Agenda — Temecula City Council, March 12, 2024 (part 1 of 4)

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk (951) 694-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II].

AGENDA

TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL

REGULAR MEETING

COUNCIL CHAMBERS
41000 MAIN STREET

TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
MARCH 12, 2024 - 6:00 PM
CLOSED SESSION - 5:30 PM
LABOR NEGOTIATIONS — The City Council will meet in closed session with its designated representatives to discuss labor negotiations pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6. The City's designated representatives are City Manager Aaron Adams, City Attorney Peter Thorson, Assistant City Manager Kevin Hawkins, Director of Finance Jennifer Hennessy, Director of Human Resources and Risk Management Isaac Garibay, Deputy City Manager Luke Watson and Senior Human Resources Analyst Becky Obmann. The employee organization is the California Teamsters Public, Professional and Medical Employees Union Local 911.

CALL TO ORDER: Mayor James Stewart
INVOCATION: Rabbi Yonasan Abrams of Chabad of Temecula
FLAG SALUTE: Mayor James Stewart
ROLL CALL: Alexander, Kalfus, Schwank, Stewart

PRESENTATIONS
Presentation Regarding the Temecula Valley Entrepreneur's Exchange and Entrepreneurial Resource Center
Presentation of Certificate of Recognition to the Temecula Valley Soccer Association Girls 14 All Star Champions

ANNUAL JOINT MEETING - CITY COUNCIL, COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION

AND PLANNING COMMISSION

BOARD / COMMISSION REPORTS
Community Services Commission and Traffic Safety Commission

PUBLIC SAFETY REPORT
County of Riverside, Riverside County Sheriffs Department

Page 1 ends

City Council Agenda March 12, 2024

PUBLIC COMMENTS - NON -AGENDA ITEMS
A total of 30 minutes is provided for members of the public to address the City Council on matters not listed on the agenda. Each speaker is limited to 3 minutes. Public comments may be made in person at the meeting by submitting a speaker card to the City Clerk. Speaker cards will be called in the order received. Still images may be displayed on the projector. All other audio and visual use is prohibited.

Public comments may also be submitted by email for inclusion into the record. Email comments must be received prior to the time the item is called for public comments and submitted to [email protected]. All public participation is governed by Council Policy regarding Public Participation at Meetings adopted by Resolution No. 2021-54.

CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Reports by the members of the City Council on matters not on the agenda will be made at this time. A total, not to exceed, ten minutes will be devoted to these reports.

CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless members of the City Council request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. A total of 30 minutes is provided for members of the public to address the City Council on matters on the Consent Calendar.

Each speaker is limited to 3 minutes. Public comments may be made in person at the meeting by submitting a speaker card to the City Clerk. Speaker cards will be called in the order received. Still images maybe displayed on the projector. All other audio and visual use is prohibited. Public comments may also be submitted by email for inclusion into the record. Email comments must be received prior to the time the item is called for public comments and submitted to [email protected].

All public participation is governed by Council Policy regarding Public Participation at Meetings adopted by Resolution No. 2021-54.

1. Waive Reading of Title and Text of All Ordinances and Resolutions Included in the A-eg nda Recommendation: That the City Council waive the reading of the title and text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda.

Attachments: Agenda Report

2. Approve Action Minutes of February 27, 2024
Recommendation: That the City Council approve the action minutes of February 27, 2024.

Attachments: Action Minutes

3. Approve List of Demands
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled:

RESOLUTION NO.

Page 2 ends

City Council Agenda March 12, 2024

4. 5.

6. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS

SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
Attachments: Agenda Report
Resolution
List of Demands
Approve Agreement with Alliant Insurance Services, Inc. for Insurance Broker Services Recommendation: That City Council approve a five-year agreement with Alliant Insurance Services, Inc. for insurance broker services in an amount not to exceed $292,000 for the total term of the agreement.

Attachments: Agenda Report
Agreement
Approve Initial Study and Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive Project, PW 16-05 Recommendation: That the City Council:

1. Adopt a resolution entitled:

RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

TEMECULA APPROVING THE INITIAL STUDY AND ADOPT A

MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION

MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE MURRIETA
CREEK BRIDGE AT OVERLAND DRIVE PROJECT, PW 16-05

2. Direct the Public Works Director to file the Notice of Determination.

Attachments: Agenda Report
Resolution
Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration
Notice of Determination
Project Description
Project Location Map
Approve Second Amendment to Agreement with Reep Fire Protection, Inc., for Fire Suppression System Maintenance Services
Recommendation: That the City Council approve the second amendment to the agreement with Reep Fire Protection, Inc., for fire suppression system maintenance services, in the amount of $100,000, for a total agreement amount of $200,000.

Page 3 ends

City Council Agenda March 12, 2024
Attachments: Agenda Report
Amendment

7. Approve Second Amendment to Annual Agreement for Paving Maintenance Services with NPG, Inc.

8. Recommendation
Attachments
That the City Council approve the second amendment to the annual agreement with NPG, Inc., for paving maintenance services in the amount of $500,000, for a total agreement amount of $2,750,000.

Agenda Report
Amendment
Receive and File Temporary Street Closures for 2024 Springfest Events Recommendation: That the City Council receive and file the temporary closure of certain streets for the following 2024 Springfest Events:

COMMUNITY SERVICES EXPO

ROD RUN

TEMECULA CULTUREFEST
Attachments: Agenda Report
Exhibit A - Springfest 2024 Road Closures
Exhibit B - Rod Run 2024 Road Closures

RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO SCHEDULED MEETINGS OF THE TEMECULA

COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT, THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA

REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, THE TEMECULA HOUSING AUTHORITY, AND/OR THE

TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY

Page 4 ends

City Council Agenda March 12, 2024

TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING
CALL TO ORDER: President Zak Schwank
ROLL CALL: Alexander, Kalfus, Schwank, Stewart

CSD PUBLIC COMMENTS - NON -AGENDA ITEMS
A total of 30 minutes is provided for members of the public to address the Board of Directors on matters not listed on the agenda. Each speaker is limited to 3 minutes. Public comments may be made in person at the meeting by submitting a speaker card to the City Clerk. Speaker cards will be called in the order received. Still images may be displayed on the projector. All other audio and visual use is prohibited.

CSD CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless members of the Community Services District request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. A total of 30 minutes is provided for members of the public to address the Board of Directors on items that appear on the Consent Calendar. Each speaker is limited to 3 minutes. Public comments may be made in person at the meeting by submitting a speaker card to the City Clerk. Speaker cards will be called in the order received. Still images may be displayed on the projector. All other audio and visual use is prohibited.

9. Approve Action Minutes of February 27, 2024
Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approve action minutes of February 27, 2024.

Attachments: Action Minutes

CSD DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT

CSD GENERAL MANAGER REPORT

CSD BOARD OF DIRECTOR REPORTS

CSD ADJOURNMENT
The next regular meeting of the Temecula Community Services District will be held on Tuesday, March 26, 2024, at 5:00 p.m., for a Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 6:00 p.m., at the Council Chambers located at 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California.

Page 5 ends

City Council Agenda March 12, 2024

SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - NO

MEETING

TEMECULA HOUSING AUTHORITY - NO MEETING

TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY
CALL TO ORDER: Chair James Stewart
ROLL CALL: Alexander, Kalfus, Schwank, Stewart

TPFA PUBLIC COMMENT
A total of 30 minutes is provided for members of the public to address the Board of Directors on matters not listed on the agenda. Each speaker is limited to 3 minutes. A total of 30 minutes is provided for members of the public to address the City Council on matters not listed on the agenda. Each speaker is limited to 3 minutes. Public comments may be made in person at the meeting by submitting a speaker card to the City Clerk. Speaker cards will be called in the order received. Still images may be displayed on the projector. All other audio and visual use is prohibited. Public comments may also be submitted by email for inclusion into the record. Email comments must be received prior to the time the item is called for public comments and submitted to [email protected]. All public participation is governed by Council Policy regarding Public Participation at Meetings adopted by Resolution No. 2021-54.

TPFA CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless members of the Temecula Public Financing Authority request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. A total of 30 minutes is provided for members of the public to address the Board of Directors on items that appear on the Consent Calendar. Each speaker is limited to 3 minutes. Public comments may be made in person at the meeting by submitting a speaker card to the City Clerk. Speaker cards will be called in the order received. Still images may be displayed on the projector. All other audio and visual use is prohibited. Public comments may also be submitted by email for inclusion into the record. Email comments must be received prior to the time the item is called for public comments and submitted to [email protected]. All public participation is governed by Council Policy regarding Public Participation at Meetings adopted by Resolution No. 2021-54.

10. Approve Action Minutes of February 27, 2024
Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approve the action minutes of February 27, 2024.

Attachments: Action Minutes

11. Adopt Ordinance No. TPFA 2024-01 Le . ivy Special Taxes within Community Facilities District No. 23-02 (Prado)
Recommendation
That the Board of Directors adopt an ordinance entitled:

Page 6 ends

City Council
Agenda March 12, 2024
ORDINANCE NO. TPFA 2024-01

AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE

TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY LEVYING

SPECIAL TAXES WITHIN TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING
AUTHORITY COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 23-02
(PRADO)
Attachments: Agenda Report
Ordinance

TPFA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT

TPFA BOARD OF DIRECTOR REPORTS

TPFA ADJOURNMENT
The next regular meeting of the Temecula Public Financing Authority will be held on Tuesday, March 26, 2024, at 5:00 p.m., for a Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 6:00 p.m., at the Council Chambers located at 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California.

Page 7 ends

City Council Agenda March 12, 2024

RECONVENE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL

BUSINESS
Any member of the public may address the City Council on items that appear on the Business portion of the agenda. Each speaker is limited to 5 minutes. Public comments may be made in person at the meeting by submitting a speaker card to the City Clerk. Speaker cards will be called in the order received. Still images may be displayed on the projector. All other audio and visual use is prohibited.

12. Introduce Ordinance Adding Chapter 9.90 Unlawful Possession of a Catalytic Converter to the Temecula Municipal Code (At the Request of Subcommittee Members Mayor Pro Tern Kalfus and Council Member Alexander)
Recommendation: That the City Council introduce an ordinance entitled:

ORDINANCE NO.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ADDING CHAPTER 9.90, UNLAWFUL POSSESSION

OF A CATALYTIC CONVERTER, TO THE TEMECULA

MUNICIPAL CODE
Attachments: Agenda Report
Ordinance

ITEMS FOR FUTURE CITY COUNCIL AGENDAS
Any Council Member, including the Mayor, may request an item be placed on a future agenda. Any such request will be discussed under this section. In making the request, a Council Member may briefly describe the topic of the proposed agenda item and any timing associated with the placement of the item on the agenda. This description shall not exceed 3 minutes. No substantive discussion on the subject of the motion may occur. Items may only be placed on the agenda by Council Members pursuant to policy or by the City Manager based on administrative or operational needs of the City. Public comments on the placement of these agenda items shall be limited to a maximum of 30 minutes. Individual comments shall not exceed 3 minutes. All public participation is governed by the Council Policy regarding Public Participation at Meetings and Agenda Placements by Council Members adopted by Resolution No. 2021-54.

CITY MANAGER REPORT

CITY ATTORNEY REPORT

ADJOURNMENT

Page 8 ends

City Council
Agenda March 12, 2024
The next regular meeting of the City Council will be held on Tuesday, March 26, 2024, at 5:00 p.m., for a Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 6:00 p.m., at the Council Chambers located at 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California.

NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
The full agenda packet (including staff reports, public closed session information, and any supplemental material available after the original posting of the agenda), distributed to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on the agenda, will be available for public viewing in the main reception area of the Temecula Civic Center during normal business hours at least 72 hours prior to the meeting. The material will also be available on the City's website at TemeculaCa.gov. and available for review at the respective meeting. If you have questions regarding any item on the agenda, please contact the City Clerk's Department at (951) 694-6444.

Page 9 ends

Item No. 1

CITY OF TEMECULA

AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Randi Johl, Director of Legislative Affairs/City Clerk DATE: March 12, 2024
SUBJECT: Waive Reading of Title and Text of All Ordinances and Resolutions Included in the Agenda
PREPARED BY: Randi Johl, Director of Legislative Affairs/City Clerk RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council waive the reading of the title and text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda.

BACKGROUND: The City of Temecula is a general law city formed under the laws of the State of California. With respect to adoption of ordinances and resolutions, the City adheres to the requirements set forth in the Government Code. In accordance with Government Code Section 34934, the title of each ordinance is included on the published agenda and a copy of the full ordinance has been available to the public online on the City's website and will be available in print at the meeting prior to the introduction or passage of the ordinance. Unless otherwise required, the full reading of the title and text of all ordinances and resolutions is waived.

FISCAL IMPACT: None
ATTACHMENTS: None

Item No. 2

ACTION MINUTES

TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL

REGULAR MEETING

COUNCIL CHAMBERS
41000 MAIN STREET

TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
FEBRUARY 27, 2024 - 6:00 PM
CLOSED SESSION - 5:30 PM
Closed Session was not held and continued to a future date.

LABOR NEGOTIATIONS — The City Council will meet in closed session with its designated representatives to discuss labor negotiations pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6. The City's designated representatives are City Manager Aaron Adams, City Attorney Peter Thorson, Assistant City Manager Kevin Hawkins, Director of Finance Jennifer Hennessy, Director of Human Resources and Risk Management Isaac Garibay, Deputy City Manager Luke Watson and Senior Human Resources Analyst Becky Obmann. The employee organization is the California Teamsters Public, Professional and Medical Employees Union Local 911.

CALL TO ORDER at 6:00 PM: Mayor James Stewart
INVOCATION: Pam Migliozzi of Center for Spiritual Living Temecula Valley FLAG SALUTE: Mayor James Stewart
ROLL CALL: Alexander, Kalfus, Schwank, Stewart

BOARD / COMMISSION REPORTS
Community Services Commission, Planning Commission and Race, Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Commission

PUBLIC SAFETY REPORT
County of Riverside, Fire Department (CAL FIRE)

PUBLIC COMMENTS - NON -AGENDA ITEMS
The following individual(s) addressed the City Council:
• Faye Wons • Rebecca
• Melissa Bourbonnais • Bob Kowell
• Laurel LaMont • Hanon Rickard

PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDA ITEMS
The following individual(s) addressed the City Council:
• Bob Kowell (Item #11) Gene DiLuigi (Item #15)
• Edward Hubler (Item #13)

CITY COUNCIL REPORTS

CONSENT CALENDAR
Unless otherwise indicated below, the following pertains to all items on the Consent Calendar.

Approved the Staff Recommendation (4-0): Motion by Schwank, Second by Alexander. The vote reflected unanimous approval.

1. Waive Reading of Title and Text of All Ordinances and Resolutions Included in the Agenda

2. 3.

4. 5.

Recommendation: That the City Council waive the reading of the title and text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda.

Approve Action Minutes of February 13, 2024
Recommendation: That the City Council approve the action minutes of February 13, 2024.

Approve List of Demands
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled:

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-14

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS

SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
Approve Resolution to Adopt the Urban Forest Management Plan and Make a Findingit t is Exempt from California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15307 and 15061 Recommendation: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled:

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-15

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

TEMECULA TO ADOPT THE URBAN FOREST MANAGEMENT

PLAN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA

DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION (CAL
FIRE) 2019/2020 URBAN AND COMMUNITY FOREST PROGRAM

GRANT GUIDELINES AND FINDING THAT THE URBAN FOREST

MANAGEMENT PLAN IS EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA
GUIDELINES SECTION 15307 AND 15061
Award Construction Contract to Ace Capital Engineering for the American with Disabilities Act Transition Plan Implementation Project, PW18-16
Recommendation: That the City Council:
2 1. Award a construction contract to Ace Capital Engineering in the amount of $356,528.53 for the American with Disabilities Act Transition Plan Implementation Project, PW18-16; and

2. Authorize the City Manager to approve contract change orders up to 15% of the contract amount, $53,479.28; and

3. Make a finding that the American with Disabilities Act Transition Plan Implementation Project, PW18-16, project is exempt from Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan fees.

6. Approve an Increase to the Contingency Amount for the Playground Equipment Enhancement and Safety Surfacing at Calle Aragon Park
Recommendation: That the City Council:

1. Approve an increase to the contingency amount for the Playground Equipment Enhancement and Safety Surfacing at Calle Aragon Park, by $17, 890; and

2. Increase the City Manager's authority to approve additional work by $17,890.

7. Approve Plans and Specifications and Authorize the Solicitation of Construction Bids for Pickleball Courts, PW21-03
Recommendation:

RECESS:

That the City Council:

1. Approve the plans and specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for the Pickleball Courts, Project PW21-03; and

2. Make a finding that this project is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Article 19, Categorical Exemption, Section 15301, Existing Facilities, of the CEQA Guidelines.

