experience with nesting ecology and behavior of LBV to determine pre-nesting/nesting behavior. If at any time it is determined by the qualified biologist that construction activities are negatively affecting LBV, including modification of behavior, work shall be halted and CDFW and USFWS shall be contacted on next steps. If LBV are not detected after a minimum of eight survey visits (three preconstruction surveys and five additional clearance surveys), the weekly visits shall cease and work within the 300-foot buffer shall be allowed to continue without additional restrictions.

If construction activities within the 300-foot buffer have already begun before March 15, the qualified biologist shall simply initiate weekly clearance surveys after March 15 while the construction activities continue. If LBV are detected, then mitigation measure MM Bio E6 shall be implemented. However, if LBV are not detected after a minimum of nine clearance surveys, then weekly visits shall cease and work within the 300-foot buffer shall be allowed to continue without additional restrictions.

MM Bio E6: Least Bell’s Vireo Construction Mitigation: Prior to the start of construction, a qualified biologist shall flag and fence the boundary of the LBV habitat areas, assumed to be occupied by LBV. A second fence, 300 feet from the boundary fence shall be constructed. If construction occurs during the breeding season (March 15 through September 30) and if activities need to occur between the boundary fence and the 300 foot buffer fence, then the contractor shall employ the following measures:

1. Install a 12-foot tall temporary noise barrier at the perimeter of the limits of disturbance between the construction activities and the adjacent LBV habitat, as determined by a qualified biologist. The barrier shall be continuous without openings, holes or cracks, and shall reach the ground. The barrier may be constructed with 1-inch plywood and provide a reduction of at least 10 dBA to ensure noise levels do not exceed 65 dBA to the adjacent LBV habitat. Other materials providing the same reduction shall also be permitted.

2. Within 300 feet of the LBV habitat areas, heavy grade rubber mats/pad shall be used within the bed of the trucks. These mats will help attenuate initial impact noise generated when an excavator drops rock and debris into the bed of the truck. These mats shall be maintained and/or replaced as necessary.

3. During Project site excavation and grading within 300 feet of the LBV habitat area, construction contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturer standards.
87 4. The contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the LBV habitat area.

5. Equipment shall be shut off and not left to idle when not in use.

6. The contractor shall not locate equipment staging within 1,000 feet of the LBV habitat area.

7. The use of heavy equipment or vibratory rollers and soil compressors shall be limited within 300 feet of the LBV habitat area, to the greatest degree possible.

Burrowing Owl: The Line E Project site is within the MSHCP Burrowing Owl Survey Area; therefore a habitat assessment is required to determine if focused burrowing owl surveys are warranted for the Line E Project. As shown on Figure 20 – Burrowing Owl Survey Map, Glenn Lukos Associates biologists conducted focused burrowing owl surveys because suitable habitat was identified within the Line E footprint, in 2022 and 2024. (GLA-A, pp. 10 –

11.) The completion of the focused burrowing owl surveys satisfied the portion of SJV-MDP EIR MM Bio 2 requiring MDP Facility-specific habitat assessments and focused surveys.

No burrowing owls were detected within the Project footprint. Based on the survey results, the Project would not impact burrowing owl habitat with long-term conservation value; therefore, MSHCP avoidance/mitigation requirements are not applicable to the Project. However, because the Project contains suitable habitat, including burrows, a pre-construction burrowing owl survey is required per MSHCP Section 6.3.2. (GLA-A, p. 69.) Because a portion of SJV-MDP EIR MM Bio 2 has already been completed, mitigation measure MM Bio E7, which amplifies the requirements of the preconstruction survey clarifies and replaces SJV-MDP EIR MM Bio 2 for the Line E Project.

MM Bio E7 (replaces MM Bio 2): Burrowing Owl Preconstruction Survey: To avoid direct impacts to burrowing owls and comply with MSHCP Objective 6 for burrowing owls, A 30-day pre-construction survey for burrowing owls shall be conducted prior to any future Project-related ground-disturbing activities (e.g., vegetation clearing, clearing and grubbing, tree removal, site watering, equipment staging, etc.) to ensure that no owls have colonized the Project site in the days or weeks preceding the ground-disturbing activities. If burrowing owls have colonized the Project site prior to the initiation of grounddisturbing activities, the Project proponent shall immediately inform the Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) and the Wildlife Agencies and shall coordinate with the RCA and the Wildlife Agencies (CDFW and United States Fish and Wildlife Service), including the possibility of preparing a Burrowing Owl Protection and Relocation Plan, prior to initiating ground disturbance. If ground disturbing activities take place, but the Project site is left undisturbed for more than 30 days, another preconstruction survey shall be conducted to ensure that burrowing owl have not colonized the Project site since it was last disturbed. If burrowing owls are found, the Project proponent shall immediately inform the RCA and the Wildlife Agencies and shall coordinate with the RCA and the Wildlife Agencies, including the possibility of preparing a Burrowing Owl Protection and Relocation Plan before construction resumes.

Northern Harrier: One northern harrier was detected flying offsite within agricultural and riparian areas during the biological surveys. As a result of the historical and current land practices, the Project site does not support nesting habitat for northern harriers; however, this species is expected to forage opportunistically over the Project site. The northern harrier is an MSHCP covered species. (GLA-A, p.

43.)
88 Yellow-breasted Chat: The Project site does not contain suitable habitat for the yellow-breasted chat; however, at least one chat was detected in the riparian habitat adjacent to the southern end of the Line E Project footprint in the same area occupied by LBV that was surveyed to evaluate the potential for indirect impacts during Project construction. The yellow-breasted chat is an MSHCP covered species. (GLA-A, p. 44.)
Yellow Warbler: The Project site does not contain suitable habitat for the yellow warbler; however, warbler was detected in the riparian habitat adjacent to the southern end of the Line E Project footprint in the same area occupied by LBV that was surveyed to evaluate the potential for indirect impacts during Project construction. The yellow warbler is an MSHCP covered species. (GLA-A, p.

44.)
The following special status bird species were not observed on or adjacent to the Project site, but have a potential to occur at the Project site: Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), Loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), Purple martin (Progne subis), Swainson's hawk (Buteo swainsoni), Tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor), White-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), and Yellow-headed blackbird (Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus). The Project site does not support suitable nesting habitat for these species; however, it does provide various qualities of foraging habitat. All of the aforementioned special status birds are MSHCP covered species. Therefore, no avoidance/mitigation measures apply to this Project for these species. (GLA-A, pp. 44 – 45, 59 – 61.) Special Status Mammalian Species
Eleven special status mammalian species were evaluated for the Project site: American badger (Taxidea taxus), Los Angeles pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris brevinasus), Pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus), Palm Springs roundtailed ground squirrel (Xerospermophilus tereticaudus chlorus), San Bernardino kangaroo rat (Dipodomys merriami parvus), San Diego desert woodrat (Neotoma lepida intermedia), Southern grasshopper mouse (Onychomys torridus ramona), Stephens' kangaroo rat (Dipodomys stephensi), Townsend's bigeared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii), Western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis californicus), and Western yellow bat (Lasiurus xanthinus). American badger, pallid bat, Palm Springs roundtailed ground squirrel, San Bernardino kangaroo rat, San Diego desert woodrat, and Townsend’s big-eared bat do not occur on the Project site. Los Angeles pocket mouse, Southern grasshopper mouse, and Stephens’ kangaroo rat are not expected to occur on the Project site due to the high levels of soil disturbance associated with past and current agricultural operations. (GLA-A, pp. 40 – 41.) As discussed in the following paragraphs, western mastiff bat and western yellow bat do not roost on the Project site but were detected offsite acoustically during focused surveys.

Western Mastiff Bat and Western Yellow Bat: The western mastiff bat and western yellow bat are designated as a CDFW species of special concern and a Western Bat Working Group (WBWG) high priority species. (These species are not covered under the MSHCP.) Both species occur year-round in southern California. The western mastiff bat is typically associated with open, semi-arid to arid habitats including dry desert washes, flood plains, chaparral, oak woodland, montane meadows, grassland and agricultural areas. This species roosts in cliff faces and occasionally in buildings that provide unobstructed entry and exit access. The western yellow bat is typically associated with valley foothill, riparian, desert wash, desert riparian and palm oasis habitats, where they often roost in trees taller than three meters in height. Native and non-native palm trees are also known to provide suitable roosting habitat for the species. (GLA-A, p. 43.)
89 GLA biologists conducted a focused bat survey on April 29, 2024 within the offsite adjacent riparian habitat at the southern end of the Line E disturbance area. The bat survey consisted of a combination of acoustic and emergence surveys and focused on detecting potential roosting areas (day and night) that included, but were not limited to, rocky outcroppings, palm trees, eucalyptus trees, and riparian vegetation. Potential roosting areas were inspected visually for evidence of roosting that included urine staining, guano concentrations, and/or audible bats. In addition to the visual surveys, four ultrasonic acoustic recording devices were deployed throughout the bat study area. All acoustic data was recorded in full spectrum and was processed and analyzed with Sonobat 4.2.2 bat call analysis software using the California Southwest classifier. All acoustic calls were manually reviewed and vetted using multiple Sonobat acoustic reference libraries and other reference materials. (GLA-A, p.

14.)
Both the western mastiff bat and western yellow bat were detected faintly acoustically during the focused bat survey. The faint acoustical signatures detected outside the Project site were indicative of individuals flying high over or near the Project site as part of their foraging foray. The Project site is generally devoid of trees and does not support suitable roosting habitat (including maternity roosts for either of these species. The offsite bat survey area contains suitable roosting habitat, including habitat for maternity roosting. Although the Project site does not contain any roosting habitat, the site provides opportunistic foraging habitat as part of these bats’ large foraging range. (GLA-A, pp. 43, 47.)
Although the western mastiff bat and western yellow bat were not confirmed roosting offsite, potential roosting habitat including palm trees are located more than 200 feet from the Project’s limits of disturbance. As such, the Project is not expected to indirectly affect roosting bats. The Project does have the potential to impact bat foraging habitat; however, the loss of foraging habitat would not be considered as a substantial adverse effect because of the presence of foraging habitat on surrounding lands. Therefore, potential impacts to sensitive bat species resulting from the implementation of the Line E Project would be less than significant and no mitigation is required.

For the reasons set forth in the above paragraphs, there would be no significant impacts to sensitive species, because all potential impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

The clarifications to the SJV MDP EIR mitigation measures do not reduce the effectiveness of the mitigation measures or change the significance determinations of the SJV-MDP EIR. New mitigation measures for potential impacts to biological resources would be implemented by the Line E Project; however, these measures are not mitigating new significant effects on the environment; rather, they identify specific actions to implement the more general SJV-MDP EIR mitigation measures. As such, the clarification of SJV-MDP EIR mitigation measures and the Line E Project-specific mitigation measures do not mitigate for new impacts, and do not constitute substantial new information that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 2) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant with Mitigation Approximately 6.38 acres of riparian habitat were mapped within the Project alignments and contained native riparian vegetation including willow (Salix spp.), mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia), and Freemont’s cottonwood (Populus fremontii). Much of the riparian vegetation occurs in scattered isolated patches, though at least one of the surveyed alignments terminates at the edge of extensive 90 riparian habitat associated with the San Jacinto River. The remaining majority of the SJV-MDP alignments extend through disturbed areas supporting a predominance of non-native and native ruderal vegetation, including non-native grasses, though these areas are often interspersed with remnants of alkali playa vegetation. Some of the remnant alkali playa areas exhibited evidence of seasonal ponding, though at the time of surveys there was not enough vegetation to adequately evaluate the features as vernal pools. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 3.4-26.) The studied riparian areas varied from roadside/agricultural ditches to ponds and basins, including extensive riparian habitat along the San Jacinto River. Some areas qualify as MSHCP Riparian Areas, though others would likely be excluded due to their artificial nature. As required by SJV-MDP mitigation measures MM Bio 4 and MM Bio 5, MDP Facility-specific mapping would be required to determine which areas are subject to MSHCP requirements. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 3.4-27.) MM Bio 4: The project-specific mapping of riparian and unvegetated riverine features will be required pursuant to Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP. For areas not excluded as artificially created, the MSHCP requires 100 percent avoidance of riparian/riverine areas.

If avoidance is not feasible, then individual projects will require the approval of a DBESP including appropriate mitigation to offset the loss of functions and values as they pertain to the MSHCP-covered species. Riparian vegetation will also need to be evaluated for the least Bell’s vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher, and western yellow-billed cuckoo. If suitable habitat is present, focused surveys for the species will be required. If avoidance is not feasible, then individual projects will require the approval of a DBESP including appropriate mitigation, i.e., on-site or off-site enhancement, restoration, establishment (creation), preservation, payment into habitat mitigation banks or in lieu fee programs, or a combination of one or more of these options
MM Bio 5: The project-specific mapping of vernal pools will be required pursuant to Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP. As noted above, vernal pools (or similar seasonal ponding alkali playa areas) are expected to occur at least in the area comprising Cell Group V, but have the potential to occur elsewhere within the Project area. For areas not excluded as artificially created, the MSHCP requires 100 percent avoidance of vernal pools areas. If avoidance is not feasible, then individual projects will require the approval of a DBESP including appropriate mitigation to offset the loss of functions and values as they pertain to the MSHCP covered species. Vernal pools and other seasonal ponding depressions will also need to be evaluated for Riverside and Vernal pool fairy shrimp.

Vernal pools in the MDP area rely on rainfall for maintenance and would continue to receive local runoff. If suitable habitat for species listed in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP (least Bell’s vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher, western yellow-billed cuckoo, Riverside fairy shrimp, Santa Rosa Plateau fairy shrimp, and vernal pool fairy shrimp) is found within the MDP Project area, and avoidance is not possible, mitigation measures shall be implemented according to MSHCP speciesspecific objectives. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 3.4-27.) Implementation of the MDP would not de-water any potential vernal or riparian areas, as it would not alter velocity, volume, or seasonal flow of the San Jacinto River 100-year floodplain. Although development within the SJV-MDP Project area would result in changes to the existing local hydrology, local hydrology would not be significantly impacted by construction of the MDP facilities alone. Areas that currently pond or receive sheet flow would continue to do so during small storm events at the 91 local level. Stormwater from larger storm events would be collected and conveyed through the MDP Facilities. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 3.4-27.)
Riparian habitat in the MDP Project area is mostly associated with the San Jacinto River, occurring along MDP Line 3, Line 4, Line 5, Line 6, Line E, Line H, Line J, and Line Z. The San Jacinto River Levee Stage 4 Project, once completed, would alter the 100-year floodplain along the MDP area's northern boundary, but its impacts are not part of the MDP Project and would be addressed separately. Compliance with mitigation measures MM Bio 4, MM Bio 5, and Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP would reduce potential impacts to riparian habitats/vernal pools and associated species to less than significant levels. (SJV MDP EIR, pp. 3.4-26-3.4-27). Riparian habitats associated with potentially jurisdictional drainage features are discussed in the response to item D.3.

Line E Project: No New Impacts/Less than Significant Impacts The proposed Line E Project would not impact the sensitive vegetation communities identified in the SJV MDP impact area because no sensitive communities are present within the Line E disturbance area. Implementation of the Line E Project would permanently impact approximately 87.11 acres of lands through grading, including areas of remedial grading that will not be restored to pre-project conditions. Permanent impacts include approximately 69.34 acres of agricultural fields, 8.49 acres of annual brome grasslands, 6.17 acres of disturbed and developed areas, and 3.10 acres of perennial pepper weed-prickly lettuce patches. The proposed Project would also temporarily impact approximately 33.22 acres of lands through project implementation. (Refer to Figure 21 – Vegetation Map.)
The temporary impacts from the proposed Line E project consist of disturbance within narrow construction easements along either side of the proposed Line E boundary required to construct the facilities. No permanent impacts will occur within the temporary construction easement area because these areas would be restored to pre-construction contours and will be hydroseeded with a native plant mix. The temporary impacts include approximately 25.07 acres of agricultural fields, 3.43 acres of annual brome grasslands, 4.25 acres of disturbed and developed areas, 0.03 acre of eucalyptus groves, and 0.44 acre of perennial pepper weed-prickly lettuce patches. (GLA-B, p. 8.) For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to substantial adverse effects on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 3) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant with Mitigation The MDP Project area contains roadside ditches and other ditches, which if later are shown to be historic diversions of natural waters, would be potential jurisdictional waters. However, the majority (if not all) of these ditches would be considered as non-relatively permanent waters and as such these features would need to be evaluated in facility-specific jurisdictional delineations to determine if they exhibit a significant nexus to traditionally navigable waters, and therefore jurisdictional. Ditches that are shown to have been wholly excavated in uplands would not be subject to the jurisdiction of the U.