At 7:16 PM, the City Council recessed and convened as the Temecula Community Services District Meeting and Temecula Public Financing Authority Meeting. At 7:30 PM the City Council resumed with the remainder of the City Council Agenda.

RECONVENE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL

PUBLIC HEARING

11. Approve Proposed Fiscal Year 2024-25 User Fee Schedule Recommendation: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled:

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-16

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A COMPREHENSIVE

USER FEE SCHEDULE AND AMENDING FEES AND CHARGES

FOR CITY SERVICES, INCLUDING BUILDING AND SAFETY,

PLANNING, LAND DEVELOPMENT, FIRE PREVENTION,

POLICE, AND OTHER CITY SERVICES AND MAKING RELATED

DETERMINATIONS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
Approved the Staff Recommendation (3-1): Motion by Schwank, Second by Stewart. The vote reflected unanimous approval with Alexander opposing.

BUSINESS - JOINT MEETING OF CITY COUNCIL/COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT

12. Approve Fiscal Year 2023-24 Mid -Year Budget Adjustments Recommendation: That the City Council/Board of Directors adopt the following resolutions entitled:

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-17

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA, AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 ANNUAL

OPERATING BUDGET
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-18

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

TEMECULA AMENDING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM FISCAL YEARS 2024-28 AND AMENDING THE
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023-24
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-19

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

TEMECULA REVISING THE SALARY SCHEDULE
RESOLUTION NO. CSD 2024-01

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE

TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2023-24
4 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGETS
Approved the Staff Recommendation (4-0): Motion by Kalfus, Second by Stewart. The vote reflected unanimous approval.

BUSINESS - CITY COUNCIL

13. Approve Amendment No. 7 to City Manager Aaron Adams' Employment Agreement Recommendation:

That the City Council approve Amendment No. 7 to City Manager Aaron Adams' Employment Agreement.

Approved the Staff Recommendation (4-0): Motion by Schwank, Second by Stewart. The vote reflected unanimous approval.

14. Appoint Members to the Old Town Local Advisory Committee and Ratify the Full Membership List for the Committee
Recommendation: That the City Council appoint members to the Old Town Local Advisory Committee and ratify the full membership list for the committee.

Motion to appoint Carliene Anderson and Sabin Uriarte to the committee and ratify full membership list for the committee (4-0): Motion by Alexander, Second by Kalf is. The vote reflected unanimous approval.

15. Consider the Creation of an Ad Hoc Subcommittee to Discuss Issues Related to the of Streets into the City -Maintained Street System for Street Maintenance by the City (At the Request of Mayor Pro Tempore Kalf is)
Recommendation: That the City Council:

1. Consider the creation of an ad hoc subcommittee to discuss issues related to the acceptance of streets into the city -maintained street system for street maintenance by the City and City policies and standards relating to the acceptance of streets.

2. If the subcommittee is created, appoint two Council Members to the subcommittee.

3. If the subcommittee is created, authorize City staff to provide the necessary document production and research necessary for the subcommittee's consideration of the issues.

Motion to approve creation of ad hoc subcommittee and appoint Mayor Stewart and Mayor Pro Tern Kalfus to the subcommittee (3-1): Motion by Alexander, Second by Kalfus. The vote reflected unanimous approval with Schwank opposing.

DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS (RECEIVE AND FILE)

16. Community Development Department Monthly Report

17. Fire Department Monthly Report

18. Police Department Monthly Report

19. Public Works Department Monthly Report

ITEMS FOR FUTURE CITY COUNCIL AGENDAS

CITY MANAGER REPORT

CITY ATTORNEY REPORT

ADJOURNMENT
At 10:19 PM, the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, March 12, 2024, at 5:00 PM for Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 6:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California.

James Stewart, Mayor
ATTEST:

Randi Johl, City Clerk
[SEAL]

Item No. 3

CITY OF TEMECULA

AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Jennifer Hennessy, Director of Finance
DATE: March 12, 2024
SUBJECT: Approve List of Demands
PREPARED BY: Tricia Hawk, Finance Manager
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled:

RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS

AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
BACKGROUND: All claims and demands are reported and summarized for review and approval by the City Council on a routine basis at each City Council meeting. The attached claims represent the paid claims and demands since the last City Council meeting.

FISCAL IMPACT: All claims and demands were paid from appropriated funds or authorized resources of the City and have been recorded in accordance with the City's policies and procedures.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution

2. List of Demands

RESOLUTION NO.2024-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND

DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. That the following claims and demands as set forth in Exhibit A, on file in the office of the City Clerk, has been reviewed by the City Manager's Office and that the same are hereby allowed in the amount of $8,410,400.78.

Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 12th day of March, 2024.

James Stewart, Mayor
ATTEST:

Randi Johl, City Clerk
[SEAL]

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss

CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2024- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 12th day of March, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

Randi Johl, City Clerk

CITY OF TEMECULA

LIST OF DEMANDS
2/12/2024 - 2/23/2024 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
2/15/2024 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN:
7,684,564.69
725,836.09
TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 3/12/2024 COUNCIL MEETING: $ 8,410,400.78

Check#
Check Date
Vendor#
Vendor
Invoice
Description
Invoice Net
601579
2/15/2024
3325
1-800-BOLLARDS INC
AR001668
BOLLARDS: CITY HALL PERIMETER: PW
$24,762.38
601580
2/15/2024
2238
79FIELD HOCKEY INC
3110.101

TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
$945.00
301549
2/22/2024
1772

ADAME LANDSCAPE INC
525245
PARKING GARAGE SWEEPING/CLEANING: PW
$540.00
301579
2/22/2024
100

ADVANCED PERMIT SERVICES
B23-6440
REFUND:80% PERMIT FEES
$158.40
601581
2/15/2024
1943

AIR EXCHANGE INC
91611367
PLYMOVENT SVCS: FIRE STATIONS
$944.53
301507
2/15/2024
1236

ALL AMERICAN ASPHALT
1173117

ASPHALT SUPPLIES, PW STREET MAINTENANCE
$441.16
301507
2/15/2024
1236

ALL AMERICAN ASPHALT
1172616

ASPHALT SUPPLIES, PW STREET MAINTENANCE
$481.55
601582
2/15/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
1KX6-KKDY-19TP
MISC SUPPLIES, TOOLS, EQUP: HR
$500.10
601583
2/15/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
1V97-GKY7-F6RW
MISC SUPPLIES/EQUIP: PW
$43.49
601583
2/15/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
1VRH-P3M7-VNRL
MISC SUPPLIES/EQUIP: PW
$25.99
601583
2/15/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
1W93-RFF4-9MFG
MISC BOOKS: RHRTPL: TCSD
$34.24
601582
2/15/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
1NY4-6M7C-T733
OFFICE SUPPLIES: FIRE
($44.58)
601582
2/15/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
1NQM-XL13-T3CQ
SUPPLIES: MPSC AND MRC SUPPLIES
$900.20
601583
2/15/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
1YFY-3G4Y-XQ37
MISC SUPPLIES: PW CIP PW19-02
$30.44
601582
2/15/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
1QP4-7DHL-M1D3
OFFICE SUPPLIES: EM
$78.27
601582
2/15/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
1R17-WMFY-MVRK
MISC SUPPLIES/EQUIP: PW
$160.94
601582
2/15/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
1XQK-PCVJ-LHF6
OFFICE SUPPLIES: CRC
$87.04
601582
2/15/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
174M-7K7Y-L39G
MISC SUPPLIES: COMDEV
$60.63
601582
2/15/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
1XQN-W43P-L4MY
MISC SUPPLIES: CALRECYCLE SB1383 GRANT: PW
$462.97
601583
2/15/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
116Q-9L7G-QNVM
MISC BOOKS: RHRTPL: TCSD
$33.04
601582
2/15/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
llJ3-6RVN-YN4Y
MISC SUPPLIES: CALRECYCLE SB1383 GRANT: PW
$92.43
601582
2/15/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
1VTQ-43RJ-FWVG
MISC SUPPLIES: CALRECYCLE SB1383 GRANT: PW
($85.46)
601638
2/22/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
1QMX-7QHN-17TW
SUPPLIES, TOOLS, EQUIP: HR
$16.48
601637
2/22/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
1KHC-HNWF-H4DF
MISC BOOKS: RHRTPL: TCSD
$531.01
601637
2/22/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
114P-Y6QC-NJ99
MISC SUPPLIES:ECO DEV
$642.71
601637
2/22/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
19XV-6TQM-QPTC
MISC SUPPLIES: MPSC & MRC: TCSD
$516.45
601637
2/22/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
117T-XY3D-P6Y9
MISC SUPPLIES:TCC
$288.44
601637
2/22/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
114R-P1YD-NRNP
MISC SUPPLIES: TVM
$55.77
601637
2/22/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
1NH1-TJ3K-3DC1
MISC SUPPLIES: WORKFORCE DEV
$222.93
601637
2/22/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
1XT7-WWJD-VXF6
SUPPLIES: MPSC & MRC
($46.22)
601637
2/22/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
1R9J-WNYP-1RXQ
MISC SUPPLIES: CRC: TCSD
$114.05
601637
2/22/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
1WNV-NNlJ-97GD
MISC SUPPLIES/EQUIP: PD
($40.93)
601638
2/22/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
1DQD-KHIQ-FMDY
MISC BOOKS: RHRTPL: TCSD
($1.73)
601637
2/22/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
1R44-H17C-DINT
MISC BOOKS: RHRTPL: TCSD
$162.15
601638
2/22/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
1DF9-L936-3GMN
SUPPLIES/EQUIP:PD
$39.86
601638
2/22/2024
1418
AMAZON.COM, INC
1KTW-K4QP-3RYY
SUPPLIES/EQUIP: POLICE
$18.02
601584
2/15/2024
1261

AMERICAN FORENSIC NURSES INC
78505

DRUG ALCOHOL ANALYSIS
$324.30
301508
2/15/2024
2195

AMERICAN PATRIOT MUSIC PROJECT
CSF Grant Prgm

CSF GRANT PROGRAM
$5,000.00
301509
2/15/2024
3623
EE # 441
Cmptr Loan Prgm 2/8
COMPUTER LOAN PROGRAM 02/08/24
$1,700.00
601585
2/15/2024
1805

AQUA CHILL OF SAN DIEGO
20076128
DRINKING WATER SYSTEM MAINT: TCC
$28.55
601639
2/22/2024
1805

AQUA CHILL OF SAN DIEGO
20076197
FEB DRINKING WTR SYS MAINT: MALL PD
$62.53
601639
2/22/2024
1805

AQUA CHILL OF SAN DIEGO
20076178
FEB DRINKING WTR SYS MAINT: AULD RD: PD
$62.53
601639
2/22/2024
1805

AQUA CHILL OF SAN DIEGO
20076194
DRINKING WATERSRVCS:IT
$28.55
301550
2/22/2024
2442

ASCENT ENVIRONMENTAL INC
20220121.01-6
CEQA ADV SVCS FY 23-24: COMM DEV
$390.00
601640
2/22/2024
1107
ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OFTEMECULA VALLEY CSF 02/05/24

COMMUNITY SERVICE FUNDING GRANT PRGM
$5,000.00
301551
2/22/2024
2242
AT&T
494465
LOCATION/ACTIVATION FEES: POLICE
$175.00
601586
2/15/2024
2381

AYERS WILLIAM BRIAN
2934
ELECTRICAL SVCS: CITY FACILITIES: PW
$5,500.00
601641
2/22/2024
1405

B&H FOTO & ELECTRONICS CORP
221098038
SOUND SYSTEM: TCSD
$837.90
601587
2/15/2024
2805
EE # 621
Reimb: Mileage
REIMB: MILEAGE 10/19/23-12/16/23
$39.42
601587
2/15/2024
2805
EE#621
Reimb:CSMFO'24
REIMB: CSMFO 2024 CONFERENCE
$781.22
601642
2/22/2024
1579

BOZONELOS BOB
Music Perf: 02/05/24

PERFORMING ARTS AGREEMENT
$300.00
301580
2/22/2024
100

BRIGHT PLANET SOLAR
Refund: B22-5468
REFUND: PERMIT B22-5468: BLDG
$147.36
301552
2/22/2024
1669

BTAC UNITED ACQUISITION HOLDING
COMPP 2038050539
BOOK COLLECTIONS: RHRTPL TCSD
$346.96
301552
2/22/2024
1669

BTAC UNITED ACQUISITION HOLDING
COMPP 2038050537
BOOK COLLECTIONS: RHRTPL TCSD
$20.11
301552
2/22/2024
1669

BTAC UNITED ACQUISITION HOLDING
COMPP 2038050538
BOOK COLLECTIONS: RHRTPL TCSD
$94.94
301552
2/22/2024
1669

BTAC UNITED ACQUISITION HOLDING
COMPP 2038085723
BOOK COLLECTIONS: RHRTPL TCSD
$257.21
301552
2/22/2024
1669

BTAC UNITED ACQUISITION HOLDING
COMPP 2038085724
BOOK COLLECTIONS: RHRTPL TCSD
$8.27
301552
2/22/2024
1669

BTAC UNITED ACQUISITION HOLDING
COMPP 2038085725
BOOK COLLECTIONS: RHRTPL TCSD
$46.11
601588
2/15/2024
2399

BUCHER BRET PHILLIP
3500.101-3511.102

TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
$3,618.16
301562
2/22/2024
1002
C S M F 0
Memb Renewal: Fin
MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL: FINANCE
$135.00
301562
2/22/2024
1002

C S M F O
Membership Renewal
MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL: FINANCE
$135.00
301510
2/15/2024
3157

CAHALAN JASON
3869
DOOR REPAIR: COUNCIL CHAMBERS: PW
$1,880.78
301511
2/15/2024
1190

CAL MAT
73907053
ASPHALT SUPPLIES: PW STREET MAINT
$394.87
301511
2/15/2024
1190

CAL MAT
73900419
ASPHALT SUPPLIES: PW STREET MAINT
$628.09
301511
2/15/2024
1190

CAL MAT
73902246
ASPHALT SUPPLIES: PW STREET MAINT
$216.96
301511
2/15/2024
1190

CAL MAT
73904242
ASPHALT SUPPLIES: PW STREET MAINT
$434.37
301553
2/22/2024
1190

CAL MAT
73915920
ASPHALT SUPPLIES: PW STREET MAINT
$509.71
301553
2/22/2024
1190

CAL MAT
73911555
ASPHALT SUPPLIES: PW STREET MAINT
$217.99
301554
2/22/2024
1190

CAL MAT
73913296
ASPHALT SUPPLIES: PW STREET MAINT
$214.90
601589
2/15/2024
1085

CALIF BUILDING OFFICIALS
17232
REGISTRATION: WEBINAR: ADA
$80.00
601589
2/15/2024
1085

CALIF BUILDING OFFICIALS
17234
REGISTRATION: WEBINAR: ADA
$80.00
601589
2/15/2024
1085

CALIF BUILDING OFFICIALS
17236
REGISTRATION: WEBINAR: ADA
$80.00
601589
2/15/2024
1085

CALIF BUILDING OFFICIALS
17233
REGISTRATION: WEBINAR: ADA
$80.00
301555
2/22/2024
2540

CALIF EMERGENCY SERVICES ASSOC
1182
REGISTRATION: CONFERENCE
$724.00
301556
2/22/2024
2465

CALIF NEWSPAPERS PARTNERSHIP
0000581621A
LEGAL NEWSPAPER PUBLICATIONS: CITY CLERK
$581.18
301557
2/22/2024
2219
CALLYO 2009 CORP
R19082
4/l/24-3/31/25 SOFTWARE SUBSCRIPTION: INFO TECH
$3,888.00

Check#
Check Date
Vendor#
Vendor
Invoice
Description
Invoice Net
301512
2/15/2024
1332

CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES INC
31918720
JAN COPIERS LEASE: LIBRARY
$671.56
601590
2/15/2024
2295

CANTRELLTINAJ
4200.102

TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
$175.00
301513
2/15/2024
2063

CASC ENGINEERING AND, CONSULTING INC
0050439
MISC ENGINEERING SVS: PW - CIP
$180.00
601591
2/15/2024
1280CDW
LLC
PJ66169
MISCSMALLTOOLS&EQUIP: INFOTECH
$157.38
601591
2/15/2024
1280CDW
LLC
PK11822
MISCSMALLTOOLS&EQUIP: INFOTECH
$830.80
601591
2/15/2024
1280CDW
LLC
PL59812
MISCSMALLTOOLS&EQUIP: INFOTECH
$191.40
301533
2/15/2024
100

CECILIA HARMS
65063829
REFUND: SENIOR EXCURSION
$15.00
301514
2/15/2024
1528

CERTIFION CORP
124EP31197
SOFTWARE SUBSCRIPTION: PD
$200.00
301558
2/22/2024
3138

CHING YUN HU
02/08/24
PERFORMANCE: THEATER:TCSD
$2,750.00
301515
2/15/2024
1347
CINTAS
8406662847
FIRST AID SERVICES: RM
$13.35
301515
2/15/2024
1347
CINTAS
8406662850
FIRST AID SERVICES: RM
$152.57
301515
2/15/2024
1347
CINTAS
8406662853
FIRST AID SERVICES: RM
$249.60
301515
2/15/2024
1347
CINTAS
8406662848
FIRST AID SERVICES: RM
$129.18
301515
2/15/2024
1347
CINTAS
8406662851
FIRST AID SERVICES: RM
$531.84
301515
2/15/2024
1347
CINTAS
8406662857
FIRST AID SERVICES: RM
$10.55
301515
2/15/2024
1347
CINTAS
8406662856
FIRST AID SERVICES: RM
$100.17
301515
2/15/2024
1347
CINTAS
8406662854
FIRST AID SERVICES: RM
$262.34
601592
2/15/2024
2205

CLARITAS HOLDINGS INC, CLARITAS LLC
2727362
DEMOGRAPHIC REPORT: ECO DEV
$1,350.00
601643
2/22/2024
2681

CLEARSTAR INC
1486293

EMPLOYMENT SCREENINGS-HR
$114.68
301516
2/15/2024
3147

CLEM TYLER J
INV0216
CONSTRUCTION SVCS: CIVIC CENTER: PW
$6,000.00
601593
2/15/2024
3060

COMPLETE OFFICE LLC
4110969-0
OFFICE SUPPLIES: FIRE
$66.53
601593
2/15/2024
3060

COMPLETE OFFICE LLC
4120446-0
OFFICE SUPPLIES: INFO TECH
$36.37
601593
2/15/2024
3060

COMPLETE OFFICE LLC
4116211-0
OFFICE SUPPLIES: COMM DEV
$78.04
601594
2/15/2024
1771

COSSOU,CELINE
1635.101

TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
$442.40
301517
2/15/2024
1849

COSTAR REALTY INFORMATION INC
120589255

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE MONTHLY SUBSCRIPTION
$1,296.00
301561
2/22/2024
1268

COSTCO MEMBERSHIP
000111833460256 FY24

AGENCY MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL
$180.00
301559
2/22/2024
1098
COSTCOTEMECULA 491
3549
HOSPITALITY/OFFICE SUPPLIES:THEATER:TCSD
$333.51
301559
2/22/2024
1098
COSTCOTEMECULA 491
3550

MISC SUPPLIES- WORKFORCE PROGRAMS
$342.15
301560
2/22/2024
1268
COSTCO TEMECULA 491
3552
SUPPLIES: MRC, MPSC & SFSP
$450.49
601595
2/15/2024
2004

COX KRISTI
4210.102

TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
$360.00
601596
2/15/2024
1592

CRAFTSMEN PLUMBING & HVAC INC
003813
PLUMBING SRVCS: COMMUNITY REC CENTER: PW
$881.00
601596
2/15/2024
1592

CRAFTSMEN PLUMBING & HVAC INC
L30669
WATER HEATER INSTALL: RON ROBERT LIBRARY: PW
$8,946.00
301518
2/15/2024
3607

CROWN CASTLE INC
1491095
FIBER SVCS: 44900TEMECULA LANE
$1,118.33
301519
2/15/2024
1699

DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES INC
553966

DIAZ ROAD EXPANSION
$10,341.75
301563
2/22/2024
1699

DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES INC
549231
ENGINERING SERVICES: PW -CIP, PWO8-04
$1,237.00
601644
2/22/2024
2528

DE LA SECURA INC
21007-026

MARGARITA REC CTR DSGN BUILD
$383,829.43
601644
2/22/2024
2528

DE LA SECURA INC
Rel Ntc: Concrete PI
REL NTC: CONCRETE PLACEMENT INC
$7,594.71
301520
2/15/2024
2192

DE NOVO PLANNING GROUP
4114

BEDFORD CT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
$835.00
601645
2/22/2024
2227
DG INVESTMENT HOLDINGS 2 INC
IN00151371
VIEWING STATIONS: SW STATION: PD
$5,361.97
601597
2/15/2024
1254

DOWNS ENERGY FUEL
CL25722
FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: FIRE DEPT
$314.70
601597
2/15/2024
1254

DOWNS ENERGY FUEL
CL26484
FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: TRAFFIC: PW
$412.40
601597
2/15/2024
1254

DOWNS ENERGY FUEL
CL26470
FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: STREET MAINT: PW
$1,919.18
601597
2/15/2024
1254

DOWNS ENERGY FUEL
CL26485
FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: TCSD
$217.26
601597
2/15/2024
1254

DOWNS ENERGY FUEL
CL26464
FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: PARKS: PW
$2,069.86
601597
2/15/2024
1254

DOWNS ENERGY FUEL
CL26465
FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: LAND DEV: PW
$133.97
601647
2/22/2024
1254

DOWNS ENERGY FUEL
CL26467
FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: CODE ENFORCEMENT
$159.55
601647
2/22/2024
1254

DOWNS ENERGY FUEL
CL26468
FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: BLDG INSPECTORS
$351.07
601646
2/22/2024
1254

DOWNS ENERGY FUEL
CL27178
FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: FIRE DEPT
$172.79
601647
2/22/2024
1254

DOWNS ENERGY FUEL
CL27791
FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: EOC
$91.28
601647
2/22/2024
1254

DOWNS ENERGY FUEL
CL27778
FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: BLDG INSPECTORS
$299.02
601647
2/22/2024
1254

DOWNS ENERGY FUEL
CL27776
FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: POLICE DEPT
$73.62
601647
2/22/2024
1254

DOWNS ENERGY FUEL
CL27777
FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: CODE ENFORCEMENT
$117.66
601598
2/15/2024
1678
DUDEK
202311636

CITYWIDE DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN
$60,021.95
601598
2/15/2024
1678
DUDEK
202311425
CONSTRUCTION MGT SVCS: PW-CIP, PW20-13, ON -CALL
$1,440.00
601599
2/15/2024
3362

DUNN EDWARDS CORPORATION
2054A05253
PAINT SUPPLIES: FACILITY MAINTENANCE: PW
$163.84
601648
2/22/2024
2385

EIDE BAILLY LLP
EI01625297
JAN AUDIT SVCS: ERP IMPLEMENTATION
$13,200.00
601600
2/15/2024
1525

ENNIS PAINT INC
455910
MISC SUPPLIES: STREET MAINTENANCE: PW
$6,257.10
301521
2/15/2024
1004

ESGIL LLC
152700
NOV PLAN CK SVCS: COMDEV
$24,287.92
601601
2/15/2024
3601

EWC EVENTS LLC
2734
REGISTRATION: CONFERENCE: RISK
$399.00
301522
2/15/2024
1005

FEDERAL EXPRESS INC
8-396-88994
EXPRESS MAILING SVCS: FINANCE
$20.90
301565
2/22/2024
1005

FEDERAL EXPRESS INC
8-404-36284
EXPRESS MAILINGS: FIRE DEPT
$145.92
301565
2/22/2024
1005

FEDERAL EXPRESS INC
8-404-36285a
EXPRESS MAILINGS: FINANCE
$31.35
301565
2/22/2024
1005

FEDERAL EXPRESS INC
8-404-36285b
EXPRESS MAILINGS:COMDEV
$77.02
301565
2/22/2024
1005

FEDERAL EXPRESS INC
8-411-43764
EXPRESS MAILING SRVCS: POLICE
$19.69
601602
2/15/2024
1871

FLATIRON WEST INC
9 I-15/ FRENCH VALLEY PARKWAY IMPROVEMENTS
$1,869,403.93
301581
2/22/2024
100

FREEDOM FOREVER LLC
Refund: Permits
REFUND: PERMIT B23-1873/B23-2475/B23-0740
$442.08
601603
2/15/2024
2374

GEORGE HILLS COMPANY INC
INV1027541
CLAIMS TPA: RM
$3,830.50
601649
2/22/2024
2374

GEORGE HILLS COMPANY INC
INV1027358
SUBROGATION RECOVERY FEE:GHC0061006: RM
$1,013.28
301582
2/22/2024
100

GEORGE KELLY
65063873
REFUND: EXCURSION:TCSD
$15.00
601650
2/22/2024
3527

GOLDEN STATE COMMUNICATIONS INC
5I06929
RADIOS & ACCESSORIES RENTAL: TEM SHERIFF
$351.25
601650
2/22/2024
3527

GOLDEN STATE COMMUNICATIONS INC
SI06951
RADIOS & ACCESSORIES RENTAL: TEM SHERIFF
$163.13
601650
2/22/2024
3527

GOLDEN STATE COMMUNICATIONS INC
RI29037
RADIOS & ACCESSORIES RENTAL: TEM SHERIFF
$700.00
601604
2/15/2024
1225

GRAINGER
9009435125
MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES: STREET MAINT: PW
$223.94
601651
2/22/2024
1197
HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INLAND VALLEY INf Ck Req 02/07/24
REFUND: BUSINESS LICENSE FEE
$35.00
301524
2/15/2024
1009

HANKS HARDWARE INC
2107/Jan
SMALL TOOLS/EQUIP FACILITIES MAINT: THEATER
$12.23
301523
2/15/2024
1009

HANKS HARDWARE INC
2641
MISC MAINT SUPPLIES: STREETS: PW
$1,003.35

Check#
Check Date
Vendor #
Vendor
Invoice
Description
Invoice Net
301523
2/15/2024
1009

HANKS HARDWARE INC
2646/Jan

SMALL TOOLS/EQUIP FACILITIES MAINT
$103.04
301523
2/15/2024
1009

HANKS HARDWARE INC
2649/Jan-a
MISC HARDWARE SUPPLIES: PARKS
$1,481.85
301523
2/15/2024
1009

HANKS HARDWARE INC
2649/Jan-b
MISC HARDWARE SUPPLIES: PARKS
$1,038.69
301523
2/15/2024
1009

HANKS HARDWARE INC
2664/Jan

SMALL TOOLS/EQUIP FACILITIES MAINT
$101.00
301523
2/15/2024
1009

HANKS HARDWARE INC
2670/Jan

SMALL TOOLS/EQUIP FACILITIES MAINT
$169.63
301523
2/15/2024
1009

HANKS HARDWARE INC
2671/Jan

SMALL TOOLS/EQUIP FACILITIES MAINT
$776.89
301524
2/15/2024
1009

HANKS HARDWARE INC
2702/Jan-a

SMALL TOOLS/EQUIP FACILITIES MAINT
$91.20
301523
2/15/2024
1009

HANKS HARDWARE INC
2708/Jan

SMALL TOOLS/EQUIP FACILITIES MAINT
$152.32
301523
2/15/2024
1009

HANKS HARDWARE INC
2716/Jan

SMALL TOOLS/EQUIP FACILITIES MAINT
$94.99
301524
2/15/2024
1009

HANKS HARDWARE INC
2729/Jan
HARDWARE SUPPLIES: PARKS
$73.93
301523
2/15/2024
1009

HANKS HARDWARE INC
2734/Jan

SMALL TOOLS/EQUIP FACILITIES MAINT
$118.73
301525
2/15/2024
2225

HASA INC
940932
POOL SANTIZING CHEMICALS: CITY POOLS
$485.40
601652
2/22/2024
1093

HEALTHPOINTE MEDICAL GROUP INC
42612-4224695
MED EMPLOYMENT SCREENING: HR
$490.00
301526
2/15/2024
1791

HEUXSTORM INC
15015
FIREWALL RENEWAL: IT
$2,040.00
301566
2/22/2024
3499

HEPHNER JOSHUA
Reimb: CRIA Conf
REIMB: CRIA INT'LTRAINING CONFERENCE: PD
$587.15
601605
2/15/2024
1761

HESSJOHNPAUL
1508

PROMOTIONAL VIDEOGRAPHY SERVICES
$687.50
301567
2/22/2024
1620

HOSPICE OF THE VALLEY
OCT-DEC'23
FY 23/24 CDBG SENIOR ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
$2,846.72
301568
2/22/2024
3611
EE # 531
Reimb: Training 4/22
REGISTRATION: LASERFICHE EMPOWER CONFERENCE
$1,750.00
601606
2/15/2024
2233

HOWELL, ANN MARIE
COT _ECONDEV_0224
GRAPHIC DESIGN SERVICES: CM
$85.00
601653
2/22/2024
2233

HOWELL, ANN MARIE
COT_COMSERV_0224

MILITARY BANNER PROGRAM
$297.50
301583
2/22/2024
100

INFINITY ENERGY
Refund: B23-2272
REFUND: PERMIT B23-2272: BLDG
$147.36
601607
2/15/2024
2564

INLAND FLEET SOLUTIONS INC
6992

VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT REPAIR, STREET MAINTENANC
$933.41
601607
2/15/2024
2564

INLAND FLEET SOLUTIONS INC
6991

VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT REPAIR, STREET MAINTENANC
$837.98
601607
2/15/2024
2564

INLAND FLEET SOLUTIONS INC
6954

VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT REPAIR, STREET MAINTENANC
$735.08
601607
2/15/2024
2564

INLAND FLEET SOLUTIONS INC
6973

VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT REPAIR, STREET MAINTENANC
$820.83
601609
2/15/2024
1719

JACOB'S HOUSE INC
Ben349997

EMPLOYEE CHARITY DONATIONS PAYMENT
$40.00
301584
2/22/2024
100

KIMBERLY BUCKLIN
Refund: B22-4737
REFUND: PERMIT B22-4737: BLDG
$76.00
601610
2/15/2024
1975

KRACH BREE B
200206
PLAQUE/ENGRAVING SVCS: I-15 CONGESTION RELIEF
$179.44
601610
2/15/2024
1975

KRACH BREE B
200209
NAME PLATE: CITY CNL
$43.50
601610
2/15/2024
1975

KRACH BREE B
200175
ENGRAVING SVCS: CITY CNL
$16.31
601610
2/15/2024
1975

KRACH BREE B
200140
BRONZE PLAQUE: MRC: PW
$2,555.63
601654
2/22/2024
1975

KRACH BREE B
200216
PLAQUE ENGRAVING SVCS: CITY CLERK
$81.56
601655
2/22/2024
3375

KUSTOM SIGNALS INC
609440
LIDAR CABLES: TEM SHERIFF
$44.63
301569
2/22/2024
1793

LA JOLLA BOOKING AGENCY
Sttlmnt:02/18/24
STTLMNT: A TRIBUTE TO TIM MCGRAW
$1,756.90
301569
2/22/2024
1793

LA JOLLA BOOKING AGENCY
Sttlmnt: 02/16/24
STTLMNT: SCOTT BRUCE'S TRIBUTE TO ELVIS
$5,871.02
301569
2/22/2024
1793

LA JOLLA BOOKING AGENCY
Sttlmnt:02/17/24
STTLMNT: AMOR PROHIBIDO: SELENA TRIBUTE
$8,101.70
601611
2/15/2024
1930

LDCO INC
3399
FABRICATE & INSTALL SIGNS: PW FACILITIES
$12,498.28
301570
2/22/2024
1014

LEAGUE OF CALIF CITIES SACRAM
2838
MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL: CC
$100.00
301571
2/22/2024
1162

LITELINES INC
19849
OLD TOWN STREETLIGHTS: PW22-16
$25,143.00
301572
2/22/2024
3198

LOOMIS ARMORED US LLC
13428174
ARMORED CAR SVCS: FINANCE
$1,235.35
301527
2/15/2024
3098
EE # 646
Reimb: CSMFO Conf
REIMB: CSMFO CONFERENCE
$902.44
301573
2/22/2024
1924

MARABOTTO JAMES L
02/09/24
PRESENTER: THEATER: TCSD
$5,000.00
601612
2/15/2024
2057

MDG ASSOCIATES INC
18168
DEC ADA LABOR COMPLIANCE SVCS: PW18-16
$543.00
601612
2/15/2024
2057

MDG ASSOCIATES INC
18169
DEC ADA LABOR COMPLIANCE SVCS: PW20-13
$647.50
301528
2/15/2024
1185

MET LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY
Ben349987

DENTAL PAYMENT
$15,270.59
301529
2/15/2024
1354
MICHELLES PLACE CANCER RESOURCE CENTEI FY 23/24 CSF PMT 5 FY 23/24 COMMUNITY SERVICE FUNDING
$7,285.00
301574
2/22/2024
1777

MIDWESTTAPE LLC
504993385

BOOKS ON TAPE
$44.89
301574
2/22/2024
1777

MIDWESTTAPE LLC
504966235

BOOKS ON TAPE
$589.40
601613
2/15/2024
1327

MIKES PRECISION WELDING INC
407895
PROTECTIVE CAGE: MRC: PW
$2,880.00
301575
2/22/2024
1616

MOORE IACOFANO GOLTSMAN INC
0084734
QLMP DIGITAL DASHBOARD SOFTWARE MAINT. (LR21-00
$2,085.00
601614
2/15/2024
1240

MORAMARCO ANTHONY J
2040.101

TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
$637.00
301530
2/15/2024
2032