S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 3.4-28.) 92 Areas supporting hydrophytic vegetation would need to be evaluated at an MDP Facility-specific level to determine whether they satisfy wetland criteria. Any “isolated” wetlands will need to be evaluated by the ACOE and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) following their joint regulatory guidance, in order to confirm whether any of the “isolated” wetlands would be jurisdictional.

With implementation of MM Bio 3, potential impacts to federally-protected wetlands would be reduced to less than significant levels. (SJV MDP EIR, p. 3.4-28.) MM Bio 3: Project-specific delineations will be required to determine the limits of the U.S.

Army Corp of Engineers (ACOE), RWQCB, and CDFG jurisdiction. Impacts to jurisdictional waters will require authorization by the corresponding regulatory agency. If impacts are indicated, then jurisdictional water will either a) be avoided or b) be minimized by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation; rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring, the impacted environment; reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action; compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments in addition to obtaining the necessary permits from requisite jurisdictions.

Line E Project: No New Impacts/Less than Significant Impacts with Mitigation This discussion is based on the Jurisdictional Delineation of the Master Drainage Plan (MDP) Line E Project, an Approximately 14,000 Linear-Foot Drainage Alignment in the City of San Jacinto, Riverside County, California, October 30, 2024, prepared by Glenn Lukos Associates, Inc. This document is hereinafter referred to as the JD Report. The JD Report is Appendix H to the BTR, which is Appendix D.1 to this Addendum. Preparation of the JD Report satisfies SJV-MDP EIR mitigation measure MM Bio 3.

The Line E Project site does not contain any state or federally protected wetlands as discussed in the following paragraphs. (GLA-C, pp. 10-13.)
The Line E Project site contains three drainage features, shown as Drainages A through C that function as agricultural ditches in addition to an area, shown as Drainage Area A on Figure 22 – CDFW Jurisdictional Area. Drainage Area A was inundated as a result of agricultural irrigation and two heavier than normal wet seasons. (GLA-C, p. 15.)
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) Jurisdiction
No Corps jurisdiction is present within the Line E Project site. Ditches A through C and Drainage Area A, flow and/or collect water only in direct response to precipitation and were completely dry during the GLA’s most recent field investigation. Therefore, they are not relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water and are not considered waters of the U.S. as defined in 33 CFR Part 328.3(a). Additionally, ditches that are excavated wholly in and draining only dry land and do not carry a relatively permanent flow of water, and artificial ponds used as stock watering, irrigation, and/or settling basins, are excluded from being waters of the waters of the U.S. pursuant to 33 CFR Part 328.3(b). (GLA-C, p. 10.)
Regional Water Quality Board (Regional Board) Jurisdiction Regional Board jurisdiction associated with the Line E Project site encompasses 3.68 acres, none of which consist of wetland waters of the State. Regional Board jurisdiction is shown on Figure 23 – Regional Board Jurisdictional Area and summarized in Table H below. 93 Table H – Summary of Regional Board Jurisdiction
Feature Name
Regional Board
Non-Wetland
Waters
(acres)
Regional Board
Jurisdictional
Waters
(acres)
Total Regional
Board
Jurisdiction
(acres)
Length
(linear feet)
Drainage A 0.17 0.00 0.17 980
Drainage Area A 3.30 0.00 3.30 ---
Drainage B 0.03 0.00 0.03 302
Drainage C 0.18 0.00 0.18 419
Total 3.68 0.00 3.68 1,701
Source, GLA-C, Table 1
Note: Sum of individual parts may not equal sum total due to rounding error.

Drainage A: Regional Board jurisdiction associated with Drainage A is located in the northwestern portion of the Line E Project site and A consists of several man-made earthen ditches that together convey agricultural runoff in a northwestward direction for approximately 980 linear feet before continuing offsite and eventually terminating in a basin adjacent to Ramona Expressway. Drainage A exhibits an ordinary high water mark (OHWM) ranging from one to 15 feet in width. (GLA-C, pp. 11-12.) Vegetation associated with Drainage A consists of non-native upland grasses and forbs including ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), red brome (Bromus rubens), black mustard (Brassica nigra), fiddleneck (Amsinckia menziesii), cheeseweed (Malva parviflora), Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), stinknet (Oncosiphon pilulifer). A single Gooding’s willow (Salix gooddingii) is located in the southeastern portion of Drainage A. (GLA-C, pp. 11-12.) Drainage Area A: Regional Board jurisdiction associated with Drainage Area A totals 3.30 acres, none of which consists of State wetlands. Drainage Area A is located in the northwestern portion of the Line E Project site and consists of relatively flat undeveloped land that appears to have been disced as recently as December 2020, according to historic aerial imagery. It does not appear that this area has been planted or otherwise maintained since December 2020. Drainage Area A conveys flows in a generally northwestern direction towards Drainage A during periods following heavy rain when adjacent agricultural ditches have flooded. Furthermore, corrugated metal culverts that convey flows within Drainage A under a dirt access road appear to have been clogged by debris, which likely contributes to backup of flood waters in Drainage Area A. (GLA-C, p. 12.) Drainage Area A was assessed for wetland indicators. Drainage Area A contained two dominant plant species, salt heliotrope (Heliotropium curassavicum) and alkali mallow (Malvella leprosa), which do not meet the parameters for hydrophytic vegetation. A 12-inch deep soil pit was dug within Drainage Area A which contained silty loam 2. No redox features or other indicators of hydric soils were observed; however, soils within this area are strongly alkali. Primary indicators of hydrology, i.e., surface area cracks, were observed within Drainage Area A. Although Drainage Area A met the indicators for hydrology, due to the lack of lacked hydrophytic vegetation and hydric soils Drainage Area A was determined not to be a wetland. (GLA-C, pp. 12-13.) Refer to the JD Report for details regarding the wetland assessment.
94 Drainage B: Regional Board jurisdiction associated with Drainage B totals 0.03 acres, none of which consists of State wetlands. Drainage B is a manmade earthen ditch located in the center of the Line E Project Site that crosses the alignment of Line E and conveys agricultural runoff in a northward direction for approximately 302 linear feet before leaving the Line E Project site. Drainage B exhibits an OHWM that averages four feet in width. The offsite portion of Drainage B, which is north of the Line E alignment, appears to convey flows to Drainage Area A during periods of heavy rain. Drainage B is ephemeral and at the time of the surveys did not contain any surface water and was generally unvegetated. However, Russian thistle, Canada horseweed, and black mustard were observed immediately adjacent to the drainage along the top of the bank. (GLA-C, p. 13.) Drainage C: Regional Board jurisdiction associated with Drainage C totals 0.18 acre, none of which consists of State wetlands. Drainage C is a man-made earthen ditch, located in the southeastern portion of the Line E Project site, that conveys flows northward away from the San Jacinto Reservoir Overflow for approximately 419 linear feet before continuing offsite and terminating as sheet flow in an adjacent agricultural field. Drainage C exhibits an OHWM ranging from 10 to 30 feet in width. A rip-rap headwall and culvert previously existed separating the offsite riparian area to the south from the remainder of Drainage C to the north. Currently, the rip-rap headwall and culvert appear to have been destroyed and flows now bypass the culvert and continue around the riprap through a highly eroded area to the east of the culvert. According to historic aerial imagery, Drainage C is typically characterized by an ephemeral flow regime. However, at the time of the initial site visit, Drainage C contained surface water in its southernmost reach, immediately adjacent to the San Jacinto Reservoir Overflow area. Drainage C was completely dry during the most recent site visit. (GLA-C, p. 13.) Vegetation associated with Drainage C includes a mix of native and non-native species such as common toad rush (Juncus bufonius), Bermuda grass, annual beard grass (Polypogon monspeliensis), stinknet (Oncosiphon piluliferum), annual yellow sweetclover (Melilotus indicus), Canada horseweed, alkali mallow, cocklebur (Xanthium sp.), and various other nonnative grasses. A single Gooding’s willow is located atop the eastern bank just outside of the Line E Project boundary to the north. (GLA-C, p. 13.)
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Jurisdiction CDFW jurisdiction associated with the Line E Project site encompasses 3.88 acres, none of which consist of riparian stream. A total of 1,701 linear feet of CDFW non-riparian stream is present on the Line E Project site. CDFW jurisdiction is shown on Figure 22 – CDFW Jurisdictional Area and summarized in Table I below.

Table I – Summary of CDFW Jurisdiction
Feature Name
CDFW
Non-Riparian
Stream
(acres)
CDFW Riparian
Stream
(acres)
Total
CDFW
Jurisdiction
(acres)
Length
(linear feet)
Drainage A 0.26 0.00 0.26 980
Drainage Area A 3.30 0.00 3.30 ---
Drainage B 0.03 0.00 0.03 302
Drainage C 0.29 0.00 0.29 419
95 Table I – Summary of CDFW Jurisdiction
Feature Name
CDFW
Non-Riparian
Stream
(acres)
CDFW Riparian
Stream
(acres)
Total
CDFW
Jurisdiction
(acres)
Length
(linear feet)
Total 3.88 0.00 3.88 1,701
Source, GLA-C, Table 2
Note: Sum of individual parts may not equal sum total due to rounding error.

Drainage A: Regional Board jurisdiction associated with Drainage A totals 0.26, none of which consists of riparian habitat. Drainage A exhibits a stream course that ranges from one to 25 feet in width. (GLA-C, p. 15.) The location, function and vegetation associated with Drainage A are discussed above under the Regional Board Jurisdiction subheading.

Drainage Area A: CDFW jurisdiction associated with Drainage Area A totals 3.30 acres, none of which consists of riparian habitat. (GLA-C, p. 15.) The location, function and vegetation associated with Drainage Area A are discussed above under the Regional Board Jurisdiction subheading.

Drainage B: CDFW jurisdiction associated with Drainage B totals 0.03 acres, none of which consists of State wetlands. (GLA-C, pp. 15-16.) The location, function and vegetation associated with Drainage Area B are discussed above under the Regional Board Jurisdiction subheading.

Drainage C: CDFW jurisdiction associated with Drainage C totals 0.29 acres, none of which consists of riparian habitat. (GLA-C, p. 16.) The location, function and vegetation associated with Drainage Area B are discussed above under the Regional Board Jurisdiction subheading.

Implementation of the Line E Project would impact 3.68 acres of non-wetland waters regulated by the Regional Board and 3.88 acres of non-riparian streambed regulated by CDFW; therefore, a Waste Discharge Permit (WDR) is required from the Regional Board and a Section 1600 Streambed Alteration Agreement is required from CDFW per SJV-MDP EIR MM Bio 3.

The proposed Line E channel includes at least 10.02 acres of soft-bottom channel. Although the Line E project would direct flood flows within the Line E tributary area, these flows would be directed in the same direction as per the existing condition. Although the Line E channel would be subject to flood control maintenance (vegetation management, clean out of debris, slope and bottom repairs, and access road maintenance and repair), none of these activities precludes or negatively affects the conveyance of water to downstream resources in the same direction and relatively same amounts as the existing condition. The flows will still reach the same area to the northwest, just following a different route. The existing MDP hydrology Q100 flow is 5,825 cfs at the northerly side of the MWD right-of-way. In the proposed Line E condition, the total Q100 flow decreases to 5,440 cfs at this same location. (PDR, pp. 15, 19)
Additionally, as outlined above in Table H – Summary of Regional Board Jurisdiction and Table I – Summary of CDFW Jurisdiction, the construction of Line E would result in impacts to 3.68 acres of non-wetlands waters under the jurisdiction of the Regional Board, necessitating the need for a WDR permit, as well as 3.88 acres of non-riparian stream under the jurisdiction of the CDFW, necessitating the need for a CDFW Section 1600 permit.
96 The Line E Project proposes to mitigate these impacts by enhancing and restoring at a minimum 2:1 ratio to the CDFW impacts (at least 7.76 acres). The 7.76 acres would be proposed to be located on a future restoration site to be located within the existing San Jacinto River 100 -year floodplain, contain alkali soils and have historically or currently support alkali meadow/vernal pool habitat and hydrology. The restoration site will be acquired and conveyed to a conservation land entity such as the Rivers and Lands Conservancy and managed in perpetuity for conservation.

A Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) would be prepared to detail the methods to implement the proposed enhancement/restoration. The HMMP would identify the proposed plant palettes, maintenance, and monitoring efforts, and propose success criteria. (GLA-B, p. 19.) Within the restoration area, the non-native vegetation shall be removed and re-planted with native riparian species (container stock and seed). The restoration area shall be monitored and maintained for at least five years to achieve success criteria. The restoration area shall be protected via a conservation easement and a long-term endowment shall be established to manage the restoration area in perpetuity. (GLA-B, p. 19) This restoration proposal is outlined in mitigation measure MM Bio E8.

MM Bio-E8: Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan. In order to mitigate the 4.03 acres of riverine resources, including impacts associated with smooth tarplant found in these riverine areas, the Project proponent shall prepare a Habitat and Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) and secure conservation property to be restored for alkali playa/meadow resources, including smooth tarplant. The HMMP shall be prepared on a property that is to be secured for conservation in perpetuity which will support at least

8.06 acres (2:1) of restored riverine alkali playa/meadow. The HMMP shall be submitted to the City of San Jacinto, CDFW and USFWS for review an approval. The HMMP will be used to support the mitigation necessary for impacts to the Waters of the State which require permits through the CDFW and Regional Board. The property shall be conveyed to a conservation entity such as Rivers and Lands Conservancy or other such entity as approved by CDFW and USFWS. The Project proponent will provide a non-wasting endowment to fund the management of the conservation/mitigation property in perpetuity.

Vernal Pools
The Line E Project site does not contain MSHCP vernal pools. Five areas were noted as inundated within the Project site, corresponding to the five features (4, 5, 46, E-1 and E2) that are described below as having been evaluated through focused surveys for listed fairy shrimp. Features 4, 5, 46 and E-2 are all unvegetated vehicle ruts in dirt roads. Feature E-1 consists of a large, inundated area that is described above as Drainage Area A. Drainage Area A was determined not to exhibit all three parameters of a wetland, specifically the inundated area did not exhibit a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation, and therefore the feature is not considered as a vernal pool. (GLA-A, p. 55.) For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to adverse effects on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required.
4) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
97 SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant with Mitigation Portions of the MDP Project area coincide with MSHCP Proposed Core 5 which is comprised of the portion of the upper San Jacinto River extending from the San Jacinto Mountains to just west of State Street. The portion of the San Jacinto River is crucial for maintaining floodplain processes, water quality, and habitat quality, benefiting species like mountain lions and bobcats. There are no other waterways in the MDP Project area that could serve as movement corridors. Flood control activities and adjacent planned land uses could adversely affect species such as the arroyo toad, San Bernardino kangaroo rat, least Bell's vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher, and Los Angeles pocket mouse. However, with the implementation of mitigation measures from the SJV MDP EIR, MM Bio 2, MM Bio 4, MM Bio 5, MM Bio 6, and MM Bio 8, set forth in the response to item D.1, impacts regarding interfering with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impeding the use of native wildlife nursery sites are considered less than significant. (SJV MDP EIR, p. 3.4-38.) Line E Project: No New Impact/Less than Significant with Mitigation The Line E Project site is not located within a regionally significant wildlife linkage or corridor, including any Core Areas or MSHCP existing or proposed Linkages. (GLA-A, p. 63.) The Line E Project would not result in the construction of physical barriers to wildlife movement and construction impacts will be temporary in nature. The Line E Project site does not contain any wildlife nurseries.