NATIONAL SAFETY COMPLIANCE INC
96822

DOT-RISK/HR
$548.75
301576
2/22/2024
2188

NETFILE INC
9093
CAMPAIGN E-FILING & ADMIN SYSTEM: CITY CLERK
$9,300.00
601616
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76615
IRRIGATION REPAIRS: VARI LOCATIONS: PW
$298.48
601615
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76616
IRRIGATION REPAIRS: VARI LOCATIONS: PW
$499.26
601617
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76612

IRRIGATION REPAIRS AT VARIOUS MEDIANS
$172.53
601617
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76613

IRRIGATION REPAIRS AT VARIOUS MEDIANS
$172.53
601618
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76614

IRRIGATION REPAIRS AT VARIOUS MEDIANS
$131.67
601617
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76900
IRRIGATION REPAIRS: REDHAWK MEDIAN: PW
$180.80
601616
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76617

IRRIGATION REPAIRS AT VARIOUS SLOPES
$373.43
601618
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76618

IRRIGATION REPAIRS AT VARIOUS SLOPES
$153.27
601617
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76905
PLANTING: YNEZ ROAD MEDIANS
$240.00
601618
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76903
IRRIGATION REPAIRS: RONALD REGAN SPORTS PARK
$148.94
601616
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76904
IRRIGATION REPAIRS: RONALD REGAN SPORTS PARK
$384.69
601615
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76610

IRRIGATION REPAIR & PLANT REPLACEMENT -VARIOUS PA
$435.71
601618
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76611

IRRIGATION REPAIR & PLANT REPLACEMENT -VARIOUS PA
$120.00
601616
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76624
LANDSCAPE SVCS: REDHAWK PARK DOG PEN
$412.68
601615
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76625
IRRIGATION REPAIRS:PHBSP
$601.83
601615
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76626
IRRIGATION REPAIRS: PHBSP
$476.79
601616
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76627
IRRIGATION REPAIRS:PHBSP
$433.27
601617
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76902
IRRIGATION REPAIRS: WOODCREST SLOPE
$227.96
601616
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76901
GARDEN RENOVATIONS: SENIOR CENTER
$325.00
601616
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76619

IRRIGTAION/TREE REPLACEMENT AT VARIOUS PARKS
$302.84
601615
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76620

IRRIGTAION/TREE REPLACEMENT AT VARIOUS PARKS
$471.86
601618
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76621

IRRIGTAION/TREE REPLACEMENT AT VARIOUS PARKS
$120.00
601615
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76691
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SERVICES LEVEL C SLOPES: PV
$62,010.00

Check#
Check Date
Vendor #
Vendor
Invoice
Description
Invoice Net
601615
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76689
LANDSCAPE SVCS: PARKS AND MEDIANS: PW
$56,141.00
601615
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76688
LANDSCAPE SVCS: PARKS AND MEDIANS: PW
$23,159.00
601615
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76693
LANDSCAPE SVCS: PARKS AND MEDIANS: PW
$77,622.00
601615
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76909
REMEDIAL LANDSCAPE SERVICES: ROW TREE PLANTING
$870.00
601617
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76893
IRRIGATION REPAIRS: VARIOUS SLOPES: PW
$225.22
601617
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76894
IRRIGATION REPAIRS: VARIOUS SLOPES: PW
$219.65
601618
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76895
IRRIGATION REPAIRS: VARIOUS SLOPES: PW
$115.49
601616
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76896
IRRIGATION REPAIRS: VARIOUS SLOPES: PW
$333.58
601617
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76897
IRRIGATION REPAIRS: VARIOUS SLOPES: PW
$228.68
601617
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76898
IRRIGATION REPAIRS: VARIOUS SLOPES: PW
$180.80
601616
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76906
IRRIGATION REPAIRS: VAIL RANCH SLOPE
$256.22
601617
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76907
IRRIGATION REPAIRS: VAIL RANCH SLOPE
$185.79
601616
2/15/2024
2578

NIEVES LANDSCAPE INC
76908
IRRIGATION REPAIRS: VAIL RANCH SLOPE
$304.99
301531
2/15/2024
2571

NORMAN A TRAUB & ASSOCIATES LLC
23070.3
WRKPLACE INVESTIGATIONS: HR
$10,440.83
601619
2/15/2024
1819

NPG INC
1122532
CONCRETE WORK: MRC: PW
$68,400.00
301532
2/15/2024
1013

NUTRIEN AG SOLUTIONS INC
53171047
TOOL & EQUIP STREET MAINTENANCE: PW
$97.84
601656
2/22/2024
1511
NV5 INC
369037

MARGARITA RECREATION CENTER
$23,915.66
301577
2/22/2024
1654

OAK GROVE INSTITUTE FOUNDATION
FY 23/24 CSF
FY 23/24 COMMUNITY SERVICE FUNDING
$5,000.00
301578
2/22/2024
3040

OLD TOWN TEMECULA HARLEY DAVIDSON
28694
VEHICLE REPAIR / MAINTENANCE: PD
$1,250.83
301578
2/22/2024
3040

OLD TOWN TEMECULA HARLEY DAVIDSON
28614
VEHICLE REPAIR / MAINTENANCE: PD
$1,549.74
301578
2/22/2024
3040

OLD TOWN TEMECULA HARLEY DAVIDSON
28542
VEHICLE REPAIR / MAINTENANCE: PD
$648.16
301578
2/22/2024
3040

OLD TOWN TEMECULA HARLEY DAVIDSON
28488
VEHICLE REPAIR / MAINTENANCE: PD
$52.97
301578
2/22/2024
3040

OLD TOWN TEMECULA HARLEY DAVIDSON
28436
VEHICLE REPAIR / MAINTENANCE: PD
$496.95
301578
2/22/2024
3040

OLD TOWN TEMECULA HARLEY DAVIDSON
28424
VEHICLE REPAIR / MAINTENANCE: PD
$1,224.25
601620
2/15/2024
2496

OLD TOWN TIRE AND SERVICE INC
74035
VEHICLE MAINTENANCE: FIRE
$48.78
601657
2/22/2024
2496

OLD TOWN TIRE AND SERVICE INC
74133
VEHICLE REPAIR / MAINTENANCE: PD
$87.98
301597
2/22/2024
1135

POSTMASTER-TEMECULA
02/20/24
POSTAGE: CITYWIDE POSTCARD MAILING
$8,166.25
601621
2/15/2024
3271

POWERSPORTS UNLIMITED INC
47114
VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINT: TEM SHERIFF
$259.20
601658
2/22/2024
3271

POWERSPORTS UNLIMITED INC
47162
VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINT: TEM SHERIFF
$270.45
601659
2/22/2024
1721

PRO ACTIVE FIRE DESIGN & CONSULTING
2064
PLAN CHECKING SVCS: FIRE
$2,960.20
301535
2/15/2024
1847

RAND R CONTROLS INC
24900
MISC SUPPLIES: FACILITIES: PW
$1,264.09
301535
2/15/2024
1847

RAND R CONTROLS INC
24901
MISC SUPPLIES: FACILITIES: PW
$574.10
301536
2/15/2024
1103

R C P BLOCK AND BRICK INC
33038686
MISC MASONRY SUPPLIES: PARKS: PW
$529.77
301536
2/15/2024
1103

R C P BLOCK AND BRICK INC
33044435
MISC MASONRY SUPPLIES: PARKS: PW
($32.63)
601622
2/15/2024
1076

RANCHO TEMECULA CAR WASH
JAN'24
CAR WASH SVCS: POLICE
$18.01
601660
2/22/2024
2203

REMOTE SATELLITE SYSTEMS INTL
00126628

PHONE SERVICE FOR EOC
$505.05
301537
2/15/2024
2532

REVZILLA MOTORSPORTS LLC
44540428
UNIFORMS: TEM SHERIFF
$461.21
601623
2/15/2024
1150

RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON
245895
DEC 2023 LEGAL SERVICES
$330.00
601623
2/15/2024
1150

RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON
245897
DEC 2023 LEGAL SERVICES
$3,967.50
601623
2/15/2024
1150

RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON
245916
DEC 2023 LEGAL SERVICES
$3,472.50
601623
2/15/2024
1150

RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON
245917
DEC 2023 LEGAL SERVICES
$3,047.50
601661
2/22/2024
1150

RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON
246357
JAN 2024 LEGAL SERVICES
$15,811.62
601661
2/22/2024
1150

RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON
246365
JAN 2024 LEGAL SERVICES
$26.00
601661
2/22/2024
1150

RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON
246368
JAN 2024 LEGAL SERVICES
$2,250.00
601661
2/22/2024
1150

RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON
246373
JAN 2024 LEGAL SERVICES
$3,210.00
601661
2/22/2024
1150

RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON
246374
JAN 2024 LEGAL SERVICES
$2,250.00
601661
2/22/2024
1150

RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON
246375
JAN 2024 LEGAL SERVICES
$138.00
601661
2/22/2024
1150

RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON
246398
JAN 2024 LEGAL SERVICES
$464.81
301564
2/22/2024
1104

RIVERSIDE CO OF ENVIRONMENTAL
IN0501674
OCT-DEC'23 VECTOR CNTRL SVC: CODE ENF
$3,248.52
301538
2/15/2024
1042

RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS DEPT
SH0000044729
MISC SUPPLIES: TEM SHERIFF
$10,417.35
301538
2/15/2024
1042

RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS DEPT
SH0000044552
MISC EQUIPMENT: TEM SHERIFF
$9,094.77
301592
2/22/2024
2635

RIVERSIDE COUNTY
PE0000001553
EMERGENCY RADIO RENTAL: PD
$1,122.01
301592
2/22/2024
2635

RIVERSIDE COUNTY
PE0000001554A
EMERGENCY RADIO RENTAL: CODE ENF
$513.10
301592
2/22/2024
2635

RIVERSIDE COUNTY
PE0000001554B
EMERGENCY RADIO RENTAL: EOC
$102.62
601625
2/15/2024
1552

SANBORN GWYNETH A CO TEMECULA MUSIC
PERF: 02/03/24
AGREEMENT: COUNTRY LIVE @ THE MERC
$753.75
601626
2/15/2024
2008

SARNOWSKI SHAWNA PRESTON
01192024
PHOTOGRAPHY SVCS: YOUTH MUSICAL THEATER PROGRP
$360.00
601662
2/22/2024
2008

SARNOWSKI SHAWNA PRESTON
02102024
MUSEUM/ACE PHOTOGRAPHY SVCS: TCSD
$275.00
601662
2/22/2024
2008

SARNOWSKI SHAWNA PRESTON
0102082024

PHOTOGRAPHY SERVICES FOR SPECIAL EVENTS
$275.00
601662
2/22/2024
2008

SARNOWSKI SHAWNA PRESTON
0302082024
PHOTO/VIDEO SVCS: REDI COMMISSION: CITY CLERK
$300.00
601662
2/22/2024
2008

SARNOWSKI SHAWNA PRESTON
0202082024

MPSC/HUMAN SERVICES PHOTOGRAPHY
$275.00
301539
2/15/2024
2360

SB&O INC
124018
ENGINEERING & LAND SURVEY SVCS: CIP: PW
$872.00
601663
2/22/2024
2266
EE#529
02/01/24
REIMB:PTS000MMISSION
$67.50
601627
2/15/2024
1509

SHERRY BERRY MUSIC
PERF: 02/O1/24
TICKET SERVICES AGREEMENT: GREAT OAKS JAZZ
$1,907.50
601628
2/15/2024
2425

SIEMENS MOBILITY INC, YUNEX LLC
5610001261
STREET LIGHT POLE REPLACE: PW
$2,096.00
601629
2/15/2024
1061

SMART & FINAL INC
02/07/24
MISC SUPPLIES: MPSC: TCSD
$256.98
301585
2/22/2024
100

SOLAR TECH ENERGY SYSTEMS INC
REFUND: B23-0049
REFUND: B23-0049 PERMIT
$64.90
601630
2/15/2024
1055

SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTROL INC
0291493
ROUTINE PEST CONTROL: FACILITIES: PW
$59.00
601664
2/22/2024
1055

SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTROL INC
0291964
PEST CONTROL SERVICES: FIRE STATIONS
$68.00
601664
2/22/2024
1055

SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTROL INC
0291662
PEST CONTROL SERVICES: FIRE STATIONS
$74.00
301540
2/15/2024
1704

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE COMPAP
45949240201
FEB GEN USAGE: 0141,0839,0978,0979
$343.90
601665
2/22/2024
3356

SOUTHSTAR ENGINEERING AND CONSULTINC
COT-1-15CR-01
I-15 CONGESTION RELIEF
$1,614.00
301593
2/22/2024
1028

STADIUM PIZZA INC
02/07/24
RFRSHMNTS: WORKFORCE DEV: TCSD
$118.90
301593
2/22/2024
1028

STADIUM PIZZA INC
02/14/24
RFRSHMNTS: CRC: TCSD
$64.82
301594
2/22/2024
1431

STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY
Ben349989

BASIC LIFE INSURANCE PAYMENT
$12,018.08
601666
2/22/2024
1263

STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUST
712851d
JAN FINGERPRINTING SVCS: PD
$4,607.00
601666
2/22/2024
1263

STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUST
716953
JAN BLOOD & ALCOHOL ANALYSIS: PD
$560.00

Check#
Check Date
Vendor # Vendor
Invoice
Description
Invoice Net
601666
2/22/2024
1263 STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OFJUST
706256-c
FINGERPRINTING SERVICES: POLICE
$1,978.00
601666
2/22/2024
1263 STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OFJUST
700085-a
FINGERPRINTING SERVICES: TCSD
$520.00
601666
2/22/2024
1263 STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OFJUST
700085-c
FINGERPRINTING SERVICES: CONTRACT CLASSES: TCSD
$147.00
601666
2/22/2024
1263 STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUST
700085-d
FINGERPRINTING SERVICES: TEM SHERIFF
$2,798.00
601666
2/22/2024
1263 STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUST
700085
FINGERPRINTING SERVICES: HR
$49.00
301586
2/22/2024
100 SUNPOWER CORP
REFUND: B23-0113
REFUND: BLDG PERMIT 23-0113
$147.36
301587
2/22/2024
100 SUNPOWER CORPORATION
REFUND: B23-3643
REFUND: B23-3643 PERMIT
$147.36
301588
2/22/2024
100 SUNRUN INSTALLATION SERVICES
REFUND: SUNRUN BLDG
REFUND: BLDG PERMITS
$1,147.68
301589
2/22/2024
100 SUNRUN INSTALLATION SERVICES
REF: PERMIT SUNRUN
REFUND: PERMIT B23-2926/B23-1317/B23-4298/823-14:
$589.44
301541
2/15/2024
2059 SUPERIOR READY MIX LP
402940
CONCRETE MATERIALS: STREET MAINTENANCE: PW
$5,295.87
301542
2/15/2024
2261 T MOBILE USA INC
9558735955
GPS LOCATE: TEM SHERIFF
$75.00
301595
2/22/2024
2261 T MOBILE USA INC
9559178573
TIMING ADVANCE: TEM SHERIFF
$25.00
601631
2/15/2024
1113 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911
Ben349993

UNION MEMBERSHIP DUES PAYMENT
$4,897.00
601667
2/22/2024
2372 TELECOM LAW FIRM PC
16728
WIRELESS PLANNING SUPPORT SVCS: COMM DEV
$60.60
601668
2/22/2024
2372 TELECOM LAW FIRM PC
16574
WIRELESS PLANNING SUPPORT SVCS: COMM DEV
$678.00
301543
2/15/2024
3614 TEMECULA VALLEY POSSE
FY 23/24 CSF
FY 23/24 COMMUNITY SERVICE FUNDING
$5,000.00
601624
2/15/2024
1265 TEMECULA VALLEY SECURITY CENTER
54639
LOCKSMITH SERVICES: MRC & TVE2: PW
$5,267.50
601624
2/15/2024
1265 TEMECULA VALLEY SECURITY CENTER
54702
LOCKSMITH SERVICES: MRC & TVE2: PW
$1,054.38
601624
2/15/2024
1265 TEMECULA VALLEY SECURITY CENTER
54809
LOCKSMITH SERVICES: FACILITY MAINTENANCE
$71.15
601624
2/15/2024
1265 TEMECULA VALLEY SECURITY CENTER
54891
LOCKSMITH SERVICES: FACILITY MAINTENANCE
$30.77
601624
2/15/2024
1265 TEMECULA VALLEY SECURITY CENTER
54888
LOCKSMITH SERVICES: FACILITY MAINTENANCE
$63.21
301544
2/15/2024
1234 TEMECULA WINNELSON COMPANY
301883 01
PLUMBING SUPPLIES: PW FACILITIES
$3,302.17
301544
2/15/2024
1234 TEMECULA WINNELSON COMPANY
30188001
PLUMBING SUPPLIES: FACILITIES: PW
$550.36
301544
2/15/2024
1234 TEMECULA WINNELSON COMPANY
302655 01
PLUMBING SUPPLIES: PARKS: PW
$140.42
301590
2/22/2024
100 TEMECULA YOUTH BASEBALL
65315812
REFUND: DEPOSIT
$400.00
601632
2/15/2024
1063 TIMMY D PRODUCTIONS INC
248002