The Line E Project has the potential to impact active bird nests if vegetation is removed during the nesting season (February 1 to September 15). Impacts to nesting birds are prohibited by the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code. Although impacts to native birds are prohibited by MBTA and similar provisions of California Fish and Game Code, Although impacts to native birds are prohibited by MBTA and similar provisions of California Fish and Game Code, impacts to native birds resulting from implementation of the Line E Project would not be a significant impact under CEQA. The native birds with potential to nest on the Project site would be those that are extremely common to the region and highly adapted to human landscapes (e.g., house finch, killdeer). The number of individuals potentially affected by the Line E Project would not significantly affect regional, let alone local populations of such species. (GLA-A, p. 63.) Nonetheless, the Line E Project would implement SJV MDP MM Bio 1, as clarified below and renumbered CMM Bio 1 (CMM = Clarified Mitigation Measure). to be specific to this Project. (clarifying language is shown in underline (example text) and deletions are shown in strike-through (example text).

MM Bio 1 CMM Bio 1: In order to avoid violation of the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code, site-preparation activities (removal of trees and vegetation) shall be avoided, to the greatest extent possible, during the nesting season (generally February 1 to September 15 August 31) of potentially occurring native and migratory bird species. If site-preparation activities are proposed during the nesting/breeding season (February 1 to September 15 August 31), a pre-activity field survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist be to the issuance of grading permits, for private development projects, or prior to construction for public agency contracts, within three days prior to any disturbance of the Line E Project site, including disking, demolition activities, and grading, to determine if active nests of species protected by the MBTA or the California Fish and Game Code are present in the construction zone. If active nests are not located within the Project area and appropriate buffer, 500 feet of an active listed species or raptor nest, 300 feet of other sensitive or protected bird nests (non-listed), or within 100 feet of sensitive or protected songbird nests, construction may be conducted during the nesting/breeding season. However, i If active nests are located during the pre-activity field survey, no 98 grading or heavy equipment activity shall take place within at least 500 feet of an active listed species or raptor nest, 300 feet of other sensitive or protected (under MBTA or California Fish and Game Code) bird nests (non-listed), or within 100 feet of sensitive or protected songbird nests the biologist shall establish suitable buffers around the nests, and the buffer areas shall be avoided until the nest is no longer occupied and juvenile birds can survive independently from the nests. active.

For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not interfere with the movement of any native or migratory fish or wildlife species or impact wildlife corridors. Clarification of SJV-MDP EIR MM Bio 1 to meet the specifics of the Line E Project and renumbering this mitigation measure to CMM Bio 1 does not constitute a change to the SVJ MDP Project or new information of substantial importance per CEQA Guidelines section 15162. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 5) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant
The San Jacinto General Plan contains several policies relating to the conservation and protection of natural resources, including conservation and protection of important plant communities and wildlife habitats, and the conservation of important natural resources such as mature trees, rock outcroppings, hills, etc. Implementation of the proposed MDP Project may adversely affect important plant communities and wildlife habitats. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 3.4-39.) The Project does not propose any above-ground structures that would require the removal of important natural resources and, through compliance with the MSHCP, would conserve important resources such as mature trees, rock outcroppings, hills, ridges, and other prominent land forms, as open space. The location of specific SJV-MDP facilities is dictated by engineering and hydraulic concerns. The Project shall meet the goal of the City of Hemet and comply with the policies of the SJVAP through compliance with the MSHCP, therefore impacts are less than significant. (SJV MDP EIR, p. 3.4-39.)
Line E Project: No New Impacts/No Impacts
On November 15, 2022 San Jacinto adopted Envision San Jacinto – General Plan 2040 (General Plan 2040). The Resource Management Element of General Plan 2040 contains policies related to the conservation and protection of natural resources. The Line E Project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. (GLA-A, p. 63.) The City’s adoption of General Plan 2040 does not constitute new information of substantial importance per CEQA Guidelines section 15162. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required.
6) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state conservation plan? SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant with Mitigation The MDP Project area is located within the Stephens’ Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan (SKR HCP) and the MSHCP.
99 The SKR HCP establishes a mechanism for the long-term conservation of the Stephens’ kangaroo rat. (SKR). Potential impacts to the SKR are mitigated on a regional basis through compliance with the MSHCP and the SKR HCP. As the MDP Project area is not in a core reserve, implementation of the SJV-MDP would conflict with the SKR HCP and impacts are less than significant. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 3.4-37.)
The MSHCP serves as a comprehensive, multi-jurisdictional Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), pursuant to Section (a)(1)(B) of the ESA, as well as a Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP) under the State NCCP Act of 2001. (SJV-MDP, p. 3.4-21.) The MSHCP establishes Criteria Area boundaries in order to facilitate the process by which properties are evaluated for inclusion in the MSHCP Conservation Area. Because some of the MDP Facilities are located within MSHCP Criteria Areas, the JPR process would be conducted by the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) for those MDP Facilities located within an MSHCP Criteria Cell prior to construction. Criteria Cells that would be considered in the JPR process include Cells 2666, 2774, 2775, 2878, 2363, 2364, 2461, 2462, 2568, 2569, 2674, 2893, 2981, and 3291. (SJV-MDP EIR, p.

3.4-29.) The conceptual alignment for Line E, as shown in the SJV-MDP EIR, is not within an MSHCP Criteria Cell.

In accordance with the MSHCP, the SJV-MDP was reviewed for consistency with MSHCP Section

3.2.1 (Public Quasi/Public [PQP] Lands), Section 6.1.2 (Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool), Section 6.1.3 (Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species), Section 6.1.4 (Guidelines Pertaining to the Urban/Wildlands Interface), and Section 6.3.2 (Additional Survey Needs and Procedures). The SJV MDP EIR concluded that with implementation of mitigation measures MM Bio 2, MM Bio 4, MM Bio 5, MM Bio 6, and MM Bio 8, the MDP Project would be is consistent with the MSHCP and potential impacts regarding conflicting with an approved local, regional, or state conservation plan would be less than significant. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 3.4-37.) The MDP Project is not located within any other adopted HCP or NCCP. The proposed Project will not conflict with an approved local, regional, or state conservation plan and potential impacts are less than significant. (SJV MDP EIR, pp. 3.4-29 - 3.4-37.)
Line E Project: No New Impacts/No Impacts
The Line E Project is located within the MSHCP; however, the Line E Project site is not located within an MSHCP Criteria Cell, and JPR is not required.

The BTR provides an analysis of the Line E Project with regard to compliance with the biological aspects of the MSHCP. Specifically the BTR analyzed consistency with MSHCP Reserve assembly requirements, compliance and consistency with Section 6.1.2 (Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools), Section 6.1.3 (Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species; NEPSSA), Section 6.1.4 (Guidelines Pertaining to the Urban/Wildlands Interface), and Section 6.3.2 (Additional Survey Needs and Procedures). As such, the Project will not conflict with the provisions of the MSHCP as discussed below.

MSHCP Reserve Assembly Requirements
The Project site is not in the MSHCP Criteria Area and therefore the Project is not subject to MSHCP Reserve Assembly requirements. (GLA-A, p. 73.)
100
Section 6.1.2 – Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools The Line E Project will impact 0.15 acres of MSHCP non-riparian riverine areas, as shown on Figure 24 – MSHCP Riverine Areas, which are identical to the areas of CDFW jurisdiction shown on Table I, and Figure 22. The purpose of the Line E Project is to re-route existing storm water flows into the proposed Line E channel. The existing direction of flows are from the southeast starting at the San Jacinto Reservoir to the northwest across Ramona Expressway (refer to Figure 4 – Project Map). The general direction and relatively same amount of storm water flows at the 100-year storm level would be maintained after implementation of Line E. Although the proposed Line E channel would be subject to flood control maintenance (vegetation management and structural repairs, as needed), the Line E channel would have at least 10.02 acres with a soft (unpaved) bottom and would function in the same or similar manner as the existing, human-altered drainage features (i.e. agricultural ditches). In order to address consistency with Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP and to evaluate the effects to riparian and/or riverine resources, a Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP) process. (GLA-A, p. 73.) The Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP) Analysis for Impacts to MSHCP Riparian/Riverine Area, San Jacinto Valley Master Drain Plan Line E, January 20, 2026 was prepared by GLA and is included and is included as Appendix D.2 to this Addendum. The DBESP was submitted to the Wildlife Agencies by the City of San Jacinto on February 25, 2025. The Wildlife Agencies requested additional information on April 23, 2025 and a response to that request was provided on June 6, 2025. On July 25, 2025 the Wildlife Agencies responded to the City. On August 28, 2025 the City (including consultants) and Wildlife Agency staff attended a site walk of the Line E area. The City submitted a revised DBESP to the Wildlife Agencies’ comments on January 21, 2026.

The DBESP evaluated potential impacts to riverine areas and narrow endemic plant species, criteria area species, and burrowing owl which are discussed below. The proposed Project, through grading and reconfiguration, will impact 3.88 acres of riverine areas. The general direction of riverine flows will be maintained after implementation of Line E. The impacts to the existing riverine areas are considered permanent given that the segments of the exact drainage features will not be restored in the same configuration. Through preparation and implementation of an HMMP as set forth in mitigation measure MM Bio E8, impacts to riverine areas would be less than significant.

Construction of the Line E Project has the potential to result in indirect impacts to LBV within the riparian habitat adjacent to the southern (upstream) end of the Line E Project Site. (Refer to Figure 19 – Least Bell’s Vireo Survey Results.) However, with implementation of mitigation measures MM Bio E4, MM Bio E5, and/or MM Bio E6, which establishes construction buffers, provides for preconstruction surveys, biological monitoring, and installation of a noise barrier, indirect impacts to LBV would be less than significant. (GLA-A, pp. 70 – 72, 74.) Five seasonal ponding features (refer to Figures 18a through 18e – Fairy Shrimp Results Map) were surveyed by GLA to determine the presence/absence of federally-listed fairy shrimp and for determinations as to whether any of these features met the definition of a vernal pool. The results of these surveys indicate implementation of the Line E Project would not impact listed fairy shrimp, nor are any of these features considered vernal pools. (GLA-A, pp. 46, 55, 74.) As part of the fairy shrimp survey, five areas noted as inundated within the Line E Project Site, identified Figures 18a through 18e as features E-1, 46, 5, 4, and E-2, were evaluated to determine of any of them are vernal pools.
101
Features 4, 5,46 and E-2 are all unvegetated vehicle ruts in dirt roads. Feature E-1 consists of a large, inundated area that is described in this Addendum and the BTR as Drainage Area A. Drainage Area A was determined not to exhibit all three parameters of a wetland, specifically the inundated area did not exhibit a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation. Therefore, Drainage Area A is not considered as a vernal pool. Because there are no vernal pools present on the Project site, implementation of the Line E project would not impact any vernal pools. (GLA-A, pp. 55, 74.) Section 6.1.3 – Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Most of the Project site is located within the MSHCP Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Area (NEPSSA), except for approximately 3,000 linear feet of the Project alignment corresponding with the northeastern corner of APNs 432-030-012 and 432-030-010. No NEPSSA plant species were detected during the focused surveys, and therefore the Line E Project would not impact Narrow Endemic Plant Species. (GLA-A, p. 74.)
Section 6.1.4 – Guidelines Pertaining to the Urban/Wildlands Interface The Line E Project would not be located adjacent to the MSHCP Conservation Area; however as mentioned above in the Section 6.1.2 discussion, a portion of Line E would be located adjacent to existing riparian habitat that supports sensitive species and that would be enhanced/restored per mitigation measure MM Bio E8. (GLA-A, p. 74.)
Section 6.3.2 Additional Survey Needs and Procedures
As discussed in the response to item D.1, the Line E Project occurs within the burrowing owl survey area. Focused burrowing owl surveys were conducted for the proposed Project site, and no burrowing owls were detected; however, potential suitable habitat exists within the Line E Project site. In compliance with MSHCP requirements and mitigation measure MM Bio E7 (which clarifies and replaces SJV-MDP EIR MM Bio 2), preconstruction burrowing owl surveys shall be conducted within 30 days of site disturbance. The Line E project does not occur within the amphibian or mammal survey areas, or within the CAPSSA; therefore, focused surveys were not required for these species.

One Criteria Area Plant Species, smooth tarplant, was detected within the Project site (see Figure 17). Ditch A, Ditch D, and Drainage Area A support smooth tarplant, and as noted above, these locations are identified as riverine areas within agricultural areas. Given that a proportion of the smooth tarplant individuals are associated with riparian/riverine resources, mitigation measure MM Bio E8 would address impacts to riparian/riverine areas pursuant to MSHCP Section 6.1.2 and reduce impacts to less than significant. The Project site does not occur within the CAPSSA and vernal pools are not present on the Project site, therefore the MSHCP requirements pertaining to CAPSSA species and vernal pools do not apply. (GLA-B, pp. 3-5.) For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state conservation plan. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required.
\\brkpan01.webb.lan\WO4\2023\23-0007\GIS\PRO\Line E Addendum\bio figures\bio figures\bio figures.aprx Map created 10 Feb 2025 Source: GLA
Line E Addendum
Figure 17 - Smooth Tarplant
I
2775
2666
2774
2878
X:\
N Sanderson Avenue
Ramona Expressway
Record Road / Ramona Boulevard
N
Sanderson Avenue
Project Site
2022 / 2023
Survey Area
2024 Survey Area
Smooth Tarplant
Criteria Cell
Criteria Area
Species Survey Area
\\brkpan01.webb.lan\WO4\2023\23-0007\GIS\PRO\Line E Addendum\bio figures\bio figures\bio figures.aprx Map created 10 Feb 2025 Source: GLA
Line E Addendum
Figure 18a - Fairy Shrimp Survey Results Map
I
X:\0
Key Map
Not to Scale Ramona ExpresswayN Sanderson Avenue
0 30 60 120
Project Site /
Fairy Sh rim p Survey Area
2022 / 2023 Survey Area
2024 Survey Area
Dry Season Survey Results
Branc h inecta Cysts Detected
Branc h inecta Cysts Not Detec ted
Survey in Prog ress – R esults Pend ing
Wet Season Survey Results
B. lind ah li Detec ted
B. lind ah li Not Detec ted
\\brkpan01.webb.lan\WO4\2023\23-0007\GIS\PRO\Line E Addendum\bio figures\bio figures\bio figures.aprx Map created 10 Feb 2025 Source: GLA
Line E Addendum
Figure 18b - Fairy Shrimp Survey Results Map
I
X:\0 0 30 60 120
Project Site /
Fairy Sh rim p Survey Area
2022 / 2023 Survey Area
2024 Survey Area
Dry Season Survey Results
Branc h inecta Cysts Detected
Branc h inecta Cysts Not Detec ted
Survey in Prog ress – R esults Pend ing
Wet Season Survey Results
B. lind ah li Detec ted
B. lind ah li Not Detec ted
Key Map
Not to Scale Ramona ExpresswayN Sanderson Avenue
\\brkpan01.webb.lan\WO4\2023\23-0007\GIS\PRO\Line E Addendum\bio figures\bio figures\bio figures.aprx Map created 10 Feb 2025 Source: GLA
Line E Addendum
Figure 18c - Fairy Shrimp Survey Results Map
I
X:\03
Key Map
Not to Scale Ramona ExpresswayN Sanderson Avenue
0 30 60 120
Project Site /
Fairy Sh rim p Survey Area
2022 / 2023 Survey Area
2024 Survey Area
Dry Season Survey Results
Branc h inecta Cysts Detected
Branc h inecta Cysts Not Detec ted
Survey in Prog ress – R esults Pend ing
Wet Season Survey Results
B. lind ah li Detec ted
B. lind ah li Not Detec ted
\\brkpan01.webb.lan\WO4\2023\23-0007\GIS\PRO\Line E Addendum\bio figures\bio figures\bio figures.aprx Map created 10 Feb 2025 Source: GLA
Line E Addendum
Figure 18d - Fairy Shrimp Survey Results Map
I
X :\0
Key Map
Not to Scale Ramona ExpresswayN Sanderson Avenue
0 30 60 120
Project Site /
Fairy Sh rim p Survey Area
2022 / 2023 Survey Area
2024 Survey Area
Dry Season Survey Results
Branc h inecta Cysts Detected
Branc h inecta Cysts Not Detec ted
Survey in Prog ress – R esults Pend ing
Wet Season Survey Results
B. lind ah li Detec ted
B. lind ah li Not Detec ted
\\brkpan01.webb.lan\WO4\2023\23-0007\GIS\PRO\Line E Addendum\bio figures\bio figures\bio figures.aprx Map created 10 Feb 2025 Source: GLA
Line E Addendum
Figure 18e - Fairy Shrimp Survey Results Map
I
X:\0
Key Map
Not to Scale Ramona ExpresswayN Sanderson Avenue
0 30 60 120
Project Site /
Fairy Sh rim p Survey Area
2022 / 2023 Survey Area
2024 Survey Area
Dry Season Survey Results
Branc h inecta Cysts Detected
Branc h inecta Cysts Not Detec ted
Survey in Prog ress – R esults Pend ing
Wet Season Survey Results
B. lind ah li Detec ted
B. lind ah li Not Detec ted
\\brkpan01.webb.lan\WO4\2023\23-0007\GIS\PRO\Line E Addendum\bio figures\bio figures\bio figures.aprx Map created 10 Feb 2025 Source: GLA
Line E Addendum
Figure 19 - Least Bell's Vireo Survey Map
I
N Sanderson Avenue
Ramona Expressway
Record Road / Ramona Boulevard
N Sanderson Avenue
Projec t S ite
LBV Territory
\\brkpan01.webb.lan\WO4\2023\23-0007\GIS\PRO\Line E Addendum\bio figures\bio figures\bio figures.aprx Map created 10 Feb 2025 Source: GLA
Line E Addendum
Figure 20 - Burrowing Owl Survey Map
I
N Sanderson Avenue
Ramona Expressway
Record Road / Ramona Boulevard
N Sanderson Avenue
Project Site
2022 / 2023 Survey Area
2024 Survey Area
500' Visual Survey Buffer
Burrowing Owl Transect
Burrow
Burrow Complex
\\brkpan01.webb.lan\WO4\2023\23-0007\GIS\PRO\Line E Addendum\bio figures\bio figures\bio figures.aprx Map created 10 Feb 2025 Source: GLA
Line E Addendum
Figure 21 - Vegetation Map
I
N Sanderson Avenue
Ramona Expressway
Inset Map
Not to Scale
Record Road / Ramona Boulevard
N
Sanderson Avenue
Proje ct Site
Pe rm a ne nt Im pa ct
Te m pora ry Im pa ct
Disturb e d Ag ricultura l Are a s
(Ag ricultura l Fie lds)
Brom us h orde a ce us
He rb a ce ous Se m i-Na tura l Allia nce
(Annua l Brom e Gra ssla nds)
Disturb e d/De ve lope d Are a s
(Disturb e d a nd De ve lope d Are a s)
Le pidium la tifolium – La ctuca se rriola
He rb a ce ous Se m i-Na tura l Allia nce
(Pe re nnia l Pe ppe r We e d –
Prickly Le ttuce Pa tch e s)
Euca lyptus g lob ulus
Woodla nd Se m i-Na tura l Allia nce
(Euca lyptus Grove s)
\\brkpan01.webb.lan\WO4\2023\23-0007\GIS\PRO\Line E Addendum\bio figures\bio figures\bio figures.aprx Map created 12 Feb 2025 Source: GLA
Line E Addendum
Figure 22 - CDFW Jurisdictional Area
I
Ditch C
Ditch C
Ditch D
Ditch E
Ditch B
12/13
X:\0363
N Sanderson Avenue
Ramona Expressway
Ditch A
Basin
A
Ditch A
Drainage
Area A
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10/11
Inset Map
Not to Scale
Ditch F
14 Inset Map
Not to Scale
Record Road / Ramona Boulevard
N
Sanderson Avenue
Project Site
Permanent Impact
Temporary Impact
CDFW Non-Riparian Stream
Agricultural Ditch
(Non-Jurisdictional)
Agricultural Basin
# Photo Location
\\brkpan01.webb.lan\WO4\2023\23-0007\GIS\PRO\Line E Addendum\bio figures\bio figures\bio figures.aprx Map created 12 Feb 2025 Source: GLA
Line E Addendum
Figure 23 - Regional Board Jurisdictional Area
I
Ditch C
Ditch C
Ditch D
Ditch E
Ditch B
12/13
X:\0363-T
N Sanderson Avenue
Ramona Expressway
Ditch A
Basin
A
Ditch A
Drainage
Area A
2 1
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10/11
Inset Map
Not to Scale
Ditch F
14 Inset Map
Not to Scale
Record Road / Ramona Boulevard
N
Sanderson Avenue
Project Site
Permanent Impact
Temporary Impact
RWQCB Non-Wetland
Waters of the State
Agricultural Ditch
(Non-Jurisdictional)
Agricultural Basin
Wetland Sampling Point
# Photo Location
\\brkpan01.webb.lan\WO4\2023\23-0007\GIS\PRO\Line E Addendum\bio figures\bio figures\bio figures.aprx Map created 10 Feb 2025 Source: GLA
Line E Addendum
Figure 24 - MSHCP Riverine Areas
I
Ditch C
Ditch C
Ditch D
Ditch E
Ditch B
X:\0363-THE REST\064
N Sanderson Avenue
Ramona Expressway
Ditch A
Basin
A
Ditch A
Drainage
Area A
Inset Map
Not to Scale
Ditch F
Inset Map
Not to Scale
Record Road / Ramona Boulevard
N
Sanderson Avenue
Project Site
Permanent Impact
Temporary Impact
MSHCP Riverine
Agricultural Ditch
(Non-Riparian/Riverine)
Basin (Non-Riparian/Riverine)
Smooth Tarplant
114
E. CULTURAL RESOURCES
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation
is Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
Would the project:
1) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, pursuant to California Code of
Regulations, Section 15064.5?
2) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource, pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Section 15064.5?
3) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Source(s): AE-A; SJV-MDP EIR
1) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Section 15064.5?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact
Significant effects upon historic structures or features are evaluated by determining the presence or absence of historic status with respect to the feature in question, and then determining the potential for project implementation to affect the structure or feature if it possesses historic status.

One historic resource was identified within the MDP Project area of potential effect (APE), known as Site 33-015743, which is south of Seventh Street. This resource is located within the boundaries of a segment of the former San Jacinto Valley Railway that dates to 1888. The resource was previously recorded and evaluated for historical significance, and it appears to qualify as a “historical resource” as defined by CEQA. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 3.5-11.)
According to the conceptual alignments and facilities identified in the SJV-MDP, MDP Project-related activities at railway location would be limited to trenching for the installation of an underground storm drain within the railway ROW. If construction within the railway ROW is limited to underground facilities, and does not include the intersection of any MDP Facilities with the rail line or associated railway structures, implementation of the MPD Project would not result in the destruction or relocation of the railway nor would it alter the basic characteristics of the site. Therefore, the proposed SJVMDP would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of Site 33-015743, the only historical resource encountered in the portions of the MDP Project footprint studied (SJV-MDP EIR, p.

3.5-14.)
A vernacular commercial building at 301 N. State Street, known as “Rocios Party Rentals,” is located within the proposed SJV-MDP footprint. However, because this structure was constructed after 1967, was not considered a potential historical resource at the time the SJV-MDP EIR was certified. No other potential historical resources were encountered within or adjacent to the SJV-MDP Project footprint. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 3.5-11.)
The facility locations and alignments shown in the SJV-MDP are conceptual. If at final design any SJV-MDP Facilities are in the vicinity of the former San Jacinto Railway, the conceptual plans change to include construction of above-ground structures or the removal of existing tracks or other railroadrelated structures within the ROW, this would be considered a modification of the SJV-MDP Project 115
for which subsequent CEQA analysis (i.e., initial study, negative declaration, addendum to the EIR, subsequent EIR, or supplemental EIR) would be required. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 3.5-15.) Portions of the SJV-MDP Project footprint were inaccessible to field survey personnel and could not be surveyed; thus, it is possible that historical resources could be present on the portions of the SJVMDP Project’s footprint that could not be surveyed and a field survey would be required for these facilities per mitigation measure MM Cultural 2a. Therefore, the implementation of mitigation measures MM Cultural 2a through, MM Cultural 2c are required to reduce potential impacts to historical and archaeological resources to less than significant. (SJV-MDP, EIR. P. 3.5-15.) MM Cultural 2a: Prior to the earlier of issuance of a grading permit or construction of any SJV-MDP facility subject to further CEQA analysis, the San Jacinto Public Works Department, Hemet Public Works Department, or RCFCWCD shall require the Project applicant to commission an assessment of the potential for archeological and cultural resources to be performed by a qualified archaeologist in conjunction with recognized Native American tribes, including the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians (Soboba), in order to determine the presence and extent of any such resources within the Project area and evaluate the significance of such resources. The assessment shall include a NAHC and CHRIS records search, a Phase I walkover survey, and preparation of an archaeological report containing the results of this assessment. Phase II archaeological evaluations will be completed prior to project approval if recommended in the assessment.

MM Cultural 2b: The San Jacinto Public Works Department, Hemet Public Works Department, or RCFCWCD shall enter into a Treatment and Disposition Agreement (TDA) with Soboba to address treatment and disposition of archaeological and cultural resources and human remains associated with Soboba that may be uncovered or otherwise discovered during construction within the jurisdiction of the San Jacinto Public Works Department, Hemet Public Works Department, or RCFCWCD. The TDA may establish provisions for tribal monitors. Following execution of the TDA by the San Jacinto Public Works Department or Hemet Public Works Department and Soboba, the TDA will be incorporated by reference into individual grading permits for portions of the Project that are within the jurisdiction of San Jacinto Public Works Department or Hemet Public Works Department; TDAs executed between RCFCWCD and Soboba will be incorporated into the construction specifications.

MM Cultural 2c: If the archaeological/cultural resources assessment described in MM Cultural 2a demonstrates the potential for archaeological/cultural resources to occur on the Project site, tribal monitors, including those from Soboba, may be allowed to monitor, at such tribe’s sole cost and expense, all grading, excavation, and grounddisturbing activities, including further surveys. Following the agreement of the San Jacinto Public Works Department, Hemet Public Works Department, or RCFCWCD, the designated archaeologist, the tribal monitor, and any applicable responsible or trustee agencies, grading, excavation, ground-disturbing activities shall be halted temporarily, and redirected in the event that any archaeological/cultural resources are discovered, in order to evaluate the significance of said archaeological/cultural resources. Any artifacts collected or recovered shall be cleaned, identified, catalogued, analyzed, and prepared for curation at an appropriate repository with permanent retrievable storage to allow for e future. Site records or site record updates (as appropriate) shall be prepared and 116
submitted to the Eastern Information Center as a permanent record of the discovery. (SJV MDP EIR, pp. 3.5-14 - 3.5-15, 3.5-17 - 3.5-18.)
Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
This discussion is based on the Cultural Resource Study for the San Jacinto Master Drainage Plan Line E, City of San Jacinto, Riverside County, California, January 2024, prepared by Applied Earthworks for the Line E Project. This report is hereinafter referred to as the CRS and is included as Appendix E to this Addendum. Preparation of the CRS satisfies SJV-MDP mitigation measure MM Cultural 2a.

According to the CRS, the Line E Project area is heavily disturbed on the surface by agricultural activity, road development, in addition to modern structures. Portions of the Line E Project site were inaccessible to field survey personnel and could not be surveyed. The records search resulted in identification of a total of eight previously recorded cultural resources within a 0.5-mile search radius of the Line E Project site. Of the eight previously recorded cultural resources, five were identified as historical built-environment resources, and of these resources, the Colorado River Aqueduct and it various segments (CA-RIV-6726H/33-011265) is the only resource documented within the Line E Project site. (AE-A, p. 15.) The Colorado River Aqueduct was constructed in the early 1930s and extends approximately 232 miles from the Whitsett Intake Pumping Plant in Lake Havasu to its terminus at Lake Mathews. This resource has been recommended as eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) under Criteria A, C, and D and a portion of the aqueduct was determined to be eligible for the NRHP with concurrence from the State Historic Preservation Officer. (CRHR). (AE, pp. 15 – 16.)
The Colorado River Aqueduct crosses underground through the Line E Project at Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 as shown on Figure 5 – Project Components. As discussed in the Project Description, the Line E Channel has been designed to cross over Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 and would be constructed in such a manner as to not impact this pipeline. Therefore, the segment of the Colorado River Aqueduct within the Line E Disturbance area is outside of the Line E Project’s vertical limits and would not be directly impacted by construction or operation of the Line E Project. (AE-A, p. 21.) The existence of Line E above the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 does not affect the historical significance of this feature.

For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Section 15064.5. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required.
2) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource, pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Section 15064.5? SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact
Numerous prehistoric—i.e., Native American—archaeological sites have been found in the area consisting of various amounts of habitation debris such as: ceramic shards, chipped stone and groundstone tools, debitage, midden soils, fire-affected rock, and sometimes human remains.

Bedrock milling features and, less frequently, petroglyphs, have been found in the San Jacinto Valley in areas where bedrock outcrops are present. However, no evidence of any prehistoric archaeological cultural resource was found within or adjacent to that portion of the Project footprint that could be surveyed. Based on the results of the records searches, Native American consultations, and field 117
surveys, no archaeological resources were identified for those SJV-MDP Facilities that were surveyed. However, because portions of the MDP Project footprint were unable to be surveyed due to restricted access and Native American monitoring has been requested, the SJV MPD Project would implement mitigation measures MM Cultural 2a through MM Cultural 2c (set forth in the response to item E.1, to reduce potential impacts to archaeological resources to less than significant. (SJV MDP EIR, pp. 3.5-15 - 3.5-16.)
Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
The records search conducted as part of the CRS resulted in identification of a total of eight previously recorded cultural resources within a 0.5-mile search radius of the Project site. Six of these were identified as archaeological resources consisting of three pre-historic isolated artifacts, one historic refuse scatters, two irrigation wells, and two built-environment resources were identified.

During the intensive pedestrian survey completed as part of the CRS, no previously unrecorded cultural resources were encountered within the Line E Project area. (AE, pp. 15, 23.) As part of the CRS, a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) was conducted. The results of the SLF search were negative and indicated that there are no known Native American cultural resources within the immediate area of the Line E Project. (AE, p. 17.) At the suggestion of the NAHC, 15 Native American individuals and organizations traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the Project area were contacted by AE. Of the 15 individuals and organizations contacted, the following seven tribes responded: Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians, Cahuilla Band of Indians, Pechanga Band of Indians, Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, and Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians.

The Project falls within the traditional land use area of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians.

The Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians and the Cahuilla Band of Indians are unaware of any cultural resources that would be affected by the Project but request to be notified immediately if any resources are discovered during development. However, because this Project is within the Cahuilla Band’s traditional land use, they requested to participate in monitoring once construction begins. The Pechanga Band of Indians requested consultation on the Project, as part of the Project area is within a Traditional Cultural Property. The Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians has no additional information to provide, but they recommend that AE directly contact Soboba of Luiseño Indians as they are closer to the Project and may have pertinent information. The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians will not participate as the Project is located outside of Serrano ancestral territory. The Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians stated that the Line E Project is within an area of high concern for Tribal Cultural Resources. (AE, p. 23.)
AE did not encounter any previously unrecorded cultural resources within the Project site. Previous prehistoric isolated finds and historic archaeological sites identified by the records search in the buffer for the current Project indicate a potential for subsurface deposits. The Project area is disturbed, and soil sensitivity appears low. The cultural resources identified adjacent to the Project area suggest some potential for subsurface archaeological deposits. Although the likelihood of the presence of intact archaeological deposits is low, in order to provide protection in the unlikely event that archeological resources are unearthed during construction the Line E Project will comply with clarified mitigation measures CMM Cultural 2b and CMM Cultural 2c.

CMM Cultural-2b: Archaeological Monitoring, Cultural Resources Worker Sensitivity Training, and Treatment and Disposition Plan. Prior to the initiation of 118
any Line E-Project-related surface grubbing or clearing and initial grading, the entity carrying out the project the San Jacinto Public Works Department,, Hemet Public Works Department, or RCFCWCD shall retain a qualified professional archaeologist (the “Project Archaeologist”) meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for archaeology as defined at 36 CFR Part 61, Appendix A. The primary task of the Project Archaeologist shall be to monitor the initial ground-disturbing activities at the Line E Project site for the identification of any previously unknown archaeological and/or cultural resources.