CULTURE DAYS AND ART NIGHTS MUSIC
$425.00
601633
2/15/2024
1152 TOP LINE INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY LLC
465746
MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES: FACILITIES: PW
$284.76
601669
2/22/2024
2410 EE # 534
Reimb: Team Pace 2/7
REIMBURSEMENT: TEAM PACE EVENT
$250.00
601670
2/22/2024
2413 TOWNSEND PUBLIC AFFAIRS INC
21086
CONSULTING/GRANT WRITING SVCS: CITY CLERK
$6,000.00
601671
2/22/2024
2375 TR DESIGN GROUP INC
4813
ARCHITECTURAL SVCS, CIP-PW, PW19-13
$50,551.20
601672
2/22/2024
2148 TRAUMA INTERVENTION PROGRAMS OF SW 12324-T
B
SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT: TRAUMA INTERVENTION PR(
$5,000.00
301545
2/15/2024
2508 TURBOSCAPE INC
13990
MISC PLAYGROUND WORK AT VARIOUS PARKS: PW
$22,560.00
301596
2/22/2024
1350 U S BANK
14105535
ACCOUNT ANALYSIS: FINANCE
$875.00
16083
2/13/2024
1350 U S BANK
S51 Remit 02/16/24
$4,340,426.19
301591
2/22/2024
100 UNDERLINE ENERGY
REFUND: B23-3610
REFUND: BLDG PERMIT B23-3610
$121.60
601634
2/15/2024
2142 URBANE CAFE OPERATIONS LLC
110680
TVE2 ORDERS FOR WORKSHOPS/MEETINGS
$515.78
301598
2/22/2024
1845 VERIZON WIRELESS
9956347389
01/11-02/10TASK FORCE TABLETS: POLICE
$430.12
601635
2/15/2024
3473 VICTOR STANLEY LLC
SI54449
BIKE BENCHES: CRC: PW
$2,106.60
301534
2/15/2024
100 VICTORIA GONZALEZ
65063757
REFUND: SENIOR EXCURSION
$15.00
601673
2/22/2024
1498 VISION ONE, INC.

INV-75321
TICKETING SERVICES: THEATER: TCSD
$2,428.00
601636
2/15/2024
2183 WALLACE & ASSOC CONSULTING INC
21648
CONSTRUCTION MGMT SVCS: PW19-07
$9,770.00
601636
2/15/2024
2183 WALLACE & ASSOC CONSULTING INC
18693
CONSTRUCTION MGMT SVCS: PW19-07
$16,675.00
601636
2/15/2024
2183 WALLACE & ASSOC CONSULTING INC
21652
CONSTRUCTION MGMT SVCS: PW19-07
$3,618.00
601636
2/15/2024
2183 WALLACE & ASSOC CONSULTING INC
21651
CONSTRUCTION MGMT SVCS: PW19-07
$4,598.00
601636
2/15/2024
2183 WALLACE & ASSOC CONSULTING INC
21649
CONSTRUCTION MGMT SVCS: PW19-07
$8,748.00
601636
2/15/2024
2183 WALLACE & ASSOC CONSULTING INC
21647
CONSTRUCTION MGMT SVCS: PW19-07
$14,092.00
301546
2/15/2024
1439 WALMART
02/07/24
MISC SUPPKUES: RIBBON CUTTING EVENT: TCSD
$158.34
301599
2/22/2024
1439 WALMART
02/13/24
MISC SUPPLIES: CRC: TCSD
$68.77
301599
2/22/2024
1439 WALMART
02/07/24 a
MISC SUPPLIES: CRC: TCSD
$70.00
301599
2/22/2024
1439 WALMART
02/07/24 b
MISC SUPPLIES: CRC: TCSD
$206.67
301599
2/22/2024
1439 WALMART
02/14/24
MISC SUPPLIES/EQUIP: WORKFORCE DEV: TCSD
$145.60
301600
2/22/2024
1102 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY INC
82210768
JANITORIAL SUPPLIES: PARKS: PW
$190.53
301600
2/22/2024
1102 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY INC
82272031
JANITORIAL SVCS FACILITY MAINT: PW
$2,788.49
301600
2/22/2024
1102 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY INC
82262877
JANITORIAL SVCS FACILITY MAINT: PW
$1,117.67
301601
2/22/2024
2230 WEBB MUNICIPAL FINANCE LLC
ARIV0000106
ENGINEERING & CFD: TAX ADMIN: TCSD SVC LEVELS
$10,285.04
301547
2/15/2024
1686 WEST COAST PERFORMING ARTS PRESENTER'
PERF: 02/03/24
AGREEMENT: THE QUEEN CONCERT 2/3/24
$15,057.10
301547
2/15/2024
1686 WEST COAST PERFORMING ARTS PRESENTER:

PERF: 02/02/24
AGREEMENT: FLEETWOOD MAC CONCERT
$12,044.80
301547
2/15/2024
1686 WEST COAST PERFORMING ARTS PRESENTER'
PERF: 02/04/24
AGREEMENT: ABBA CONCERT 2/4/24
$13,225.81
601608
2/15/2024
1757 WEST SAFETY SERVICES, INC.
6082607
DEC ENTERPRISES 911 SVC: INFO TECH
$322.50
601674
2/22/2024
1782 WESTERN AV
18549
AV EQUIP:OLD TOWN & VARIOUS FACILITIES-CIP IT20-01
$23,878.05
301602
2/22/2024
2322 WEX BANK
95002336
01/07-02/06 FUEL USAGE: POLICE
$1,709.92
301548
2/15/2024
3612 WILDLANDS SLR HOLDINGS I LLC
SLRMB-433
DIAZ ROAD EXPANSION- NO. 119-20
$18,450.00
301603
2/22/2024
1223 ZOLL MEDICAL CORPORATION GPO
3909756
PARAMEDIC PROGRAM SUPPLIES: MEDIC
$1,644.95
Total
$7,684,564.69

Item No. 4

CITY OF TEMECULA

AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager / City Council
FROM: Isaac Garibay, Director of Human Resources and Risk Management DATE: March 12, 2024
SUBJECT: Approve Agreement with Alliant Insurance Services, Inc. for Insurance Brokerage Services
PREPARED BY: Nicole Flores, Risk Manager
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve a five-year agreement with Alliant Insurance Services, Inc. for insurance brokerage services in an amount not to exceed $292,000 for the total term of the agreement.

BACKGROUND: On January 10, 2024 the City issued a termination letter to Arthur J.

Gallagher & Risk Management Services, LLC., terminating the agreement for insurance brokerage services. On March 12, 2024, the City proposes to go into agreement with Alliant Insurance Services, Inc. for a five-year term for insurance brokerage services.

FISCAL IMPACT: The cost to the City will be an additional $12,000 over Arthur J.

Gallagher & Risk Management Services, LLC., for the insurance brokerage services for a term of five years, July 1, 2024, to June 30, 2029.

ATTACHMENT: Broker Fee Agreement

2-18-24

AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACTOR SERVICES BETWEEN
CITY OF TEMECULA AND ALLIANT INSURANCE SERVICES, INC.

BROKER SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT is made and effective as of March 12, 2024, between the City of Temecula , a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City"), and Alliant Insurance Services, Inc., a Corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "Contractor"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows:

1. TERM
This Agreement shall commence on March 12, 2024 and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than June 30, 2029, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement.

2. SERVICES
Contractor shall perform the services and tasks described and set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. Contractor shall complete the tasks according to the schedule of performance which is also set forth in Exhibit A.

3. PERFORMANCE
a. Contractor shall faithfully and competently exercise the ordinary skill and competence of members of their profession. Contractor shall employ all generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Contractor hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement.
b. City will cooperate with Contractor in the performance of Contractor's duties by providing complete and accurate information as to City's loss experience, risk exposures, and any other pertinent information that Contractor requests. City shall promptly review coverage documents concerning the programs delivered by Contractor for consistency with City's specifications. In addition, City shall have the responsibility to keep record of and immediately report significant changes in exposures, loss -related data, and/or any other material changes to Contractor. This reporting must be memorialized in writing and delivered to Contractor in accordance with the notice provisions below. City instructs Contractor to process information provided hereunder for the purpose of performing the services and tasks described and set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and in accordance with Exhibit C attached hereto.

2-18-24

4. PAYMENT
a. The City agrees to pay Contractor annually to be invoiced July 1 of each year, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit B, other than the payment rates and schedule of payment, are null and void. This amount shall not exceed Two Hundred Ninety -Two Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($292,000.00) for for the total term of the agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. b. Contractor shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement which are in addition to those set forth herein, unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in writing by the City Manager . Contractor shall be compensated for any additional services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by City Manager and Contractor at the time City's written authorization is given to Contractor for the performance of said services.

C. Contractor will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all non -disputed fees.

If the City disputes any of Contractor's fees, it shall give written notice to Contractor within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. For all reimbursements authorized by this Agreement, Contractor shall provide receipts on all reimbursable expenses in excess of fifty dollars ($50) in such form as approved by the Director of Finance.

5. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE a. The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the Contractor at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Contractor shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement.
b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to Contractor the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Contractor will submit an invoice to the City, pursuant to Section entitled "PAYMENT" herein.

6. DEFAULT OF CONTRACTOR
a. The Contractor's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Contractor is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Contractor for any work performed after the date of default and can

2- l 8-24
terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Contractor. If such failure by the Contractor to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Contractor's control, and without fault or negligence of the Contractor, it shall not be considered a default.
b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Contractor with written notice of the default. The Contractor shall have ten (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Contractor fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement.

7. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS
a. Contractor shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information related to the scope of work required by City that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement. Contractor shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible. Subject to appropriate terms of confidentiality and non -disclosure, Contractor shall provide free access to the representatives of City or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records, shall give City the right to examine and audit said books and records, shall permit City to make transcripts there from as necessary, and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment. b. Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer files containing data generated for the work, surveys, notes, and other documents prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Contractor. With respect to computer files containing data generated for the work, Contractor shall make available to the City, upon reasonable written request by the City, the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring and printing computer files.

B. INDEMNIFICATION
The Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City of 'Temecula, Temecula Community Services District, and/or the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all third -party claims, demands, losses, reasonable defense costs or expenses, including reasonable attorney fees and expert witness fees, or liability of any kind or nature which the City of Temecula, Temecula Community Services District, and/or

2-18-24
the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, its officers, agents, employees or volunteers may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property , to the extent caused by Contractor's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions arising out of or in any way related to the performance or non-performance of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the negligence of the City of Temecula, Temecula Community Services District, and/or the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency.

9. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property, which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, or employees.
a. Minimum Scope of Insurance.
i. Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. If the Contractor has no employees while performing under this Agreement, worker's compensation insurance is not required, but Contractor shall execute a declaration that it has no employees.
i. Professional Liability Insurance shall be written on a policy form providing professional liability for the Contractor's profession. b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain limits no less than:
i. General Liability: One Million ($1,000,000) per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.
ii. Automobile Liability: One Million ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
iii. Worker's Compensation as required by the State of California; Employer's Liability: One million dollars ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury or disease.
iv. Professional Liability Coverage: One million ($1,000,000) per claim and in aggregate.
c. Deductibles and Self -Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self -insured retentions will be declared and approved by the Risk Manager of the City of Temecula.
d. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
1) The City of Temecula, the Temecula Community Services District, the Successor Agency to the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, their officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as additional insured's, as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the 4 2-18-24
Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City of Temecula, the Temecula Community Services District, the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, their officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
2) For any claims related to this project, the Contractor's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City of Temecula, the Temecula Community Services District, the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, their officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self -insured maintained by the City of Temecula, Temecula Community Services District, and/or Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it.
3) Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City of Temecula, the Temecula Community Services District, and the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, their officers, officials, employees or volunteers. 4) The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability.
5) Each insurance policy required by this agreement shall be endorsed to state in substantial conformance to the following: If the policy will be canceled before the expiration date the insurer will notify in writing to the City of such cancellation not less than thirty (30) days' prior to the cancellation effective date. 6) If insurance coverage is canceled or, reduced in coverage or in limits the Contractor shall within ten (10) business days of notice from insurer phone, fax, and/or notify the City via certified mail, return receipt requested of the changes to or cancellation of the policy.
a. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of A-:VII or better, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. Self insurance shall not be considered to comply with these insurance requirements.
b. Verification of Coverage. Contractor shall furnish the City with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. The Contractor will upon request provide complete certificates, endorsements, and coverage documentation as required by these specifications.

10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
a. Contractor is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on

2-18-24
behalf of Contractor shall at all times be under Contractor's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers shall have control over the conduct of Contractor or any of Contractor's officers, employees, or agents except as set forth in this Agreement. Contractor shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. Contractor shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner. b. No employee benefits shall be available to Contractor in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Contractor as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Contractor for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Contractor for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder.

11. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES
The Contractor shall keep itself informed of all local, State and Federal ordinances, laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Contractor shall at all times observe and comply with all such ordinances, laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Contractor to comply with this section.

12. RELEASE OF INFORMATION
a. Except for:
1) Information that is or becomes public other than as a result of a breach of this Agreement by Contractor;
2) Information that is lawfully known by Contractor without any obligation of confidentiality or other restriction on use or disclosure, prior to the disclosure of the information by the City; 3) Information that becomes available to Contractor from a third party whom, to Contractor's knowledge, is not prohibited from transmitting such information by a contractual, legal, or fiduciary obligation to the City; and
4) Information that is independently developed by the Receiving Party or any of its Representatives without use of Confidential Information;
all information gained by Contractor in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Contractor without City's prior written authorization. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Contractor may also disclose City's information to insurers, underwriters, and other recognized intermediaries and administrators solely as needed to market and service City's insurance programs, or portions thereof; provided, however, that Contractor shall first inform such recipients of

2-18-24
the confidential nature of the information. Contractor, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not without written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement. Response to a subpoena or court order or otherwise by law or regulation, shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Contractor, if permitted by law, gives City notice of such court order or subpoena. b. Contractor shall, if permitted by law, promptly notify City should Contractor, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed there under.

City retains the right, but has no obligation, to be present at any deposition, hearing or similar proceeding concerning the work performed under this Agreement. Contractor agrees to cooperate fully with City and to provide City with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Contractor concerning the work performed under this Agreement. However, City's right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response.

13. NOTICES
Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (i) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice. Notice shall be effective upon delivery to the addresses specified below or on the third business day following deposit with the document delivery service or United States Mail as provided above.

Mailing Address: City of Temecula
Attn: Risk Management
41000 Main Street
Temecula, CA 92590
To Contractor: Alliant Insurance Services, Inc.

Attn: Conor Boughey
560 Mission Street, 6th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
with a copy to:

Alliant Insurance Services, Inc.

Attn: Chief Legal Officer
701 B Street, 6th Floor
San Diego, CA 92101

2-18-24

14. ASSIGNMENT
The Contractor shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City, except that prior written consent will not be required for Contractor to assign this Agreement to its successor in the event of a merger, sale of substantially all of Contractor's assets, or similar event.. Upon termination of this Agreement, Contractor's sole compensation shall be payment for actual services performed up to, and including, the date of termination or as may be otherwise agreed to in writing between the City Council and the Contractor.

15. LICENSES
At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement.

16. GOVERNING LAW
The City and Contractor understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with geographic jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. In the event such litigation is filed by one party against the other to enforce its rights under this Agreement, the prevailing party, as determined by the Court's judgment, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and litigation expenses for the relief granted.

17. PROHIBITED INTEREST
No officer, or employee of the City of Temecula that has participated in the development of this agreement or its approval shall have any financial interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement, the proceeds thereof, the Contractor, or Contractor's sub- contractors for this project, during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter. The Contractor hereby warrants and represents to the City that no officer or employee of the City of Temecula that has participated in the development of this agreement or its approval has any interest, whether contractual, non -contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction, the proceeds thereof, or in the business of the Contractor or Contractor's sub -contractors on this project. Contractor further agrees to notify the City in the event any such interest is discovered whether or not such interest is prohibited by law or this Agreement.

18. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are merged

2-18-24
into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material.

19. EXHIBITS. The following exhibits are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this provision as though set forth in full:

Exhibit A Scope of Services
Exhibit B Payment Rates and Schedules
Exhibit C Data Processing Addendum
Exhibit D Details of Data Processing

20. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT
The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Contractor warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Contractor and has the authority to bind Contractor to the performance of its obligations hereunder. The City Manager is authorized to enter into an amendment on behalf of the City to make the following non -substantive modifications to the agreement:
(a) name changes; (b) extension of time; (c) non -monetary changes in scope of work; (d) agreement termination.

2-18-24
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written.

CITY OF TEMECULA
By:

James Stewart, Mayor
ATTEST:

By:

Randi Johl, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By:

Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
ALLIANT INSURANCE SERVICES, INC.

By:

ConoranioFVice President
By:

Daniel Howell, Senior Executive Vice
President, Managing Director

CONTRACTOR
Alliant Insurance Services, Inc.

Attn: Conor Boughey and General Counsel
701 B Street, 6`h Floor
San Diego, CA 92101
[email protected]
415-744-4889
IU:

2-18-24
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written.

CITY OF TEMECULA
X
James Stewart, Mayor
ATTEST:

By
Randi Johl, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

IN
ALLIANT INSURANCE SERVICES, INC.

By:

ConorB 15for Vice President
By:

Daniel Howell, Senior Executive Vice
President, Managing Director
Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONTRACTOR
Alliant Insurance Services, Inc.

Attn: Conor Boughey and General Counsel
701 B Street, 61h Floor
San Diego, CA 92101
[email protected]
415-744-4889
IN

2-18-24

EXHIBIT A
Tasks to be Performed
The specific elements (scope of work) of this service include:

ALLIANT agrees to provide SERVICES for the following PROGRAMS of CLIENT:

1. Property

2. Difference in Conditions;

3. Drone Aviation

4. Workers' Compensation

5. Auto Physical Damage

6. Crime

7. Cyber

8. General Liability

9. Pollution

10.Terrorism

11. Volunteer Accident

SERVICES
Alliant shall perform the following services for the PROGRAMS identified above in this Exhibit ("SERVICES"):

1. Develop and recommend insurance and other risk financing or loss funding PROGRAMS, techniques, and methods.

2. Assist CITY in developing underwriting information. Structure offerings to insurers and secure, when reasonably available, a PROGRAM as desired by CITY with financially acceptable insurance companies, or other pooling programs providing the balance of coverage scope, cost, and services selected by the CITY.

3. Negotiate and review insurance wording for PROGRAM contracts to meet the specific needs of CITY.

4. Review marketing plan with CITY prior to approaching insurers on any PROGRAM.

5. Review insurance policies, binders, certificates, and other documents related to the PROGRAM for accuracy and obtain revisions in such documents when needed.

6. Monitor the PROGRAM to assure its continuing balance of coverage scope, cost, service, and stability.

7. Prepare written reports to CITY management to include:
11 2-18-24
A. Reports as needed of pending rate, coverage, or renewal problems including significant changes in the financial status of major insurers, reinsurers, and other entities providing services for PROGRAM.

At least ninety (90) days prior to PROGRAM anniversary, prepare a written report stating anticipated renewal terms and conditions, and other indications of market conditions, trends, and anticipated changes, B Not more than ninety (90) days after renewal, deliver a comprehensive annual summary report outlining the PROGRAM for use in the CITY'S annual report. Such report shall contain the following information:
1) Recapitulation of PROGRAMS cost for current and
preceding years.
2) Summary of coverages and other PROGRAM terms
and conditions.

8. Provide additional broker services as agreed upon by the PARTIES.

9. ALLIANT'S goal is to procure insurance for CITY with underwriters possessing the financial strength to perform. To that end, ALLIANT regularly reviews publicly available information concerning an underwriter's financial condition. ALLIANT does not, however, guarantee the solvency of any underwriters with which insurance or reinsurance is placed and CITY recognizes and agrees that ALLIANT maintains no responsibility for any loss or damage occasioned by reason of the financial failure or insolvency of any insurer. ALLIANT encourages CITY to review the publicly available information collected by ALLIANT to enable CITY to make the ultimate decision of accepting or rejecting a particular underwriter.

10. Deliver binders or other evidences of insurance after the placement of any insurance under the PROGRAM to be effective until such time as the policy or policies for the placement are received by CITY from the insurance carriers. Such binders shall be signed by an authorized agent or employee of the insurance carrier.

11. ALLIANT shall use best efforts to secure a correct policy or policies of any insurance under the PROGRAM.

12. ALLIANT shall not be responsible for the failure of CITY to make premium payments.

For additional compensation, CLIENT may obtain SERVICES from ALLIANT for programs not listed in this Addendum A. The terms, including without limitation compensation, for ALLIANT's provision of SERVICES for additional programs must be mutually agreed to in writing by the PARTIES.
12 2-18-24
Team Coordinator
* Conor Boughey
Account Manager
* Thomas Joyce
Marketing and Risk Management Specialists
Conor Boughey
Thomas Joyce
Additional staff member to
be named later
Claims Services:

Rachel Wrightson
*Denotes KEY PERSONNEL
13 2-18-24

EXHIBIT B
Payment Rates and Schedule
Cost for services shall be as per Contractor's proposal attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full but in no event shall the total cost of services exceed $292,000.00 for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in the Payment section of this Agreement.

Year
Fee
January 10, 2024 to June 30, 2025
$
54,000
July 1, 2025 to June 30, 2026
$
56,000
July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2027
$
58,500
July 1, 2027 to June 30, 2028
$
60,500
July 1, 2028 to June 30, 2029
$
63,000

DISCLOSURES
A. Surplus Lines Fees and Taxes. In certain circumstances, placement of insurance services made by Alliant Insurance Services, Inc. ("Alliant") on behalf of a client, with the prior approval of that client, may require the payment of surplus lines assessments, taxes, and/or fees to state regulators, boards, and associations. Such assessments, taxes,
and/or fees will be charged to the client and identified separately on invoices covering these placements. The
client shall be responsible for all such assessments, taxes, and fees, whether or not separately invoiced. Alliant shall not be responsible for the payment of any such fees, taxes, or assessments, except to the extent such fees, taxes or assessments have already been collected from the client.

B. Third Party Brokers. Alliant may determine from time to time that it is necessary or appropriate to utilize the services of third party brokers (such as surplus lines
brokers, underwriting managers, London market brokers,
and reinsurance brokers) to assist in marketing the
insurance programs of a client. These third party brokers may be affiliates of Alliant (e.g., other companies of Alliant 14 2-18-24
that provide services other than those included within the scope of services covered in this proposal), or may be
unrelated third party brokers. Compensation to such third party brokers will not be part of Alliant's fee.

C. Indirect Income. "INDIRECT INCOME" means insurance
carrier contingency arrangements. Alliant will accept these compensation incentives from insurers, if any, including contingent commissions, market service agreements
(MSA), volume -based commission incentives and rebates
on business placed on behalf of a client. Alliant producers who solicit, negotiate, or place insurance products, or services for clients, do not negotiate indirect income
agreements with the carriers, nor do they receive any
portion of the indirect income paid to Alliant. Nonetheless, the client may opt -out of having its premiums included in the calculation of indirect income by accessing the "opt -out" form from the link on Alliant's website:
h ftp://alliantinsurance.com/Legal-
Notices/Pages/Disclosure- Policy.aspx. The "opt out"
provision applies only to those accounts served directly by Alliant as a retail agent or broker. It does not apply to account placements for which Alliant's role is that of a wholesaler, MGA, or program administrator working with
non-Alliant brokers who represent the client. Indirect
Income, if any, is determined by insurance carriers, and if the client does not opt- out, it remains the carriers'
exclusive decision to include or exclude certain premiums in any calculation. The availability of information regarding the make-up of any indirect income payment is at the
carrier's discretion.

D. Alliant Specialty Insurance Services (ASIS). In addition to the compensation that Alliant receives for providing services to a client, its related entity, Alliant Specialty Insurance Services (ASIS) and its underwriting operations, Alliant Underwriting Services (AUS), may receive
compensation from Alliant and/or carriers for providing underwriting services. The financial impact of the
compensation received by ASIS is a cost included in the premium. Compensation received by ASIS will be
disclosed in writing to a client. Alliant and ASIS maintain an arm's length relationship. While Alliant represents a client as an individual entity, ASIS independently administers its program as a whole and not on behalf of any particular
member.
15 2-18-24

EXHIBIT C
Data Processing Addendum
As used in this Data Processing Addendum (the "Addendum" or "DPA"), the City of Temecula shall be referred to as "Customer" and Alliant Insurance Services, Inc. shall be referred to as "Alliant' or "Service Provider." This Addendum reflects the Parties' agreement with regard to Service Provider's Processing of Personal Data (defined below) in connection with providing Services described in the Agreement. In the event of a conflict, the terms and conditions of this Addendum will prevail. Capitalized terms shall have the meaning given them in the Agreement, in this DPA, and in the Data Protection Laws, as applicable.

Customer and Service Provider agree as follows:

1. DEFINITIONS. The following terms, including any derivatives thereof, will have the meanings set forth below.

1.1. "Data Protection Laws" means any laws that apply to the Processing of data by Service Provider under the Agreement, including but not limited to the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020.

1.2. "Data Subject" means any living identified or identifiable natural person to which Personal Data relates or identifies.

1.3. "Data Subject Request" means a request to access, correct, amend, transfer, rectify, restrict, limit use, opt out of sale or sharing or other processing, or delete a Data Subject's Personal Data consistent with that person's rights under Data Protection Laws.

1.4. "De -Identified Data" means information that cannot reasonably be used to Infer information about, or otherwise be linked to, a particular consumer, provided that the business that possesses the information:

1.4.1. Takes reasonable measures to ensure that the information cannot be associated with a Data Subject or household;

1.4.2. Publicly commits to maintain and use the information in deidentified form and not to attempt to reidentify the information, except that the business may attempt to reidentify the information solely for the purpose of determining whether its deidentification processes satisfy the requirements of this definition; and
16 2-18-24

1.4.3. Contractually obligates any recipients of the information to comply with all of the requirements of this definition.

1.5. "Personal Data," "Personal Information," means Customer information Processed by Service Provider under the Agreement that is linked, reasonably linkable, or relates to an identified or identifiable natural person. Both Personal Data and Personal Information are referred to in this Addendum as "Personal Data."

1.6. "Process" or "Processing" means any operation or set of operations performed on Personal Data, whether or not by automated means, such as collection, recording, organization, structuring, storage, adaptation or alteration, modification, retrieval, consultation, use, disclosure by transmission, dissemination or otherwise making available, sale, analysis, alignment or combination, restriction, erasure or destruction.

1.7. "Sell" has the meaning as set forth in the Data Protection Laws.

1.8. "Service Provider" means Alliant Insurance Services, Inc., including its affiliates and subsidiaries.

1.9. "Services" will have the same meaning provided under the Agreement.

1.10. "Share" has the meaning as set forth in the Data Protection Laws.

1.11. "Subprocessorit means a subcontractor engaged by Service Provider or its affiliates to Process Customer Personal Data as part of the performance of the Services.

2. PROCESSING OF PERSONAL DATA

2.1. Processing of Personal Data. Service Provider will only Process (including but not limited to Sale, Sharing, or Disclosure) Customer Personal Data for the purposes of providing the Services specified in the Agreement.

2.1.1. Service Provider will not Sell or Share Customer Personal Data, nor will it retain, use, or disclose Customer Personal Data for any purpose other than for the specific business purpose of performing the Services specified in the Agreement. Service Provider will not Process Customer Personal Data outside the direct business relationship between Customer and Service Provider, including retaining, using, or disclosing Customer Personal Data for a commercial purpose other than providing the Services specified in the Agreement or as required by law.

2.1.2. The details of the Processing of Personal Data pursuant to the Agreement are set forth in Exhibit D to the Agreement.
17 2-18-24

2.1.3. Service Provider shall not combine Customer Personal Data received from Customer with any other information Service Provider receives from or on behalf of another person or business or which it collects from its own interactions with Data Subjects.

2.1.4. Service Provider shall Process Personal Data under the Agreement in compliance with Data Protection Laws, including providing the same level of privacy protection required by Data Protection Laws. Service Provider will notify Customer if Service Provider determines it or its Subprocessor(s) cannot meet its obligations under the Data Protection Laws, in which case Customer may, upon thirty (30) days' notice, take reasonable and appropriate steps to stop and remediate unauthorized Processing of Personal Data.

2.2. Data Subject Requests. Service Provider shall inform Customer if it receives a request from a Data Subject to exercise their rights under Data Protection Laws. Service Provider will provide such assistance, including taking any appropriate technical and organizational measures, as Customer requests to help Customer fulfill its obligations under Data Protection Laws to respond to Data Subject Requests.

2.3. Disclosure. Service Provider shall inform its personnel engaged in the Processing of Customer Personal Data of the confidential nature of the Customer Personal Data and ensure that they are subject to binding confidentiality obligations.

2.4. Confidentiality. Service Provider will ensure that all employees are subject to binding confidentiality obligations.

2.5. De -identified Data. Service Provider shall be responsible for its compliance with all laws regarding data that cannot reasonably identify, be related to, describe, be capable of being associated with or be linked directly or indirectly to a Data Subject.

2.5.1. To the extent Service Provider Processes De -Identified Data under the Agreement, Service Provider:

2.5.1.1. Will not attempt to associate De -Identified Data with an individual;

2.5.1.2. Will not attempt to re -identify De -Identified Data;

2.5.1.3. Will maintain and use De -Identified Data only in a de -identified fashion; and
18 2-18-24

2.5.1.4. Will not use De -Identified Data to infer information about, or otherwise link to, an identified or identifiable individual or a device linked to such an individual.

3. AUDITS. Customer may audit Service Provider's compliance with its obligations under this DPA and Data Protection Laws, including but not limited to ongoing manual reviews, automated scans, regular assessments, audits, or other technical and operational testing at least once every 12 months.

4. SECURITY MEASURES. Service Provider shall, in relation to the Customer Personal Data, implement appropriate technical and organizational measures to ensure a level of security appropriate to the risk.

5. SUBPROCESSORS. Service Provider will ensure that any Subprocessor that has access to Customer Personal Data enters into a written agreement obligating the Subprocessor to comply with terms that are at least as restrictive as those imposed on Service Provider under the Data Protection Laws.

6. ADDITIONAL COMPLIANCE PROVISIONS

6.1. The Parties each represent and warrant to each other that they have read and understand the requirements of all applicable Data Protection Laws, and will be responsible for their own compliance with them.

6.1.1. Customer shall have the right to take reasonable and appropriate steps to ensure that the Service Provider is using Customer Personal Data in a manner consistent with Service Provider's obligations under this DPA and Data Protection Laws.

6.1.2. Each Party agrees that it is responsible for its own compliance with the requirements of the applicable Data Protection Laws

6.1.3. The Parties agree that where Service Provider processes Personal Data, it functions as a Service Provider and a Processor under the Data Protection Laws.

6.1.4. The disclosure of Customer Personal Data to Service Provider does not constitute a Sale or Sharing under the Data Protection Laws. Notwithstanding anything in the Agreement, the Parties acknowledge and agree that Customer's provision of access to Personal Data is not part of and is explicitly excluded from the exchange of consideration or any other thing of value between the Parties.
i. CERTIFICATION. Service Provider certifies that it understands the restrictions herein and will comply with them.
19 2-18-24
20 2-18-24
EXHIBIT D — Details of Data Processing
The details of the Processing to be carried out under the Agreement are as follows:

Nature and
Purpose of
Processing
Types of
Personal Data
Processed
As set forth in the Agreement
❑ Abilities/aptitudes
❑ Address
❑ Attitudes
0 Background checks
0 Bank account
number
0 Bank routing number
❑ Beneficiary
information
❑ Beneficiary number
❑ Blood pressure
0 CCTV footage
❑ Citizenship Status
0 Compensation
information
❑ Credit history
0 Criminal history
0 Date of birth
0 Dates of health
service
0 Diagnosis
0 Disability
0 Disease/disorder
0 Driver's license
number
0 Education history
information
❑ Education records
(e.g., transcript)
0 Email address
0 Employee ID
0 Employment history
0 Eye color
❑ Facial images
❑ Financial records
0 Other: Information pr
❑ Finger or handprint
0 Gender/Gender Identity
❑ Genetic information
❑ Govt-issued ID number
0 Handicapped status
0 Health records
0 Health status
0 Health symptoms
0 Health treatments
❑ Height
❑ ImmigrationNISA
0 Insurance information
0 Insurance policy
numbers
0 Intelligence
❑ Iris/retina scan
❑ Keystroke patterns
0 Marital status
0 Medical claim history
0 Medical conditions
O Medical device
identifiers
❑ Medical photo
images/X-Rays
0 Medical record number
❑ Medical test results
❑ Medication
❑ Mental health
0 Name
❑ National ID Card
Number
❑ National
origin/race/ethnicity
0 Partial Social Security
number
ided in loss runs and claim
❑ Passport number
❑ Payment card
number
0 Performance
Evaluations
❑ Philosophical beliefs
❑ Political party
❑ Preferences, Trends,
Predispositions
❑ Professional licenses
0 Purchase/Service
history
❑ Religion
❑ Resume
0 Signature
❑ Sleep patterns
❑ Social Insurance
Number
0 Social Security
number
❑ State I D
❑ Subscriber number
❑ Survey responses
0 Tax information
❑ Telephone number
❑ Union membership or
information
0 Vehicle License Plate
Number
❑ Vein patterns
0 Veteran/Military
Status
❑ Voice patterns
❑ Voice recordings
❑ Weight
21 Item No. 5

CITY OF TEMECULA

AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Patrick Thomas, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: March 12, 2024
SUBJECT: Approve Initial Study and Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive Project, PW16-05
PREPARED BY: Amer Attar, Engineering Manager
Nino Abad, Senior Civil Engineer
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council take the following actions:

1. Adopt a resolution entitled:

RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

TEMECULA APPROVING THE INITIAL STUDY AND ADOPT

A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM

FOR THE MURRIETA CREEK BRIDGE AT OVERLAND
DRIVE PROJECT, PW 16-05

2. Direct the Public Works Director to file the Notice of Determination.

BACKGROUND: The Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive Project, PW 16-05; includes the design, environmental, and construction of a new bridge along Overland Drive over Murrieta Creek. The bridge will connect Overland Drive to Diaz Road on the west end of the project and to Enterprise Circle West on the east end.