The Project Archeologist shall attend the pre-grading meeting with the City of San Jacinto Staff, the Line E Project construction manager, and any Line E Project contractors to conduct a mandatory Cultural Resources Worker Sensitivity Training to those in attendance. The Project Archaeologist or designated archaeological monitor shall have the authority to temporarily halt and redirect earth moving activities in the affected area if suspected archaeological resources are unearthed.

Also prior to the initiation of any Line E Project-related surface grubbing or clearing and initial grading, the entity carrying out the project San Jacinto Public Works Department, shall enter into a Treatment and Disposition Agreement (TDA) with the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians to address treatment and disposition of archaeological and cultural resources and human remains associated with the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians that may be uncovered or otherwise discovered during construction within the jurisdiction of the San Jacinto Public Works Department, Hemet Public Works Department, or RCFCWCD. The TDA may establish provisions for tribal monitors. Following execution of the TDA by the San Jacinto Public Works Department and Soboba, the TDA be incorporated by reference into individual grading permits for portions of the Project that are within the jurisdiction of San Jacinto Public Works Department or Hemet Public Works Department; TDAs executed between RCFCWCD and Soboba will be incorporated into the Line E Project construction specifications.

CMM Cultural 2c: Inadvertent Finds. If the archaeological/cultural resources assessment described in MM Cultural 2a demonstrates the potential for archaeological/cultural resources to occur on the Project site, tribal monitors, including those from Soboba, may be allowed to monitor, at such tribe’s sole cost and expense, all grading, excavation, and ground-disturbing activities, including further surveys. Following the agreement of the San Jacinto Public Works Department, Hemet Public Works Department, or RCFCWCD, the designated archaeologist, the tribal monitor, and any applicable responsible or trustee agencies, Grading, excavation, ground-disturbing activities shall be halted temporarily by the Project Archaeologist, and redirected in the event that any archaeological/cultural resources are discovered during initial ground disturbing activities, in order to evaluate the significance of said archaeological/cultural resources. Any artifacts collected or recovered shall be cleaned, identified, catalogued, analyzed, and prepared for curation at an appropriate repository with permanent retrievable storage to allow for additional research in the future. Site records or site record updates (as appropriate) shall be prepared and submitted to the Eastern Information Center South Coastal Information Center as a permanent record of the discovery.
119
For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts resulting in a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource, pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Section 15064.5. Clarification of the SJV-MDP EIR mitigation measures to be Line E Project-specific does not mitigate new impacts or constitute new information of substantial importance. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required.
3) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact
The SJV-MDP EIR determined that no cemeteries are located within the MDP Project area, and due to its previously disturbed condition, discovering human remains is unlikely; thus, the MDP Project is not expected to disturb any human remains. If suspected human remains are found during construction of any MDP Facility, all activities in the vicinity of the remains shall cease and the contractor shall immediately notify the County Coroner, pursuant to California Health & Safety Code Section 7050.5 and California Resource Protection Code Section 5097.98. Therefore, potential impacts to disturbing any human remains would be less than significant. (SJV-MDP IS, p. 17.) Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
In the unlikely event that unknown human remains are uncovered during construction of the Line E Project, pursuant to law, the proper authorities would be notified and standard procedures for the respectful handling of human remains would be adhered to in compliance with California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15064.5(e); Public Resources Code (PRC) Division 5, Chapter 1.75, Section 5097.98; State Health and Safety Code (HSC) Division 7, Part 1, Chapter 2, Section 7050.5. Through compliance with these regulations, potential impacts associated with disturbing human remains would less than significant.

For the reasons set forth above, the disturbance of human remains is unlikely and if suspected human remains are found during construction of the Line E Project, construction activities would stop and the provisions of state law would be followed. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required.
120
F. ENERGY
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation is
Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
Would the project:
1) Result in potentially significant environmental
impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
2) Conflict with or obstruct a State or Local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Source(s): CEC; Project Description, Energy Tables (Appendix G) 1) Result in potentially significant environmental impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less Than Significant Impact.

This threshold was not a part of the State CEQA Guidelines at the time the SJV-MDP EIR was prepared. However, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(c), the Project’s irreversible environmental changes were evaluated. The proposed SJV-MDP Facilities would not result in a large commitment of non-renewable resources, besides the temporary use of non-renewable resources (e.g., fossil fuels) during construction. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 5.0-19.) Additionally, all the information necessary to evaluate the Project’s energy consumption was available.

Construction of the SJV-MDP Facilities would be intermittent as individual facilities are implemented over time. Construction would require the use of heavy equipment, as well as construction workers and vendors traveling to and from the SJV-MDP Facilities construction sites. Construction equipment requires diesel as the fuel source and construction worker and vendor trips use both gasoline and diesel fuel. Fuel consumption from on-site heavy-duty construction equipment and construction vehicles would be temporary and cease once construction is complete, which would represent a negligible demand on energy resources. Furthermore, operations of the SJV-MDP Facilities do not consume energy beyond infrequent maintenance service. As such, the impact on energy consumption would be less than significant.

Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
As an infrastructure project, the majority of impacts associated with the Line E Project would be shortterm. As analyzed above, in item C.2, the construction of the Line E Project is anticipated to take approximately three years and would require the use of equipment for grading/excavation, as well as construction workers and vendors traveling to and from the Line E Project site. Construction equipment requires diesel as the fuel source and construction worker and vendor trips use both gasoline and diesel fuel. Line E Project-related fuel consumption was estimated and is included in Appendix G – Energy Tables. Construction of the Line E Project is estimated to use approximately 329,340 gallons of diesel fuel and 30,632 gallons of gasoline. (See Appendix G.) Fuel consumption from on-site heavy-duty construction equipment and construction would be temporary in nature and uses a limited number of equipment, which would represent a negligible demand on energy resources. There are no unusual Line E Project characteristics that would necessitate the use of construction equipment that would be less energy-efficient than at comparable construction sites in other parts of the State.
121
Energy used during operation of the Line E Project would primarily result from electricity usage from the confluence basin pumps. These pumps are estimated to use approximately 240 kilowatts (kW) per hour. The amount of time these pumps would operate in a given year will vary depending on the volume of water being pumped during each storm and the storm frequency. For example, the estimated average runtime for the pumps to drain a 100-year storm is approximately 47.3 hours, which would result in approximately 11,352 kilowatt-hours kWh (240 kW x 47.3 hours = 11,352 kWh).

This represents a negligible demand on Southern California Edison’s (SCE’s) energy resources, which consumed 85,670 gigawatt hours (GWh) in 2022 (CEC), and therefore would not operate in a manner that is wasteful or inefficient. Additionally, the Line E Project would also use gasoline and diesel fuel use during operation and routine maintenance of the backup generator and for maintenance fuel use, which would also be negligible.

For the reasons set forth in the preceding paragraphs, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy during construction or operation. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required.
2) Conflict with or obstruct a State or Local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less Than Significant Impact.

This threshold was not a part of the State CEQA Guidelines at the time the SJV-MDP EIR was prepared. However, all the information necessary to evaluate the MDP Project’s consistency with applicable renewable energy plans was available.

The SJV-MDP Project, and any of its implementing facilities, would comply with the state and local regulations that pertain to renewable energy or energy efficiency. However, there are no specific plans for these types of facilities. Therefore, impacts regarding conflicts with or obstruction of a renewable energy plan or energy efficiency would be less than significant.

Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
The Line E Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of any state or local plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency because there are no applicable plans for these types of facilities.

As such, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts regarding obstruction of state or local plans renewable energy or energy efficiency. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 122
G. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation is
Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
Would the project:
1) Cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent AlquistPriolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42
2) Cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: Strong seismic ground shaking?
3) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? 4) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

Landslides?
5) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 6) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
7) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Section
1803.5.3 of the California Building Code (2019), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? 8) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater?
9) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Source(s): Kleinfelder-A, Kleinfelder-B, GP DEIR; Project Description; AE-A, SJV-MDP IS 1) Cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent AlquistPriolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42; and
2) Cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: Strong seismic ground shaking?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact
Portions of the proposed MDP project lie within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. While the MDP Project does not include facilities or structures that would be inhabited by humans, and as such would not expose persons directly to substantial adverse effects from ground shaking. Detention 123
basin failure due to ground shaking could indirectly cause flooding during high water periods.

However, the likelihood of an earthquake coinciding with such events is low. Additionally, the proposed MDP Facilities would be designed and constructed to withstand expected ground shaking and potential soil instability, based on geotechnical reports that would be prepared as part of the final design for the MDP Facilities. Because recommendations from the geotechnical engineer would be incorporated into the final design and construction of the MDP Facilities, potential impacts from seismic hazards would be less than significant. (SJV-MDP IS, p. 18.) Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
This discussion is based on the Structures Report, February 14, 2025, and the Draft Geotechnical Investigation Report, San Jacinto Line E Storm Drain, San Jacinto California, February 13, 2025, hereinafter referred to as the Draft Geotechnical Report. Both of these documents were prepared by Kleinfelder, Inc. and are included as Appendices B.1 and B.2 of this Addendum.

The Line E Project is within the zone of influence for several faults which are considered active or potentially active and capable of producing seismic shaking at the site that could potentially be damaging to buildings and appurtenant structures. Specifically, as shown on Figure 25 – Fault Location Map, the Line E Project site is east of and adjacent to the Casa Loma fault strand of the San Jacinto fault zone (SJFZ). The Casa Loma fault intersects the proposed Confluence Basin at the north end of the Line E Project site and the proposed Line E inlet at the south end of the Line E Project site. (Kleinfelder-A, p. 10.) The Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone setback associated with the mapped fault traces impinges on the proposed Line E Channel alignment at the south end of the Project limits near Bridge Street and Sanderson Avenue, and at the north end where the alignment crosses Record Road. (Kleinfelder-B, p. 12.)
It is anticipated that the Line E Project site would periodically experience ground acceleration as the result of moderate to large magnitude earthquakes on faults outside the Line E Project area.

According to the Draft Geotechnical Report, the risk for surface fault rupture within the Line E Project site is high. (Kleinfelder-B, p. 13.)
The Line E Project would construct approximately 200 linear feet of concrete trapezoidal channel across the Metropolitan Water District Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 right-of-way with access roads on both sides of the channel, and side slopes varying from a 10:1 ratio to a 23:1 ratio. Metropolitan has design policies for structures built over their buried pipelines. Given that the Line E Channel would cross over Casa Loma Barrel No. 1, two designs are being analyzed in this Addendum. The purpose of these designs is to prevent additional weight on the existing Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 from the proposed Line E channel, including the weight of maintenance vehicles and channel water.

The Draft Geotechnical Report concluded that the Line E Project is geotechnically feasible, provided the recommended seismic design parameters regarding earthwork, design, and construction considerations presented in the Draft Geotechnical Report are followed during design and construction. (Kleinfelder-B, pp. 14 – 15.) These recommendations are identified in the Project Description under the subheading Geotechnical Recommendations for Crossing the Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 and made a part of the Line E Project. Because the design and construction of the Line E Project would incorporate the recommendations of the Draft Geotechnical Report, potential adverse effects including risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault and strong seismic ground shaking would be less than significant.
124
For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to rupture of a known earthquake fault or strong seismic ground shaking. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required.
3) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact
The majority of the proposed MDP Facility alignments and detention basin locations are in areas with moderate susceptibility to liquefaction, with some small areas identified as very high, high, and low susceptibility. Because the project does not include structures inhabited by humans, it will not directly expose people to seismic-related ground failure. Detention basin failure from ground shaking could indirectly cause flooding during high water periods, but the probability of an earthquake coinciding with such events is low. The facilities will be designed and constructed to withstand expected ground shaking and potential soil instability, as per recommendations from geotechnical reports prepared during the design phase of MDP Facilities. Therefore, impacts regarding liquefaction and seismicrelated ground failure are considered less than significant. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 18.) Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
The Line E Project site is within an area identified as having a moderate potential for liquefaction.

Liquefaction could occur within interbedded sand layers through the upper 60 feet below ground surface. Settlement resulting from liquefaction could be a potential impact if it were to result in damage the Line E Channel or to Metropolitan’s Casa Loma Barrel No. 1 Siphon where the Line E Channel crosses this pipeline. The Draft Geotechnical Report estimated liquefaction could occur within interbedded sand layers throughout the upper 60-feet below g round surface and total liquefaction-induced settlements in the vicinity of the proposed Metropolitan pipeline crossing could be approximately 2 inches, which is considered generally negligible in this area. (Kleinfelder-B, pp. 16 – 17.) Because the design and construction of the Line E Project would incorporate the recommendations of the Draft Geotechnical Report, which are made a part of the Line E Project as discussed in the Project Description, impacts regarding rupture of a known earthquake fault and strong seismic ground shaking, including liquefaction would be less than significant.

For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to strong seismic ground shaking, including liquefaction. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 4) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: Landslides?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact
The Project area is relatively flat and not susceptible to seismically induced landslides. Furthermore, because the Project is not located on a hillside and does not include habitable structures, the potential impacts to people or structures due to landslides are considered less than significant. (SJVMDP IS, p. 19.). 125
Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
The implementation of the Line E Project would not result in or cause landslides because the topography of Line E Project site is predominately flat. Therefore, no impacts from the Line E Project would occur with regard to landslides.

For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to landslides. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required.
5) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact
The proposed alignments and basins are on level ground and will not significantly alter topography or create unstable soil conditions. The project includes at-grade, above-ground, and below-ground stormwater conveyance facilities and detention basins. While there is potential for short-term topsoil loss during construction due to runoff and erosion, this will be minimized by adhering to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) general construction permit. This permit requires a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be prepared and implemented during construction. The SWPPP will include Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce soil erosion and topsoil loss. Therefore, potential impacts from soil erosion or topsoil loss during construction are considered less than significant. (SJV-MDP IS, p. 19.)
Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
The Proposed Line E Project site is primarily farmland on the distal margin of the San Jacinto River and the risk of erosion is considered low to moderate. (Kleinfelder-B, p. 13.) Pursuant to existing regulatory requirements, San Jacinto would obtain coverage under the NPDES general construction permit from the State Water Resources Control Board and prepare a SWPPP prior to construction activities that would implemented during construction activities. The SWPPP would incorporate applicable Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize the loss of topsoil and prevent substantial erosion.

For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 6) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact
The majority of the proposed SJV-MDP Project would be located in an area with moderate liquefaction susceptibility due to deep groundwater and susceptible sediments, with some sections spanning areas of very-high, high, and low susceptibility. The SJV-MDP Project does not include habitable structures, thus it will not directly expose people to significant effects from seismic-related ground failure. The San Jacinto Valley, where the MDP Project is situated, has documented subsidence issues but is not susceptible to landslides. The proposed MDP Facilities would be designed and constructed to withstand expected ground shaking and potential soil instability. A geotechnical report will be prepared, and all recommended measures will be incorporated into the 126
final design and construction. Therefore, potential impacts from soil instability are considered less than significant. (SJV-MDP IS, p. 19.)
Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
Construction and operation of the Line E Project would not significantly contribute to landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, or liquefaction, and it would not be situated on unstable soil. Because the design and construction of the Line E Project would incorporate the recommendations of the Draft Geotechnical Report, which are made a part of the Line E Project as discussed in the Project Description, impacts regarding geologic stability would be less than significant.

For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to geologic stability. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 7) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Section 1803.5.3 of the California Building Code (2019), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact
Expansive soils contain significant clay particles that can shrink or swell with changes in water content, exerting stress on structures. The project alignment spans various soil series (Chino, Cieneba, Cortina, Dello, Domino, Exeter, Friant, Gorgonio, Grangeville, Greenfield, Hanford, Metz, Pachappa, Rockland, San Emigdio, Traver, Vista, Waukena, and Willows), which have a low to moderate shrink-swell potential and minimal clay content. The Willows series, which does have some clay, comprises only 0.1% of the project area. Because the MDP Project Area is not located on known expansive soils, it would not create substantial risks to life or property due to expansive soils. (SJV-MDP IS, p. 20.)
Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
The Draft Geotechnical Report concluded the soils encountered were silty or granular in nature with an Expansion Index values of 34 and 44, which indicates these soils have a “low” expansion potential. Because the design and construction of the Line E Project would incorporate the recommendations of the Draft Geotechnical Report to ensure suitable soils, which are made a part of the Line E Project as discussed in the Project Description, impacts regarding a substantial direct or indirect risk to life or property resulting from expansive soils would be less than significant.

For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts regarding a substantial direct or indirect risk to life or property resulting from expansive soils. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required.
8) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: No Impact
The proposed MDP Project would not generate the need for septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. (MDP EIR IS, p. 20.)
127
Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
The Line E Project does not include septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems.

Therefore, no impact from the Line E Project would occur regarding soil capabilities for alternative waste systems.

For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to soils capable of supporting septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required.
9) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant with Mitigation The Paleontological Resources Assessment conducted for the SJV MDP EIR indicated that the MDP Project's surficial soils, consisting of Recent (Holocene) alluvium, have a low potential for significant fossil remains. However, these younger sediments rest on older Pleistocene-age sediments, which have a high potential to yield significant vertebrate fossils. Thus, while the surface potential for paleontological resources is low, the subsurface potential is high. Fossils in similar sediments have typically been found deeper than 10 feet, but some have been found as shallow as three feet, particularly near hills. Because not all SJV-MDP Facilities could be surveyed and MDP Project excavations would exceed three feet in depth, implementing mitigation measures MM Cultural 1, and MM Cultural 3 through MM Cultural 6 would reduce potential impacts to paleontological resources to less than significant. (SJV MDP EIR, p. 3.5-17.)
MM Cultural 1: A paleontological resources field survey (or surveys) shall be completed prior to the earlier of issuance of a grading permit or construction of any SJV-MDP facility subject to further CEQA analysis. If the results of such survey (or surveys) identify the presence of potentially significant paleontological resources, avoidance or other appropriate measures (such as excavation, analysis, and interpretation of resources) potentially leading to curation in perpetuity in a facility that meets the standards of the State of California Guidelines for the Curation of Archaeological Collections (OHP 1993) and 36 CFR 79, shall be implemented.

MM Cultural 3: Earth-moving activities encountering soils that are identified as Pleistocene-age or older alluvium, by the soils engineer, shall be monitored by a qualified paleontological monitor. Continuous monitoring shall be restricted to undisturbed older alluvium, which might be present below the surface. To avoid construction delays, the monitor shall be prepared to quickly salvage fossils, as they are unearthed. The monitor shall remove samples of sediments that are likely to contain the remains of small fossil invertebrates and vertebrates. The monitor shall have the authority to temporarily halt or divert grading equipment to allow for the removal large specimens.

MM Cultural 4: All recovered specimens shall be prepared and stabilized for identification and permanent preservation, including the washing of sediment samples to recover small invertebrates and vertebrates.

MM Cultural 5: Identification and curation of recovered specimens into an established accredited museum repository with permanent retrievable paleontological storage shall 128
be required. Mitigation of adverse impacts to significant paleontological resources is not complete until the curation process has been fully completed and documented.

MM Cultural 6: Preparation of a report of findings with an appended itemized inventory of specimens shall be required. The submittal of the report to the Lead Agency and the curation of recovered specimens into an established, accredited museum repository would signify the completion of the mitigation program.

Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
This discussion is based on the Paleontological Resource Assessment for the San Jacinto Master Drainage Plan Line E, City of San Jacinto, Riverside County, California, January 2024, prepared by Applied Earthworks (AE) and included as Appendix F of this Addendum. Preparation of the Paleontological Resource Assessment satisfies SJV-MDP mitigation measure MM Cultural 1.

Through desktop studies and field surveys, AE determined the paleontological resource potential of the Line E Project site. The desktop studies included a review of published and unpublished literature and maps, as well as museum records searches. The purpose of these studies was to identify the geologic units in the Line E Project site and to determine whether previously recorded paleontological localities occur either within the Line E Project site, or within the same geologic units nearby but outside the Line E Project site. (AE-B, p. 10.)
A records search was conducted through the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP) online database which did not list any localities within a 10-mile radius of the Line E Project site. The Paleobiology Database (PBDB) does not list any fossil localities from Pleistocene alluvial deposits within the Line E Project site but shows numerous localities reported from Lakeview five to six miles west. The Western Science Center of Hemet (WSC) search did not yield any localities within the Line E Project site, although numerous localities are listed from Pleistocene alluvial deposits reported during construction of the Eastside Pipeline Project 1.5–2 miles southwest of the Line E Project site. The Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (NHMLAC) records search results do not report any localities within the Line E Project site, although several nearby localities to the south-southwest are listed from geologic units similar to those mapped in or in the vicinity of the Project site. (AE-B, p. 15.)
During the field survey, low ground visibility and the absence of geologic outcrops or road cuts limited AE’s close field examinations of the surficial geology of the Line E Project site. The ground surface throughout the Line E Project site was mostly obscured by vegetation, particularly in much of the northwestern and southeastern subareas and in the east-west stretch of the alignment parallel to Ramona Expressway. AE observed exposed sediments in a few locations, most of these exposed sediments appear to have been previously disturbed from cultivation or landscaping. (AE-B, p. 15.) AE did not observe any notable changes in lithology and did not encounter any paleontological resources during the survey. AE has determined that the Project site has High B Sensitivity based on Riverside County’s sensitivity rankings. No paleontological resources were encountered during the geotechnical investigation. AE did not observe any exposures of unequivocally undisturbed alluvial deposits during the survey. Based on the presence of artificial fill in all of the boring logs and the extent of previous disturbance to the Line E Project site, most of the sediments AE observed during the survey may have been the locally derived artificial fill. Therefore, the surficial sediments in the Line E Project site are unlikely to yield significant paleontological resources. However, AE’s desktop studies indicate deposits of Qyva/Qya as well as Qyv1a have a high potential of preserving significant 129
paleontological resources particularly with increasing depth. Sediments matching the descriptions of Qyva/Qya at a depth of 0.5–2.5 feet below ground surface, just below artificial fill, were found throughout the Line E Project site. (AE-B, p. 19.) Therefore, the Line E Project would implement clarified SJV-MDP EIR mitigation measures CMM Cultural 3 through CMM Cultural 6, set forth below, to reduce impacts to paleontological resources to less than significant.

CMM Cultural 3: Paleontological Resources Mitigation Monitoring Plan. Prior to the commencement of ground-disturbing activities, the City (or designee) shall retain a Project Paleontologist to prepare and implement a Paleontological Resources Mitigation Monitoring Plan (PRMMP) for the Line E Project. The PRMMP shall include preparation and presentation of Paleontological Resources Workers Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) to educate construction crews about the types of paleontological resources that may be encountered at the Line E Project site. The Paleontological Resources WEAP shall provide a description of the laws and ordinances protecting fossil resources, the types of fossil resources that may be encountered in the area, the role of the paleontological monitor, outline steps to follow in the event that a fossil discovery is made and provide contact information for the Project Paleontologist. The Project Paleontologist or designee(s) shall present the Paleontological Resources WEAP to the construction contractor and each of the construction crews working on the Project during a preconstruction meeting. The Paleontological Resources WEAP shall be taped and presented to any construction crew members who were not present at the preconstruction meeting during which it was initially presented prior to such crew members working on the Project. This training may be conducted concurrent with other preconstruction training (e.g., biological resources, safety).

Earth-moving activities encountering soils that are identified as Pleistocene-age or older alluvium, by the soils engineer, shall be monitored by a qualified paleontological monitor as set forth in the PRMMP. Continuous monitoring shall be restricted to undisturbed older alluvium, which might be present below the surface. To avoid construction delays, the monitor shall be prepared to quickly salvage fossils, as they are unearthed. The monitor shall remove samples of sediments that are likely to contain the remains of small fossil invertebrates and vertebrates. The monitor shall have the authority to temporarily halt or divert grading equipment to allow for the removal large specimens.

CMM Cultural 4: All recovered specimens shall be prepared and stabilized for identification and permanent preservation as set forth in the PRMMP prepared under CMM Cultural 3, including the washing of sediment samples to recover small invertebrates and vertebrates.

CMM Cultural 5: Identification and curation of recovered specimens into an established accredited museum repository with permanent retrievable paleontological storage shall be required as set forth in the PRMMP prepared under CMM Cultural 3. Mitigation of adverse impacts to significant paleontological resources is not complete until the curation process has been fully completed and documented.

CMM Cultural 6: Preparation of a report of findings with an appended itemized inventory of specimens shall be required as set forth in the PRMMP prepared under CMM Cultural

3. The submittal of the report to the Lead Agency and the curation of recovered 130
specimens into an established, accredited museum repository would signify the completion of the mitigation program.

For the reasons set forth above, the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related the direct or indirect destruction of a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. Clarification of the SJV-MDP mitigation measures to be Line E Project-specific does not mitigate new impacts or constitute new information of substantial importance that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. \\brkpan01.webb.lan\WO4\2023\23-0007\GIS\PRO\Line E Addendum\bio figures\bio figures\bio figures.aprx Map created 11 Feb 2025 Source: Kleinfelder
Line E Addendum
Figure 25 - Fault Location Map
I

LEGEND LEGEND
Casa Loma Fault
Casa Loma Fault
Casa Loma Fault
Casa Loma Fault
Casa Loma Fault
%

PROPOSED

CONFLUENCE
BASIN
%

PROPOSED

ON-SITE
BASIN
Service Layer Credits:
£
LEGEND
Line E Alignment
Recency of Displacement
in years (USGS)
< 150
<15,000
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Trace (CGS)
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zone (CGS)
U.S. Geological Survey, Quaternary fault
and fold database for the United States.

California Geological Survey, Alquist-Priolo
fault traces and zones, Seismic Hazards Program.

DRAFT
132
H. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation is
Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
Would the project:
1) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
2) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
Source(s): Project Description; CalEEMod Output (Appendix C); CAPCOA; SJ GP; SCAQMD-C. 1) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less Than Significant Impact
The SJV-MDP EIR determined that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions would result from fuel usage by construction equipment and related activities, such as construction worker trips. Model results indicate an estimated 2,373 metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents (MTCO2E) will occur in the four modeled scenarios analyzed. The SJV-MDP EIR determined that the CO2 emissions of 2,373 MTCO2 from construction emissions do not exceed the SCAQMD recommended screening level of 3,000 MTCO2/year for commercial projects. The commercial project screening level was used in the SJV-MDP EIR because (1) neither CARB nor SCAQMD had identified or recommended a screening level for infrastructure projects and (2) the commercial screening level provides a more conservative basis because it is substantially lower than the screening level for industrial projects of 7,000 MTCO2/year from non-transportation sources. Although the draft SCAQMD GHG threshold guidance document released in October 2008 recommends that construction emissions be amortized for a project lifetime of 30 years to ensure that GHG reduction measures address construction GHG emissions as part of the operational reduction strategies, construction emissions were not amortized. (SJV-MDP EIR pp. 3.3-40 – 3.3-41.) Thus, the SJV-MDP EIR analysis, which compared total construction emissions to the identified threshold, utilized a conservative approach. Nonetheless, the amortized emissions from construction of facilities analyzed in the SJV-MDP EIR would equal approximately 79 MTCO2E per year.

The SJV-MDP EIR determined that long term emissions from the proposed SJV-MDP facilities would primarily be in the form of mobile source emissions from the infrequent visits by vehicles driven by maintenance personnel with no stationary sources of emissions present. This and any other maintenance-related activity will not result in additional sources of emissions when compared to the existing maintenance routine of the current MDPs for the area. Therefore, long-term impacts related to the San Jacinto Valley MDP facility operation are considered negligible and were not evaluated. (SJV-MDP EIR p. 3.3-41.)
Because the SJV-MDP Project will not generate GHG emissions that will exceed SCAQMD draft screening thresholds, impacts will be less than significant. (SJV-MDP EIR p. 3.3-41.) Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
Greenhouse gas emissions from the Line E Project were modeled using the CalEEMod version 2022.1 program (included as Appendix C) to evaluate whether the expected criteria GHG emissions 133
would exceed the SCAQMD draft screening significance threshold of 3,000 MTCO2E/yr.10 The CalEEMod model calculates GHG emissions from fuel usage by construction equipment and construction-related activities, such as construction worker trips, which were previously identified in item C.2, above. Table J – Project Construction Equipment GHG Emissions, summarizes the CalEEMod results for the following GHGs: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), refrigerants (R), and carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2E).

Table J – Project Construction Equipment GHG Emissions
Year Metric Tons per year (MT/yr)
Total CO2 Total CH4 Total N2O Total R Total CO2E
2027 505 0.02 0.01 0.10 510
2028 1,220 0.05 0.03 0.21 1,231
2029 1,212 0.05 0.03 0.19 1,223
2030 711 0.03 0.02 0.10 718
Total 3,648 0.15 0.09 0.60 3,682
Amortized 122.73
Note: See detailed model output reports, included as Appendix C.

As shown in Table J, the estimated 3,682 MTCO2E will occur from the Project construction equipment over the course of the estimated three-year construction period. The draft SCAQMD GHG threshold guidance document released in October 2008 recommends that construction emissions be amortized for a project lifetime of 30 years to ensure that GHG reduction measures address construction GHG emissions as part of the operational reduction strategies. (SCAQMD-C). As such, the amortized emissions, which equate to approximately 122.73 MTCO2E per year, were also shown.

The operation of the Line E Project will generate GHG emissions from the operation of the electric pumps for the proposed basin, backup generator usage during routine maintenance and emergency power outages and infrequent visits by vehicles driven by maintenance personnel. As indicated in item F.1, above, these pumps are estimated to use approximately 240 kilowatts (kW) per hour. The amount of time these pumps will operate in a given year will vary depending on the volume of water being pumped during each storm and the storm frequency. For example, the estimated average runtime for the pumps to drain a 100-year storm is approximately 47.3 hours, which would result in approximately 11,352 kilowatt-hours kWh (240 kW x 47.3 hours = 11,352 kWh). The GHG emissions from operation of the electric pumps during a 100-year storm event were calculated outside of CalEEMod using the estimated pump usage and the 2030 Southern California Edison (SCE) carbon intensity data from the CalEEMod User’s Guide (CAPCOA) of 263 pounds of CO2E per megawatthour (MWh). Based on the estimated usage of 11,352 kWh, the estimated GHG emissions from electric pumps during a 100-year storm event will be approximately 1.35 MTCO2E. The proposed Project’s GHG emissions from amortized construction activities combined with estimated operation activities are not anticipated to exceed the SCAQMD screening threshold of 3,000 MT CO2E/yr. Due to the estimated amount of emissions from Project construction and average pump electricity usage 10 http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-ceqa-significance-thresholds/year-2008- 2009/ghg-meeting-15/ghg-meeting-15-main-presentation.pdf?sfvrsn=2 134
during operations as well as the nominal emissions from routine maintenance, the proposed Project will not generate a substantial amount of GHG emissions.

For the reasons set forth in the preceding paragraphs, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 2) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less Than Significant Impact
This threshold was not a part of the State CEQA Guidelines at the time the SJV-MDP EIR was prepared. However, the SJV-MDP EIR evaluated GHG emissions impacts and applicable regulatory requirements. Because the MDP Project would not generate GHG emissions that will exceed SCAQMD draft screening thresholds nor were any applicable plans, policies or regulations identified that the Project would require the Project to implement, impacts will be less than significant. (SJVMDP EIR, pp. 3.3-20 – 3.3-28; 3.3-40 – 3.3-41.) Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
The City of San Jacinto does not have an adopted a Climate Action Plan nor are there any other applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions for an infrastructure project such as this. San Jacinto General Plan 2040 does set forth goals, policies, and actions to reduce GHG emissions within the Resource Management Element (SJ GP, pp. 84, 98-99.) The Line E Project would not obstruct implementation of any plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions because the Line E Project is an infrastructure project to serve the City of San Jacinto for existing and future growth consistent with San Jacinto General Plan 2040. (SJ GP, p. 108.)
As such, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to conflicts or obstruction of any applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required.
135
I. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation is
Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
Would the project:
1) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
2) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
3) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within onequarter mile of an existing or proposed school? 4) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
5) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excess noise for people
residing or working in the project area?
6) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
7) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
Source(s): SJV MDP IS; GP DEIR; Project Description; EnviroStor; Cortese 1) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact
The SJV-MDP EIR determined that proposed MDP Project's construction would only involve the use of typical construction materials, such as petroleum products and other similar substances. These materials would be transported to the site for equipment fueling. Future maintenance may occasionally use herbicides and pesticides in compliance with federal, state, and local regulations.