As required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) an Initial Study (IS) was prepared. The IS identified no impact or a less than significant impact for the following environmental areas of concern:
• Aesthetics
• Agriculture and Forestry Resources
• Air Quality
• Energy
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions

• Hazards & Hazardous Materials
• Hydrology and Water Quality
• Land Use and Planning
• Mineral Resources
• Noise
• Population & Housing
• Public Services
• Recreation
• Transportation
• Utilities and Service Systems
• Wildfire
The IS identified the following areas of potential concern that will be reduced to a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated as summarized:
• Biological Resources: Require a qualified biologist to conduct pre -construction surveys, deliver training for construction personnel, and monitor construction activities to ensure practicable measures are being employed to avoid incidental disturbance of habitat and species of concern. Mitigate permanent and temporary biological resource impacts through the creation of rehabilitation/mitigation area of approximately 1.23 acres on City owned property located at Temecula Creek.
• Cultural Resources: Require a certified archaeologist to monitor construction in coordination with the Pechanga Tribe. Also, the implementation of recommendations for a pre -grading meeting with contractors, and a monitoring frequency approved and coordinated with the Pechanga Tribe, and cultural resources protection, avoidance, and curation as required in the event of resource discovery. • Geology and Soils: Require a qualified paleontologist to provide pre -construction training for the discovery of fossils and subsequent procedures. It also requires full time paleontological monitoring for construction of bridge piers that reach below ten (10) feet in depth and bridge abutments that reach twenty-five (25) feet below the surface.

Under CEQA guidelines, an Initial Study (IS) determined a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) be completed for the project. The MND includes mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts to a level of less than significant. Staff recommends that the City Council approve the IS and adopt an MND for this project. A summary of the proposed mitigation measures is included within the attached Final IS/MND.

The Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was posted on January 11, 2024.

The corresponding public review comment period also commenced on January 11, 2024, and concluded on February 12, 2024. Notifications were mailed to all property owners within a one thousand (1,000) foot radius of each end of the proposed bridge site and a notice was also placed in the local newspaper.

The City of Temecula received a single comment letter from Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD). The letter addressed permits, studies, and mitigation requirements since the property spanned by the bridge is owned by RCFC&WCD). Staff does not foresee any issues with the comments received. The comment letter and the responses to it are in Appendix "I" of the IS/MND.

FISCAL IMPACT: The Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive Project is identified in the City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget for Fiscal Years 2024-28, and is funded with Federal Highway Bridge Program (HBP), Developer Impact Fees (DIF) — Street Improvements, and Measure S. There are sufficient funds in the project account to cover the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Mitigated Negative Declaration fee of $2,966.75 (includes $50.00 County filing fee).

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution

2. Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration

3. Notice of Determination

4. Project Description

5. Project Location

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE INITIAL STUDY AND

ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING

PROGRAM FOR THE MURRIETA CREEK BRIDGE AT
OVERLAND DRIVE PROJECT, PW16-05

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that:
(a) The Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive Project, PW16-05; includes the design, environmental, and construction of a new bridge along Overland Drive over Murrieta Creek. The bridge will connect Overland Drive to Diaz Road on the west end of the project and to Enterprise Circle West on the east end.
(b) Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (Cal. Pub.

Res. Code §21000 et seq.) and the State Guidelines (the "Guidelines") (14 Cal. Code Regs. §15000 et seq.), City staff prepared an Initial Study ("IS") of the potential environmental effects of the approval of the Project as described in the Initial Study. Based upon the findings contained in that Study, City staff determined that, with the incorporation of mitigation measures, there was no substantial evidence that the Project could have a significant effect on the environment and an MND was prepared by the City in full compliance with CEQA. (c) The IS identified no impact or a less than significant impact for the following environmental areas of concern:
1) Aesthetics
2) Agriculture and Forestry Resources
3) Air Quality
4) Energy
5) Greenhouse Gas Emissions
6) Hazards & Hazardous Materials
7) Hydrology and Water Quality
8) Land Use and Planning
9) Mineral Resources

10)
Noise
11)
Population & Housing
12)
Public Services
13)
Recreation
14)
Transportation
15)
Utilities and Service Systems
16)
Wildfire
(d) The IS identified the following areas of potential concern that will be reduced to a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated as summarized:
1) Biological Resources: Require a qualified biologist to conduct pre - construction surveys, deliver training for construction personnel, and monitor construction activities to ensure practicable measures are being employed to avoid incidental disturbance of habitat and species of concern. Mitigate permanent and temporary biological resource impacts through the creation of rehabilitation/mitigation area of approximately 1.23 acres on City owned property located at Temecula Creek.
2) Cultural Resources: Require a certified archaeologist to monitor construction in coordination with the Pechanga Tribe. Also, the implementation of recommendations for a pre -grading meeting with contractors, and a monitoring frequency approved and coordinated with the Pechanga Tribe, and cultural resources protection, avoidance, and curation as required in the event of resource discovery. 3) Geology and Soils: Require a qualified paleontologist to provide pre -construction training for the discovery of fossils and subsequent procedures. It also requires full time paleontological monitoring for construction of bridge piers that reach below ten (10) feet in depth and bridge abutments that reach twenty-five (25) feet below the surface. (e) Under CEQA guidelines, the IS determined a Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MND") be completed for the project. The MND includes mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts to a level of less than significant. Staff recommends that the City Council approve the IS and adopt an MND for this project. A summary of the proposed mitigation measures is included within the and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program are within Final IS/MND.
(f) The Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was posted on January 11, 2024. The corresponding public review comment period also commenced on January 11, 2024, and concluded on February 12, 2024. Notifications were mailed to all property owners within a one thousand (1,000) foot radius of each end of the proposed bridge site and a notice was also placed in the local newspaper. Copies of the documents have been available for public review and inspection at City Hall, 41000 Main Street, Temecula California 92590.

(g) The City of Temecula received only one comment letter from Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD). The letter addressed permits, studies, and mitigation requirements since the property spanned by the bridge is owned by RCFC&WCD). Staff does not foresee any issues with the comments received. The comment letter and the responses to it are in Appendix "I" of the IS/MND. (h) The City Council has reviewed the MND and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("MMRP"), on file in the Office of the City Clerk and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, and all comments received regarding the MND and, based on the whole record before it, finds that:
1) The MND and the Mitigation Monitoring Program were prepared in compliance with CEQA;
2) With the incorporation of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment; and 3) The MND and Mitigation Monitoring Program reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council.

Section 2. Based on the findings set forth in this Resolution and the IS, the City Council hereby adopts the MND and MMRP for the Project.

Section 3. The Director of Public Works is authorized and directed to file a Notice of Determination in accordance with CEQA.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 12th day of March, 2024.

James Stewart, Mayor
ATTEST:

Randi Johl, City Clerk
[SEAL]

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

Randi Johl, City Clerk

Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration
Federal Aid Project No. BR-NBIL (543)
City Project No. PW 16-05
prepared by
City of Temecula
Planning Division, Department of Community Development
4100 Main Street
Temecula, California 92590
Contact: Nino Abad, Senior Civil Engineer, Project Manager prepared with the assistance of
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
8825 Aero Drive Suite 120
San Diego, California 92123
February 2024

9.A
I _
Z
30n
YEARS
RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC. SINCE1994

Table of Contents
Table of Contents
Acronyms and Abbreviations..................................................................................................................v InitialStudy.............................................................................................................................................1

1. Project Title.........................................................................................................................1

2. Lead Agency Name and Address.........................................................................................1

3. Contact Person and Phone Number...................................................................................1

4. Project Location..................................................................................................................1

5. General Plan Designation....................................................................................................1

6. Zoning..................................................................................................................................1

7. Description of Project.........................................................................................................4

8. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting....................................................................................5

9. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required..........................................................5

10. Have California Native American Tribes Traditionally and Culturallv Affiliated with the rl UJCL.L ru CQ Rt:LJUt:3Lt:U %-UI 13U I LauUI1 ruI JUQI IL LU rUU11 L, Rt:3UUI Ut:3 %-UUC JCL.LIU 11 21080.3.1?..........................................................................................................................5 Environmental
Factors Potentially Affected...........................................................................................7 Determination........................................................................................................................................7 EnvironmentalChecklist
.........................................................................................................................9 1 Aesthetics............................................................................................................................9 2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources................................................................................. 13 3
Air Quality........................................................................................................................ 15 4
Biological Resources......................................................................................................... 27 5
Cultural Resources........................................................................................................... 39 6
Energy.............................................................................................................................. 45 7
Geology and Soils............................................................................................................. 47 8
Greenhouse Gas Emissions.............................................................................................. 55 9
Hazards and Hazardous Materials................................................................................... 61 10
Hydrology and Water Quality.......................................................................................... 65 11
Land Use and Planning..................................................................................................... 73 12
Mineral Resources........................................................................................................... 75 13
Noise................................................................................................................................ 77 14
Population and Housing................................................................................................... 95 15
Public Services.................................................................................................................. 97 16
Recreation........................................................................................................................99 17 Transportation............................................................................................................... 101
18 Tribal Cultural Resources............................................................................................... 103
19 Utilities and Service Systems......................................................................................... 107
Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration i

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
20 Wildfire.......................................................................................................................... 109 21 Mandatory Findings of Significance............................................................................... 111 References......................................................................................................................................... 115 Bibliography............................................................................................................................... 115 Listof Preparers......................................................................................................................... 119 Tables
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Table 6
Table 7
Table 8
Table 9
Table 10
Table 11
Table 12
Table 13
Table 14
Table 15
Figures
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Health Effects Associated with Non -Attainment Criteria Pollutants ............................... 16 SCAQMD Regional Air Quality Significance Thresholds ................................................... 17 SCAQMD LSTs for Construction....................................................................................... 18 Project Construction Emissions....................................................................................... 22 On -site Construction Emissions....................................................................................... 23 Proposed Mitigation Site Acreage................................................................................... 33 Estimated Fuel Consumption during Construction.......................................................... 45 Estimated Construction GHG Emissions.......................................................................... 59 AASHTO Maximum Vibration Levels for Preventing Damage .......................................... 79 Vibration Annoyance Potential Criteria........................................................................... 80 Activity Categories and Noise Abatement Criteria (23 CFR 772)..................................... 81 Summary of Short-term Noise Level Measurements...................................................... 83 Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels................................................................. 84 Summary of Noise Modeling............................................................................................ 86 Vibration Levels at Sensitive Receivers............................................................................ 93 Regional Location.......................................................

ProjectLocation.........................................................

Noise Measurement Locations ..................................

Project Overview Map ...............................................

Impact Area A Receivers ............................................

Impact Area B Receivers ............................................

Impact Area C Receivers ............................................

Impact Area D Receivers ............................................ .........................................................2 .........................................................3 ...................................................... 82 ...................................................... 87 ...................................................... 88 ...................................................... 89 ...................................................... 90 ...................................................... 91

Table of Contents
Appendices
Appendix A Air Quality Report (Rincon Consultants Inc., August 2023) Appendix B VMT Analysis Technical Memorandum (STC Traffic, Inc., February 2021) Appendix C Road Construction Emissions Model Methodology (Rincon Consultants Inc., February 2022)
Appendix D Amended Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (Rincon Consultants, March 2022)
Appendix E Energy Calculation Methodology (Rincon Consultants Inc., February 2022) Appendix F Water Quality Assessment Report (Engineering Resources of Southern California Inc., October 2019)
Appendix G Noise Study Report (Rincon Inc., Dec 2020)
Appendix H Hydrology and Hydraulics Report (Engineering Resources of Southern California, Inc., May 2020)
Appendix I Response to Comment
Appendix J Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
This page intentionally left blank.

Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronyms and Abbreviations
AASHTO
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials AB
Assembly Bill
APE
Area of Potential Effect
AQMP
Air Quality Management Plan
BMP
Best Management Practice
CAAQS
California Ambient Air Quality Standards
Caltrans
California Department of Transportation
CARB
California Air Resources Board
CDFW
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA
California Environmental Quality Act
CNEL
Community Noise Equivalent Level
CO2
carbon dioxide
COze
carbon dioxide equivalent
dB
decibels
DBESP
Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation dBA
A -weighted sound pressure level
DNL
Day -Night Average Level
DPM
diesel particulate matter
FHWA
Federal Highway Administration
FTA
Federal Transit Administration
FTIP
Federal Transportation Improvement Program
GHG
greenhouse gas
GWP
global warming potential
1-15
Interstate 15
IPPC
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Lea
equivalent noise level
LST
Localized Significance Thresholds
MSHCP
Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan
NAAQS
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NAC
noise abatement criteria
NAHC
Native American Heritage Commission
Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration v

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
NO,
nitrogen oxides
NPDES
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
PBA
peak bedrock acceleration
PM2.5
particulate matter with a diameter equal to or less than 2.5 microns PM10
particulate matter with a diameter equal to or less than 10 microns PPV
peak particle velocity
RCA
Regional Conservation Authority
RMs
root mean squared
ROG
reactive organic gases
RTP
Regional Transportation Plan
RWQCB
Regional Water Quality Control Board
SB
Senate Bill
SCAB
South Coast Air Basin
SCAG
Southern California Association of Governments
SCAQMD
South Coast Air Quality Management District
SCS
Sustainable Communities Strategy
SIP
State Implementation Plan
SR
State Road
SWPPP
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
SWP
State Water Project
TAC
toxic air contaminant
TNM
Traffic Noise Model
USACE
United States Army Corps of Engineers
USEPA
United States Environmental Protection Agency
USFWS
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
VMT
vehicle miles traveled
VOC
volatile organic compound
vi

Initial Study
Initial Study
l . Project Title
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive (Project)

2. Lead Agency Name and Address
City of Temecula
Community Development Department
Planning Division
41000 Main Street
Temecula, California 92590

3. Contact Person and Phone Number
Contact: Nino Abad, Senior Civil Engineer, Project Manager (951) 308-6385

4. Project Location
The proposed project is located in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, California, west of Interstate 15 (1-15), north of Rancho California Road, west of Commerce Center Drive, south of Winchester Road, and east of Diaz Road (see Figure 1). The approximate longitude and latitude coordinates of the proposed bridge sites are 117.1658' W and 35.5239' N. The project is located 0.3 mile west of Interstate 15 and will extend Overland Drive across Murrieta Creek to connect to Avenida Alvarado at the Diaz Road intersection (see Figure 2).

5. General Plan Designation
Light Industrial, Service Commercial, and Open space

6. Zoning
The project is located in the Specific Plan 14 (SP-14) zone. Light Industrial (LI) is located adjacent to the west.

Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
Figure 1 Regional Location
Elsinoi me�ganiPi:
anyon Lake I Menifee
Newport '
,cyan
�� aflrpad�
Lakeland
Village
you Rd o Scott Rd
G Runa o0
d _ m
'a�YP l Wildomar a $
Clinton keith Rd French Valley r
Lake Skinner
a sP e Cleveland urrieta Recreation Area
o5
National P`F
Forest
4'
U
xi
n C ✓ N 4�
SO Sl40:1C
w� J Cris{o
10°1
11 p
t,nrr° Temecula
air
f: NP
�r
G RJ
Ago
"N
Marine Corps �N,sSonRd r p ��
Base Camp Aivara it o,
Pendleton ¢ lb sf
Fallbrook
941
0 2.5 5 Miles
Imagery provided by Fsri and its licensors O 2019.

Project Location - N
Federal Project No.