Standard protocols and best management practices (BMPs) will ensure proper storage and use of these materials. All activities involving hazardous substances will adhere to relevant regulations, ensuring the project does not pose a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Therefore, the impacts are considered less than significant. (SJV-MDP IS, p. 20.) Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
Storm water is not considered a hazardous material. As analyzed in the SJV-MDP EIR, construction of the Line E Project construction would only involve the use of typical construction materials, such as vehicle and equipment grease, gasoline, lubricants, pipe/joint sealers, which are common on construction sites, are not considered hazardous or acutely hazardous in the amounts used on 136
construction sites. Therefore, no impacts from the Line E Project would occur with regard to the creation of a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.

For the reasons set forth above, the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to the creation of a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 2) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant with Mitigation As part of the SJV-MDP EIR, a search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) for documented hazardous material sites for the MDP Project area and within a one-mile radius of the Project boundary. The EDR report listed a total of 64 sites within one-mile of the proposed Project. Of the 64 recorded sites, 27 are adjacent to the conceptual alignments of the proposed facilities and 11 of those sites are potentially contaminated.

The potentially contaminated sites are located near the conceptual alignments of the following SJVMDP Facilities: North Line A-1, Line B, Line B-1, Line C-4, Line D, Line E-1, Line E-2, Line H, Line J2 and Line J-3. (SJV-MDP EIR, pp. 3.6-20 – 3.6-22.) The SJV-MDP EIR determined that although no significant impacts from hazards or hazardous materials are anticipated from the project or its construction and operations, unanticipated contamination from sources like leaking underground storage tanks or unauthorized chemical releases could be encountered. However, the implementation of mitigation measures MM Haz 1 through MM Haz 6 will reduce these potential impacts to less than significant levels. (SJV-MDP EIR, p. 3.6-22.)
MM Haz 1: As part of the final design of each SJV-MDP facility, the design engineer or designee shall check proposed sites for listing on the most recent Hazardous Waste and Substances List provided by the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. If the location of said facility is on the Hazardous Waste and Substances List, avoidance of that property or properties will be the first consideration; if avoidance is infeasible, MM Haz 2 shall be implemented.

MM Haz 2: If the selected facility traverses a site listed on the Hazardous Waste and Substances List, and avoidance is not feasible or if there are other indications that a site could be contaminated, a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for such facility will be prepared. If the Phase 1 ESA identifies possible contamination along the facility alignment, then all recommended subsurface investigation measures listed in the Phase I ESA will be implemented. Based on subsurface investigations characterizing subsurface contamination, remediation measures (such as excavation of contaminated soil, bioremediation, or soil-vapor extraction), shall be implemented for the applicable facility or an alternative facility alignment will be chosen.

MM Haz 3: All environmental investigation and/or remediation (such as excavation of contaminated soil, bioremediation, or soil-vapor extraction) shall be conducted under a 137
Workplan approved by jurisdictional regulatory agencies overseeing hazardous waste cleanups until the applicable regulatory standard is met.

MM Haz 4: Prior to any excavation or soil removal on known contaminated sites, or if contaminated soil (i.e., soil with a visible sheen or detectable odor) is encountered, a complete characterization of the soil will be conducted. Appropriate sampling shall be conducted prior to disposal of the excavated soil. If the soil is contaminated, it shall be properly disposed of according to California’s Land Disposal restrictions (California Code of Regulations, Chapter 18, Title 22). If site remediation involves the removal of contamination, then contaminated material shall be transported off-site by a licensed handler/hauler to a licensed hazardous waste disposal facility.

MM Haz 5: If soil import is required for construction of a specific facility, proper sampling shall be conducted prior to the use of such imported soil to make sure that the imported soil is free of contamination.

MM Haz 6: If during construction of a specific facility, soil and/or groundwater contamination is suspected, construction in the area of the suspected contamination shall cease and appropriate health and safety measures shall be implemented. The construction contractor shall contact the respective jurisdictional enforcement agency (i.e., San Jacinto, Hemet, Riverside County, RCFCWCD) to obtain the necessary information on appropriate measures and their implementation. The measures recommended by the applicable enforcement agency will be implemented.

Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
The Line E Project site is not in proximity to any of the hazardous materials sites identified in the EDR report for the SJV MDP EIR. As required by SJV-MDP EIR MM Haz 1, the site was reviewed on the California Department of Toxic Substances Control databases. Based on the review of the California Department of Toxic Substances Control Envirostor and Geotracker databases, there are no hazardous waste facilities and sites with known contamination. (Envirostor.) Because Line E does not traverse a site listed on the Hazards Waste and Substances List, SJV-MDP EIR mitigation measure MM HAZ 2 is not applicable. Nonetheless, both a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) and a Phase II ESA were prepared by Roux Associates, Inc, Phase I Environmental Site Assessment North Sanderson Avenue and Record Road, San Jacinto, California, dated January 30, 2024 and Phase II Subsurface Investigation Letter Report, Line (Proposed Irrigation Channel), North Sanderson Avenue and Record Road, San Jacinto, Riverside County, California, dated March 14, 2024. These documents are hereinafter referred to as the Phase I ESA and Phase II ESA and are included as Appendices H.1 and H.2 to this Addendum.

The Phase I ESA was prepared in accordance with the American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM) Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process (ASTM E1527-21). The Phase I ESA involved site reconnaissance, regulatory record review, and review of historical sources. (ROUX-A, pp. 1, 4.) The Phase I ESA identified a Recognized Environmental Condition (REC) in connection with current and historical agricultural operations in the Line E Project area. Based on long-term agricultural uses, it was determined that possible agricultural chemicals such as organochlorine pesticides (OCPs), lead-based and arsenic based pesticides may have been used and thus may have impacted soils. (ROUX-A, p. 22.) Thus, the Phase II subsurface investigation was conducted.
138
As part of Phase II ESA, shallow soil sampling was conducted in general accordance with DTSC’s Interim Guidance for Sampling Agricultural Properties, dated August 7, 2008. A total of 54 soil samples were collected at a depth of 0.5 feet below ground surface (bgs) and composited in 13 samples that were analyzed for OCPs; eight (8) discrete samples were also analyzed for lead and arsenic. The analytical results were compared to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) and/or DTSC Human and Ecological Risk Office (HERO) Human Health Risk Assessment Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) Note Number 3 DTSC-modified Screening Levels (DTSC SLs) for commercial/industrial soil. Because the Line E project does not include any residential component, the commercial/industrial screening levels are appropriately used.

In addition, total lead and arsenic concentrations were compared with regional background levels, as presented in Background Concentrations of Trace and Major Elements in California Soils and Determination of a Southern California Regional Background Arsenic Concentration in Soil. (ROUXB, p. 2.) No OCP constituents were reported above laboratory method reporting limits (MRLs). All MRLS were below applicable USEPA RSLs and DTSC SLs. (ROUX-B, p. 2.) Arsenic was detected above the laboratory reporting limit at concentrations ranging from 1.0 to 1.4 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).

Arsenic was also detected above the DTSC SL of 0.36 mg/kg for commercial/industrial soil. However, arsenic did not exceed the regional background concentration of 12 mg/kg in any sample, and it did not exceed the USEPA RSL of 3.0 mg/kg for commercial/industrial soil. Lead was detected above the laboratory reporting limit at concentrations ranging from 1.8 to 2.4 mg/kg. Lead was detected below the DTSC SL of 500 mg/kg for commercial/industrial soil and below the USEPA RSL of 800 mg/kg for commercial/industrial soil. (ROUX-B, p. 3) Because the results of the Phase II ESA subsurface investigation determined that OCP, arsenic, and lead concentrations were below conservative regulatory thresholds for commercial/industrial land uses and regional background concentrations, no further investigation is recommended. (ROUX-B, p. 3.).

The Phase I ESA also identified Other Environmental Features (OEFs) in an adjoining dairy farm north of Record Road and west of the Line E alignment. The dairy farm features several ponds likely used to store dairy farm effluent including manure thus, the potential generation and migration of methane gas. (ROUX-A, p .22.)
Based on the results of the Phase I ESA and Phase II ESA, SJV-MDP EIR mitigation measures MM Haz 3, MM Haz 4, and MM Haz-6 are not applicable to the Line E Project. Because soil import is not anticipated MM Haz 5 is also not applicable.

As discussed in the response to item I.1 above, storm water is not considered a hazardous material and construction of the Line E Project would only involve the use of typical construction materials, such as vehicle and equipment grease, gasoline, lubricants, pipe/joint sealers, which are common on construction sites and are not considered hazardous or acutely hazardous in the amounts that would be used during construction of the Line E Project. Operation and maintenance of the Line E Project is not anticipated to require the use of significant amounts of hazardous materials, as rodenticides and pesticides. Therefore, impacts regarding the creation of 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 would be less than significant.

For the reasons set forth above, the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased impacts regarding the creation of a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the 139
environment. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required.
3) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant
The SJV-MDP IS determined that the proposed MDP Project is a master drainage plan, that would identify drainage facilities that may be constructed at some future date. Implementation of the SJV-MDP would ultimately involve the construction and maintenance of storm water conveyance facilities and detention basins. The MDP Facilities would not emit hazardous emissions or include the handling of acutely hazardous materials, substances, or wastes. Potential impacts to existing or proposed schools would be less than significant. (SJV-MDP IS, p. 21.) Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
There are no existing or proposed schools within a one-quarter-mile radius of the Line E Project site.

The closest existing school to the Line E Project site is Megan Cope Elementary which is approximately three-quarter mile from the southern end of the Project Disturbance area. Thus, the Line E Project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school because there are no existing or proposed schools within one-quarter-mile of Line E Project site.

For the reasons set forth above, the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to the emission of hazardous emissions or handling hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school.

Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 4) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant with Mitigation A search of available environmental records was conducted and reviewed for the SJV-MDP EIR. The environmental records listed a total of 64 sites within one-mile of the proposed project alignment, however the Project proposes facilities within close vicinity of 27 sites classified as hazardous materials sites under various regulatory statuses. None of these sites are on the Cortese List. As discussed in the response to item I.2. the SJV-MDP EIR determined that although no significant impacts from hazards or hazardous materials are anticipated from the project or its construction and operations, unanticipated contamination from sources like leaking underground storage tanks or unauthorized chemical releases could occur and these potential impacts would be reduced to less than significant through implementation of mitigation measures MM Haz 1 through MM Haz 6. (SJV-MDP EIR, pp. 3.6-20 – 3.6-22.)
Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact.

As required by SJV-MDP EIR MM Haz 1, the list compiled by Government Code Section 65962.5, known as the Cortese List, was reviewed to determine if any portion of the Line E Project site is on this list. None of the sites listed on the Cortese List are within or near the Line E Project disturbance area. Additionally, a review of the California Department of Toxic Substances Control’s EnviroStor 140
database, which identifies sites that have known contamination or sites for where there may be reasons to investigate further, indicates there are no known environmental hazards or hazardous facilities in proximity to the Line E Project disturbance area. Because the Line E Project is not on or in proximity to a known hazardous materials site, implementation of the Line E Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Because there are no known hazardous materials sites, SJV-MDP EIR mitigation measure MM Haz 2 is not applicable. As discussed above in item I.2, the soil samples conducted as part of the Phase II ESA found that OCP, arsenic, and lead concentrations were below conservative regulatory thresholds for commercial/industrial land uses and regional background concentration therefore, no further investigation is needed. (ROUX-B, p. 3) For the reasons set forth above, the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to a significant hazard to the public or the environment resulting from the Project site being included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required.
5) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excess noise for people residing or working in the project area? SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact
The SJV-MDP EIR determined that the nearest airport is the Hemet-Ryan Airport located less than one mile southwest from the southernmost portion of the proposed project. As the project will not result in the construction of new places of employment or new homes, impacts are considered less than significant. (SJV-MDP IS, p. 22.)
Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
The Line E Project site is located approximately four miles from Hemet-Ryan Airport and is not within the Hemet-Ryan Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Due to the distance from the Hemet-Ryan Airport and because the project would not involve the construction of new places of employment or new homes, there would be no impacts regarding airport noise.

For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to hazards from an airport. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 6) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant
The SVJ-MDP EIR determined that implementation of the proposed project would not interfere with evacuation or emergency response plans because road access would be maintained or detours provided during project construction. (SJV-MDP IS, p. 21.) Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
Operation and maintenance of the Line E Project would not interfere with evacuation or emergency response plans as the Line E Project consists of storm water drainage facilities. If any road closures are required during construction, a traffic control plan would be prepared to maintain emergency 141
access or identify detours, if needed. Therefore, any potential impacts regarding emergency response would be less than significant and no mitigation is required.

For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to impairing implementation of or physical interference with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 7) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact
The SJV-MDP EIR determined the proposed facilities are located within an area designated as having a high susceptibility for wildfires; however, the project includes construction and maintenance of storm water conveyance facilities and detention basins which would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. Impacts are considered less than significant. (SJV-MDP IS, p. 22.)
Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
The 2019 Fire Hazard Severity Zone map from the San Jacinto GP EIR, shows the Line E Project area is surrounded by areas designated as having a high susceptibility for wildfires. (SJGP EIR, p. 5.20-27.) The Line E Project is the construction and maintenance of storm water conveyance facilities and detention basins, which would not directly expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires.

The Line E project could indirectly induce new development in areas with a high susceptibility for wildfires. Protection from wildland fires is realized through creation of defensible areas around structures, the use of fire-resistant building materials, and coordinated emergency response. All new construction in San Jacinto is required to adhere to standards and requirements set forth in the San Jacinto Municipal Code, which incorporates the California Fire Code. In accordance with San Jacinto Development Code Section 17.300.050, all development located in or adjacent to wildfire prone areas would be required to prepare a fire management plan, which would be reviewed by the Riverside County Fire Department and may include additional fire protection measures (e.g., landscape or open space buffers), maintenance programs for weed and vegetation abatement, installation of fireresistant plants, and the use of noncombustible building materials. Future development in San Jacinto would be required to comply with the provisions of federal, State, and local requirements related to wildland fire hazards, including State fire safety regulations associated with wildland-urban interfaces, fire-safe building standards, and defensible space requirements. As future development and infrastructure projects are considered by SA, each project would be evaluated for potential impacts, specific to the project, associated with wildland fire hazards as required under CEQA. Therefore, through compliance with existing federal, State, and local laws and regulations related to wildland fire hazards and implementation of the San Jacinto General Plan 2040 goals, policies, and actions, indirect impacts regarding the exposure of people or structures to significant loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires would be less than significant. (SJGP EIR, pp. 5.9-38 – 5.9-39.) For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts regarding the exposure of people or structures that either directly or indirectly could lead to significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. Thus, there are 142
no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 143
J. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation is
Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
Would the project:
1) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade
surface or ground water quality?
2) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such
that the project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
3) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces in a manner which would result in:
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
4) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would
substantially increase the rate or amount of surface
runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite?
5) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would create
or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
6) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would impede
or redirect flood flows?
7) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk the
release of pollutants due to project inundation?
8) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
Source(s): GP DEIR; USGS, PDR, RWQCB
1) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact
The SJV-MDP EIR determined that the proposed MDP Project would not significantly increase impervious surfaces, as it involves underground storm drain pipelines, trapezoidal channels, and earthen basins. The SJV-MDP aims to create a comprehensive stormwater drainage system to 144
support land use plans for San Jacinto, Hemet, and Riverside County, reducing current flooding issues. The drainage facilities would not generate significant runoff or pollutants, and detention basins will help settle sediments and attenuate peak flow rates.

Construction activities will be regulated by the RWQCB under the NPDES permit program, ensuring compliance with water quality standards. The project and future developments will adhere to water quality regulations, resulting in less-than-significant impacts on water quality. San Jacinto, Hemet, and Riverside County, as co-permittees under the MS4 permit, will manage stormwater runoff and eliminate illegal discharges. They will ensure that development projects incorporate BMPs to reduce stormwater contaminants.

Facilities near Metropolitan’s infrastructure will require detailed plan submissions for review and approval, further ensuring minimal water quality impacts. Thus, the project’s potential water quality impacts are anticipated to be less than significant. (SJV-MDP EIR, pp. 3.7-28 – 3.7-30.) Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
Construction of the Line E Project would be required to comply with the RWQCB under the NPDES permit program, ensuring compliance with water quality standards during construction. The Line E Project in and of itself does not need to comply with WQMP requirements. The developments tributary to the Project would adhere to WQMP requirements, resulting in less than significant impacts to the water quality of stormwater conveyed by the Line E Project and to the receiving waters downstream of the Line E Project (e.g., San Jacinto River). San Jacinto and the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, as co-permittees of the MS4 permit, would manage stormwater runoff quality and quantity, and minimize illegal discharges of non-stormwater to the extent practicable throughout their jurisdictions including the Project area.

For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 2) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact
The SJV-MDP EIR determined the proposed facilities are designed to convey stormwater without extracting groundwater or significantly increasing impervious surfaces. The earthen channels and basins will enhance regional groundwater recharge. Therefore, the project will not deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with recharge, resulting in less-than-significant impacts. (SJV-MDP IS, p. 23.)
Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
The Line E Project will not cause depletion of, or interfere with groundwater recharge, as this Project would convey stormwater. The segment of the Line E channel that is earthen and the earthen Confluence Basin could provide opportunity for groundwater recharge as they will be unlined facilities.

As with the SJV EIR, there would be no use for groundwater nor interference with groundwater recharge from the Line E Project.
145
For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to groundwater supplies or groundwater recharge. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 3) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact
The MDP Facilities would primarily be constructed using earthen basins and channels to manage stormwater flow and increase percolation. While concrete-lined trapezoidal channels would add some impervious surfaces, the overall impact is minimal. Implementation of the SJV-MDP would improve drainage by directing flows, and future developments will follow the Riverside County WQMP to minimize impervious areas. Designed to handle 100-year stormwater flows, the Project will not cause on-site or off-site flooding. Impacts are considered less than significant, with no mitigation measures necessary. (SJV-MDP EIR, pp. 3.7-30 – 3.7-31.)
Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
The proposed Line E Project would have an earthen Confluence Basin and a mostly earthen channel to convey stormwater flows and facilitate percolation. The proportion of the Project channel that is earthen far exceeds the proportion that consists of concrete aprons upstream and downstream of ungrouted riprap drop structures (“Sloped Trapezoidal Rock Drop Structures”). The profile along the centerline of the Sloped Trapezoidal Rock Drop Structure is shown below:

The Project will alter the existing drainage pattern of the area by narrowly conveying flood flows into Line E instead of wide sheet flows across roads and fields as it does in the current condition. The Project does not alter the course of a stream or river as there are none in the Project area. According to the Project Preliminary Design Report (PDR), the Line E channel has been engineered to adequately convey flood flows from its tributary area up to the 100-Year flood event allowing plant growth within the channel. (PDR, p. 36.) Through the design of accommodating vegetation to grow within the channel, this vegetation would provide inadvertent stormwater treatment by slowing the speed of the water and allowing sediment to drop out of the water column as well as biological uptake of contaminants before outletting downstream, and therefore reducing erosion or siltation effects.

Future developments within the Line E tributary area would contribute runoff to the flows conveyed by Line E. These developments are required to comply with NPDES requirements for construction-phase erosion and sediment controls and post-construction WQMP requirements to treat stormwater runoff 146
prior to discharge into Line E. Therefore, the Line E Project would not create downstream erosion impacts from the indirect contributions of upstream developments.

For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to erosion or siltation on- or off-site. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 4) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact
The SJV-MDP Project includes a conceptual plan for constructing and maintaining storm drain facilities. While these facilities will generally follow the existing drainage pattern of the area on a large scale, they will alter the drainage pattern locally within the Master Plan area to reduce flooding potential. The SJV-MDP will guide the location and size of drainage facilities needed by the City of San Jacinto or others as the area develops, and to resolve existing flooding issues. Many SJV-MDP drainage facilities are expected to be constructed alongside local development projects, with conditions of approval ensuring that impacts on surface runoff are less than significant. (SJV-MDP IS, p.24.)
Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
As stated previously in item J.4., the Project will alter the local drainage pattern by conveying flows in a channel instead of wide sheet flows. Also, the Project will have a minimal increase in impervious area (i.e., concrete aprons downstream and upstream of ungrouted riprap drop structures) and the Project would not alter an existing stream or river. The purpose of the Project is to reduce the chance of flooding by conveying flood flows into an engineered, flood control channel. According to the Project Preliminary Design Report (PDR), the channel has been engineered to adequately convey flood flows of its tributary area for up to the 100-Year flood event in a controlled manner that will not result in flooding which could cause adverse scour of the proposed channel, nor to downstream areas. (PDR, p. 36.)
The Project is within two FEMA flood hazard zones/flooding areas: one from the north of the Project related to the San Jacinto River (FEMA flood plan zone AE), and one from the south related to the San Jacinto Reservoir (FEMA flood plain zone A). (PDR, p. 10.) The Project would reduce the flooding associated with the San Jacinto Reservoir. (PDR, Figure 15.) However, after construction of the Line E Project, a portion of the Line E Channel would remain within the 100-Year floodplain of the San Jacinto River. (PDR, p. 10.)
To address the downstream flooding potential, the Confluence Basin to which the Line E Channel outlets would have approximately 57 acre-feet of capacity (approximately 16 million gallons) including

7.1 acre-feet (approximately 2 million gallons) of dead storage volume over an area of 6.25 acres with a 72-hour drawdown period. (PDR, p. 32.) The dead storage volume is the water below the elevation of the spillway and has no free flow outlet. The dead storage volume of the Confluence Basin will be released downstream/offsite at a controlled rate using a proposed pump station. (PDR, p. 32.) Once the pumps release the dead storage through the outlet of Line E, these flows would occur in the same areas that already receive flooding in the exiting condition. (PDR, Figure 16 – Existing Floodplain and Preliminary Post Project Floodplain.) The downstream/offsite property to which the Project outlets is 147
within the 100-Year floodplain of the San Jacinto River, by the time the dead storage volume of the Confluence Basin is exceeded, the downstream/offsite property will already be in a state of flooding due to the river (PDR, p. 37.)
For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to increasing the rate of runoff resulting in flooding on- or offsite. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 5) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact
The SJV-MDP EIR determined that implementation of the Master Drainage Plan would not contribute runoff water that would exceed storm water drainage systems. The SJV-MDP aims to create a comprehensive stormwater drainage system to support land use plans for San Jacinto, Hemet, and Riverside County, reducing current flooding issues. The drainage facilities will not generate significant runoff or pollutants, and detention basins will help settle sediments and attenuate peak flow rates.

The Project will comply with NPDES general construction permit requirements and will obtain applicable dewatering permits from the SWRCB, no substantial sources of polluted runoff will be generated from project construction or operations. Therefore, impacts were determined to be less than significant with mitigation. (SJV-MDP EIR, pp. 3.7-28 – 3.7-34.) Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
The Line E Project is the construction of a stormwater drainage system so that existing and planned runoff capacity is being achieved. As stated previously in the response to item J.4, the Line E Project would alter the local drainage pattern by conveying flows in a channel instead of wide sheet flows.

Also, the Line E Project would have a minimal increase in impervious area (i.e., concrete aprons downstream and upstream of ungrouted riprap drop structures) and the Line E Project would not alter an existing stream or river. The purpose of the Line E Project is to reduce the chance of flooding by conveying flood flows into an engineered, flood control channel. As stated previously in the response to item J.5, up to 57.6 acre-feet of runoff conveyed by the Line E Channel would be held in the proposed Confluence Basin and then slowly released using a proposed pump station to downstream/offsite properties. The 7.1 acre-feet of dead storage volume in the Line E Channel and Confluence Basin would address the majority of storm events. The controlled release by the pump station has been designed so that Line E Project has the capacity to convey the runoff/discharge the project area. (PDR, p. 36.)
The SJV-MDP contemplates Line E being connected with other drainage facilities, none of which are being proposed for implementation at this time. The downstream/offsite facility to which the Line E Project outlets is an interim-condition earthen channel (referred to as a low-flow channel). (PDR, p. 36.) At some point in the future when development warrants, an ultimate SJV-MDP facility (Line Z) would be constructed in its place. (PDR, p. 5.) Ultimately as contemplated in the SJV-MDP, Line Z reaches the San Jacinto River. The existing downstream/offsite low-flow channel is constrained by a 60-inch diameter reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) culvert at Ramona Expressway.

Line E flows onto the downstream/offsite property are within the 100-Year floodplain of the San Jacinto River. Line E flows will be comingled with the flooding that occurs with the San Jacinto River. 148
Although the Project would exceed the capacity of existing downstream/offsite drainage systems during a large flood event, the existing downstream drainage system would already be flooded because of the San Jacinto River’s flood zone, and the contribution of additional flows from the Project would be insignificant compared to the existing flooding (PDR, p. 37 and PDR MDP Line E 2D HEC-RAS Low Flow Analysis, MDP Line E Proposed Low Flow Condition 2D HEC-RAS Work Map, p. 2 of 4.) When downstream SJV-MDP facilities are constructed to ultimate design in the future, such as Line Z, then the Line E Project’s contribution would be contained within said future downstream MDP facilities. (PDR, p. 5.)
For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to runoff that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or additional sources of polluted runoff. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required. 6) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would impede or redirect flood flows?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact
The SJV-MDP EIR determined that although the Master Drainage Plan will be constructed within areas mapped as 100-year flood hazard zones, the placement of these flood control facilities within such areas is necessary due to the relatively flat topography of the project area. The proposed MDP facilities will redirect sheet flows across the project area into basins, open channels, and underground storm drains, conveying these flows towards the San Jacinto River to the north. Once completed, the proposed drainage system will provide 100-year protection and eliminate major flood hazards in the project area. Because the construction of the proposed MDP facilities, in conjunction with the San Jacinto River Levee Stage 4 Project, would alleviate flooding potential within the project area, impacts are considered less than significant. (SJV-MDP EIR, pp. 3.7-32 – 3.7-33.) Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
The purpose of the Line E Project is to prevent impeding or redirecting flows that would cause significant impacts, in an area with no existing streams or rivers that would have to be redirected or impeded. There are currently no formal flood control facilities within the Line E Project area, beyond some roadside ditches and sheet flow flooding is a common event in this area. Therefore, as outlined above, the Line E project conveys stormwater flows in a manner which will facilitate the capacity needed in the Project area to prevent flooding, erosion and will not redirect or impede these flows which then results in potentially significant impacts. Rather, the Project entails conveying stormwater in same location and direction as the existing conditions. Existing flooding occurring in the Project area will remain as long as the SJV-MDP is not built out.

Therefore, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to impeding or redirecting flood flows. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR.
7) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk the release of pollutants due to project inundation?
149
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact
The SJV-MDP EIR determined the MDP Project is not located within an area that would be subject to seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. The proposed basins would only store floodwaters temporarily during large and infrequent storm events further limiting the potential for inundation that would impact people or structures. Impacts are considered less than significant. (SJV-MDP IS, pp. 25 – 26.) Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
Tsunamis are large waves that occur in coastal areas. The City is not located in a coastal area; therefore, there is no risk for the release of pollutants due to inundation by tsunami.

Seiches are seismically‐induced oscillation or sloshing of water contained in enclosed bodies including lakes, ponds, reservoirs, and swimming pools. This hazard is dependent upon the frequency of seismic waves, distance and direction from the epicenter, and site‐specific design criteria of the enclosed body of water. The proposed Confluence Basin would be like an enclosed body of water, but it has a 72-hour drawdown time, which means it can be drained completely within 72 hours and therefore presents a very unlikely seiche risk.

The Line E Project alignment is not located within an area that would be subjected to seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. (SJV-MDP IS, pp. 25-26.) Therefore, the release of pollutants due to flood, seiche or tsunami is not anticipated.

For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to the release of pollutants due to project inundation. Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No new analysis is required. 8) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: Less than Significant
Refer to item J.1, above. The SJV-MDP EIR determined impacts to a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan would be less than significant. (SJV-MDP EIR, pp. 3.7-28 – 3.7-3.0.)
Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
The Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) sets water quality standards for all ground water and surface waters within the Santa Ana River Watershed, which includes the Line E Project area. Substantial regulation currently exists that addresses stormwater runoff and keeping nonstormwater pollutants out of receiving waters, including the statewide construction general permit (CGP) (i.e., SWPPP). The Line E Project would comply with these regulations. Through compliance with said regulations, the Project will be consistent with the RWQCB Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan).

The Project is located within an adjudicated portion of the San Jacinto Groundwater Basin (Basin) identified as the Hemet-San Jacinto Basin as defined by the Hemet-San Jacinto (HSJ) Stipulated Judgment (Riverside County Superior Court Case No. RIC 1207274, April 18, 2013). The purpose of the adjudication is to declare the individual and collective rights to surface water and groundwater in the basin “…and the imposition of a physical solution to achieve the optimum, reasonable, beneficial use of the waters of the Basin pursuant to section 2 of article X of the California Constitution” (Judgment, p. 5.)
150
The 2013 HSJ Judgment adopted The Hemet/San Jacinto Groundwater Management Area Water Management Plan (Management Plan) on November 7, 2007. The eight primary goals of the Management Plan are:
• Address pumping overdraft and declining groundwater levels, • Provide for Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians’ prior and paramount water rights, • Ensure reliable water supply,
• Provide for planned urban growth,
• Protect and enhance water quality,
• Develop cost-effective water supply,
• Provide adequate monitoring for water supply and water quality, and • Supersede the Fruitvale Judgment and Decree.

The Stipulated Judgment delineates the Basin into management zones. The Stipulated Judgment appointed the Hemet-San Jacinto Watermaster to oversee management of the Basin. The Watermaster consists of a board composed of one elected official and one alternate selected by each of the public agencies involved in the Judgment (i.e., EMWD, Lake Hemet Municipal Water District, City of Hemet, and City of San Jacinto) and one Private Pumper representative and one Private Pumper alternate. The court appointed Watermaster implements the HSJ Groundwater Management Plan. The Line E Project site is not a designated recharge site and is not slated to become one in the future. As such, development of the Project will not conflict with or obstruct the requirements of the Judgment.

Through implementation of existing regulations related to water quality and groundwater management, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct a water quality control plan or groundwater management plan.. Thus, there are no impacts, in this regard.

For the reasons set forth above, implementation of the Line E Project would not result in any new or increased significant impacts related to the implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan Thus, there are no new impacts, changes, or new information associated with the Line E Project that would require preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. No further analysis is required.
151
K. LAND USE/PLANNING
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New
Mitigation is
Required
No New
Impact/No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
Would the project:
1) Physically divide an established community?
2) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation
of an agency with jurisdiction adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental
effect?
Source(s): Project Description, SJV-MDP IS
1) Physically divide an established community?
SJV-MDP EIR Conclusion: No Impact
SJV-MDP EIR determined that the primary goal of the proposed project is to manage flooding caused by stormwater runoff. The facilities will be situated at grade or below the ground surface, ensuring they do not physically divide any communities. Necessary crossings for streets, pedestrians, and wildlife over open channels would be provided. The proposed detention basins are within undeveloped areas. (SJV-MDP IS, 26.)
Line E Project: No New Impact/No Impact
There is not an existing community within immediate proximity to the Line E Project. The majority of the land surrounding the Line E Project disturbance area is vacant/agricultural with the exception of a few scattered residences and an Eastern Municipal Water District facility as shown on Figure 26 – Existing Development). Thus, no established communities would be divided as a result of implementation of the Line E Project.