BR-NBIL(543) %1
75 i4
Lancaster
_
© Palmdale
Vicbrville
Santa Clarita
Angeles
Simi National
Valley Forest
Twentynine
Palms
)s Angeles Ontario
Joshua Tree
qV
Riverside Eo
National
Cathedralcit
AnaheimPark
Anaheim Corona
Santa Ana
Indio
Oceanside
San Diego
2 Initial Study
Figure 2 Project Location
lmagerV provided bV Microsoft Sing and its licensors® 2020.

Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive

7. Description of Project
The project proposes to construct a bridge over Murrieta Creek to connect Avenida Alvarado with Overland Drive in the City of Temecula, Riverside County. The Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive is anticipated to be a concrete girder structure spanning approximately 348 linear feet over Murrieta Creek. The bridge would accommodate four through travel lanes (two lanes in each direction), left -turn lane(s), and two 5-foot-wide shoulders served as Class II bike lanes, for a curb - to -curb width of 68 feet. In addition, a 6-foot-wide sidewalk would be included on the southern side of the bridge for pedestrians to cross the creek. The existing bike trail on the west side of the creek will intersect with the extended Overland Drive by a signal -controlled at -grade crossing.

Upon completion of the Murrieta Creek Bridge Project, the proposed street configuration would be consistent with the four -lane roadway segment on Overland Drive to the east. In addition to the construction of the bridge, various roadway and utility improvements would occur at the western and eastern bridge approaches. In order to match the roadway section on Avenida Alvarado on the west side of the bridge, the project would transition the lane configuration in the eastern portion of Avenida Alvarado to be consistent with the four -lane configuration of the bridge. Intersection improvements to Overland Drive/Enterprise Circle West and Diaz Road/Avenida Alvarado would include the installation of traffic signals and associated signing, striping, streetlights, and utilities.

Traffic signals and streetlights will be installed at the Overland Drive/Commerce Center Drive intersection as well. Reconstruction and roadway improvements along Diaz Road and Avenida Alvarado would include undergrounding electrical utilities, construction of curbs, gutters, and sidewalks, relocating sewer and water facilities, and adding traffic signage and striping. As a part of the bridge construction, one abutment would be constructed on each end of the bridge, along with two piers within Murrieta Creek. Earth embankments with concrete slope protection and cutoff walls buried underground for scour protection would also be installed on the east and west side of the Creek. The foundation of the bridge piers involving large -diameter cast -in -drilled -hole concrete piles will be installed below the channel bottom, which is deep enough for protection from scour.

The channel bottom will remain earthen without any concrete or rip rap lining. The bridge girder would provide cell openings to accommodate future utilities and electrical conduits for streetlights and traffic signal communication.

The project will also include railing architectural treatment and landscaping modifications or improvements in the right-of-way along the bridge approach, at the Overland Drive/Enterprise Circle West and Diaz Road/Avenida Alvarado intersections, and on Diaz Road and Overland Drive.

During construction, best management practices (BMPs) are anticipated to include construction scheduling, streambank stabilization, wind erosion controls, gravel bag berms, gravel bag check dams, sediment sweeping and vacuuming, and material and waste handling and storage. Site Design BMPs would include preservation of existing vegetation and channel and slope protection (permanent soil stabilization including concrete slope protection under the bridge abutments and erosion control hydroseed mix on graded areas within the creek). In addition, all proposed slopes with slope gradient of 2:1 or flatter would be planted with deep rooted, drought tolerant erosion protection vegetation native to the area. Slopes steeper than 2:1 gradient would be lined with concrete for erosion protection and slope stability. Proposed Treatment Control BMPs, which are structural BMPs designed to treat and reduce pollutants in stormwater runoff prior to releasing it to receiving waters, include curb inlet media filters in the proposed catch basins. The proposed BMPs would target and reduce pollutants of concern from stormwater runoff from the project site.

Initial Study

8. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting
The surrounding urban land uses are predominately built out and consist of industrial and commercial uses. The project site is surrounded by industrial park uses to the west and service commercial uses to the east. The project will cross over the Murrieta Creek, which is designated as open space.

9. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required
The City of Temecula is the lead agency with responsibility for approving the protect. The protect would require regulatory permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USACE California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) due to impacts to jurisdictional Waters of the State or Waters of the United States. An encroachment permit from the Riverside County Flood Control District and Water Conservation District (RCFCD&WCD) would be required due to the proposed construction activities within the Murrieta Creek Channel. Approval from the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA), CDFW, and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) would be required for compliance with the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) and the Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP).

10. Have California Native American Tribes Traditionally and Culturally Affiliated with the Project Area
Requested Consultation Pursuant to Public Resources
Code Section 21080.3.1 ?
On March 12, 2020, the City of Temecula distributed AB 52 consultation letters, including project information, map, and contact information, to each of the five (5) Native American tribes previously requesting to consult on City of Temecula projects. The tribal governments that were provided an AB 52 consultation letter include the following:
■ Pechanga Band of Mission Indians
■ Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians
■ Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians
■ Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians
■ Torres -Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians
Despite a July 8, 2020, follow up email from the City, the Torres -Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians did not respond to the City's invitation to consult on the project. Each of the other four Tribes responded to the City's consultation letter. Responses are detailed in Section 18, Tribal Cultural Resources.

Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
This page intentionally left blank.

Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
This project would potentially affect the environmental factors checked below, involving at least one impact that is "Potentially Significant" or "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture and ❑ Air Quality
Forestry Resources
■ Biological Resources ■ Cultural Resources ❑ Energy
■ Geology and Soils ❑ Greenhouse Gas ❑ Hazards and Hazardous Emissions Materials
❑ Hydrology and Water ❑ Land Use and Planning ❑ Mineral Resources Quality
❑f Noise ❑ Population and ❑ Public Services
Housing
❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation ■ Tribal Cultural Resources ❑ Utilities and Service ❑ Wildfire ■ Mandatory Findings Systems of Significance
Determination
Based on this initial evaluation:
❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
■ 1 find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions to the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "less than significant with mitigation incorporated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

Final Initial Study — Mitigated Negative Declaration 7

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

Signature
MAH64i U Pfllt-trs
Printed Name
ZJz7 1g04
Date
A514+4 K-f Dirc�citr� .-� Co �++wtw 1 Y P
Title /

Environmental Checklist
Aesthetics
Environmental Checklist
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
b. Substantially damage scenic resources,
including but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings
within a state scenic highway? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
c. 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 a
publicly accessible vantage point). If the
project is in an urbanized area, would the
project conflict with applicable zoning and
other regulations governing scenic
quality? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
d. Create a new source of substantial light or
glare that would adversely affect daytime
or nighttime views in the area? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
a. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? A scenic vista is usually a view of a valued resource, such as waterways, the ocean, hills, valleys, or mountains. The City has generally identified the conservation of the hills and Santa Ana Mountains to the west and southern ridgelines, the Santa Margarita River, the slopes in the Sphere of Influence located west and east of the City limits and other important landforms and historic landscape features as scenic vistas.

Interstate 15 (1-15) from Corona south to the San Diego County line has been designated as an Eligible State Scenic Highway. While this portion of the 1-15 is eligible to be designated as a state scenic highway, it has not yet been recognized as such (Caltrans 2016).

From the project site, unobstructed views to the ridgelines and hills to the west are present. In addition, the southern hillsides are also visible but partially obstructed by development and trees.

Murrieta Creek is visible from the surrounding area and travels through the project site. While there are no designated scenic resources, there are a number of resources within and visible from the Final Initial Study — Mitigated Negative Declaration 9

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
project which are considered aesthetically important to the City of Temecula. The proposed project is located below the western escarpment, which is considered a scenic vista pursuant to the City's General Plan; however, there will not be a significant adverse impact on the scenic vista of the escarpment, as the proposed bridge will be constructed generally at existing grade and will not block scenic vistas within the area. Therefore, views of the project area would not be substantially altered by this project and impacts would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
b. Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? The project is not located within a designated scenic highway corridor. The nearest designated State Scenic Highways in Riverside County are along State Road (SR) 74 and SR-243. The portions of these highways that are designated are located about 26 miles northeast of the project area and are not visible from within the project area or surrounding areas. The project is located adjacent to the 1-15, which is designated by Caltrans as an Eligible State Scenic Highway; however, it is not officially designated as a State Scenic Highway by Caltrans. Public views of the distant mountains (Cleveland National Forest) from 1-15 would not be obscured by development of the project. The project is not located on a scenic highway and would not substantially damage scenic resources, including rock outcroppings or historic buildings.

The Open Space and Conservation Element of the City's General Plan states waterways provide for scenic enjoyment in the area. In addition, natural drainage courses provide a scenic setting for the community. The proposed project would add a bridge structure across Murrieta Creek, but would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings.

Therefore, views of the project area for passengers along 1-15 would not be substantially altered by the project and impacts would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Would the project 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 a publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? The viewers in the area consist of workers at their place of business, motorists and pedestrians traveling through the area, and recreational users of the Class I shared use path along Murrieta Creek. A majority of the viewers in the area would not be considered sensitive as they are at work or traveling through the area. However, people utilizing the shared use path would be considered sensitive viewers as they are utilizing and recreational amenity in the area.

The project site is currently undeveloped and is covered with riparian/riverine communities. The visual character of the project site would be altered; however, the proposed character would be consistent with existing bridges located 1,000 feet northwest and 2,300 feet southeast of the project site. The project would not substantially damage the surrounding natural scenic resources and visual character and would be similar to surrounding uses. In addition, the project would implement the following Avoidance and Mitigation Measures to ensure the project would not degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views:
�i

Environmental Checklist
Aesthetics
■ Existing landscaping impaired by the proposed project will be replaced with similar landscaping in the right-of-way along the bridge approach, Overland Drive/Enterprise Circle West and Diaz Road/Avenida Alvarado intersections, and along Diaz Road and Overland Drive. ■ Street trees and landscaping of business parks impacted by the project shall be replaced with similar landscaping.
■ Trees removed along the Class I shared -use trail shall be replaced at a 3:1 ratio. ■ Bridge design would incorporate colored decorative metal railings for bicycle and pedestrian safety, and Caltrans standard fractured rib texture treatments on concrete railings to control graffiti.
■ Murrieta Creek vegetation disturbed by construction will be treated for erosion control and re- seeding with native species seed mix.

Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact on the visual character of the area and no further analysis of this issue is necessary.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
d. Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area?
Light pollution is regulated by Chapter 17.22 Section 17.22.176 of the City of Temecula Municipal Code. Ordinance 655 requires lighting to be shielded, directed down to avoid glare onto adjacent properties, and emit low levels of glare into the sky. Existing sources of light or glare in the project area include vehicles on the surrounding roadways, lights on local streets and parking lots, and windows from the light industrial and office commercial buildings. The bridge would not result in additional vehicles on local roadways. New streetlights would be placed along the bridge for vehicle and pedestrian safety; however, lights would comply with City of Temecula outdoor light standards and would be similar to streetlights on the surrounding roadways. Therefore, the project would not create new sources of light or glare which would adversely impact the daytime or nighttime visual setting of the area. Compliance with the Municipal Code would result in compliance with the County of Riverside's Mount Palomar Light Pollution Ordinance, the project would result in a less than significant impact.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 11

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
This page intentionally left blank.
12 Environmental Checklist
Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland,
or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on maps prepared
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
❑
❑
❑ ■
b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use or a Williamson Act contract?
❑
❑
❑ ■
c. 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))? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
d. Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non -forest
use? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
e. 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? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
a. Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? The project site is located within an urbanized area of the City. The surrounding area is developed for commercial and industrial uses, while the project site itself, which crosses Murrieta Creek, consists of riparian/riverine communities. The project site does not contain agricultural uses or related operations. According to Figure OS-3, of the City of Temecula General Plan, the project site is not located on Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. No impact would occur.

NO IMPACT
Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 13

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
b. Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract?
The project site is currently zoned Specific Plan 14 (SP-14). No portion of the project site or surrounding land uses are zoned for agriculture and no nearby lands are enrolled under the Williamson Act. As such, future development of the project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract, and no impact would occur in this regard. In addition, the project will not involve changes in the existing environment, which would result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. No impact would occur.

NO IMPACT
Would the project 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))?
As discussed above under Response 2.b, the project site is currently zoned SP-14. No forest land or timberland zoning is present on the project site or in the surrounding area. As such, future development of the project would not conflict with existing zoning for forest land or timberland and would not result in the loss of or conversion of forestland. No impact would occur.

NO IMPACT
d. Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non forest use? No forest land exists on the project site or in the surrounding area. As such, future development of the project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest use.

No impact would occur.

NO IMPACT
e. Would the project 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?
Since there are no agricultural or forest uses or related operations on or near the project site, future development of the project would not involve the conversion of farmland or forest land to other uses, either directly or indirectly. No impacts to agricultural land or use would occur. Further analysis of this issue is not necessary.

NO IMPACT
14 Would the project:
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation
of the applicable air quality plan?
b. 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?
c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
d. Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors) adversely affecting a
substantial number of people?
Overview of Air Pollution
Environmental Checklist
Air Quality
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
The federal and State Clean Air Acts mandate the control and reduction of certain air pollutants.

Under these laws, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) have established the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for "criteria pollutants" and other pollutants.

Some pollutants are emitted directly from a source (e.g., vehicle tailpipe, an exhaust stack of a factory, etc.) into the atmosphere, including carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds (VOC)/reactive organic gases (ROG),' nitrogen oxides (NOx), particulate matter with diameters of ten microns or less (PM1o) and 2.5 microns or less (PM2.5), sulfur dioxide, and lead. Other pollutants are created indirectly through chemical reactions in the atmosphere, such as ozone, which is created by atmospheric chemical and photochemical reactions primarily between VOC and NOx.

Secondary pollutants include oxidants, ozone, and sulfate and nitrate particulates (smog).

Air pollutant emissions are generated primarily by stationary and mobile sources. Stationary sources can be divided into two major subcategories:
■ Point sources occur at a specific location and are often identified by an exhaust vent or stack.

Examples include boilers or combustion equipment that produce electricity or generate heat. ■ Area sources are widely distributed and include such sources as residential and commercial water heaters, painting operations, lawn mowers, agricultural fields, landfills, and some consumer products.
1 CARB defines VOC and ROG similarly as, "any compound of carbon excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, and ammonium carbonate," with the exception that VOC are compounds that participate in atmospheric photochemical reactions. For the purposes of this analysis, ROG and VOC are considered comparable in terms of mass emissions, and the term VOCi s used in this IS-MND.

Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 15

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
Mobile sources refer to emissions from motor vehicles, including tailpipe and evaporative emissions, and can also be divided into two major subcategories:
■ On -road sources that may be legally operated on roadways and highways. ■ Off -road sources include aircraft, ships, trains, and self-propelled construction equipment.

Air pollutants can also be generated by the natural environment, such as when high winds suspend fine dust particles.

Air Quality Standards and Attainment
The project site is located in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). As the local air quality management agency, the SCAQMD is required to monitor air pollutant levels to ensure that the NAAQS and CAAQS are met and, if they are not met, to develop strategies to meet the standards. Depending on whether the standards are met or exceeded, the SCAB is classified as being in "attainment" or "nonattainment." In areas designated as non -attainment for one or more air pollutants, a cumulative air quality impact exists for those air pollutants, and the human health impacts associated with these criteria pollutants, presented in Table 1, are already occurring in that area as part of the environmental baseline condition. Under state law, air districts are required to prepare a plan for air quality improvement for pollutants for which the district is in non-compliance. The portion of Riverside in the SCAB is designated nonattainment extreme for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, nonattainment serious for the 24-hour PM2.5 and annual PM2.5 NAAQS; nonattainment for the 8- hour ozone CAAQS; nonattainment for the 24-hour and annual PMlo CAAQS; and nonattainment for the annual PM2.5 CAAQS (SCAQMD 2016). This nonattainment status is a result of several factors, the topography and climate of Southern California, the large population growth, and anthropogenic sources, such as exhaust from vehicles driving on roadways (SCAQMD 2017a).

Table 1 Health Effects Associated with Non -Attainment Criteria Pollutants Ozone
(1) Short-term exposures: (a) pulmonary function decrements and localized lung edema in humans and animals and (b) risk to public health implied by alterations in pulmonary morphology and host defense in animals; (2) long-term exposures: risk to public health implied by altered connective tissue metabolism and altered pulmonary morphology in animals after long-term exposures and pulmonary function decrements in chronically exposed humans; (3) vegetation damage; and (4) property damage.

Suspended particulate
(1) Excess deaths from short-term and long-term exposures; (2) excess seasonal declines in matter (PM1o)
pulmonary function, especially in children; (3) asthma exacerbation and possibly induction; (4) adverse birth outcomes including low birth weight; (5) increased infant mortality; (6) increased respiratory symptoms in children such as cough and bronchitis; and (7) increased hospitalization for both cardiovascular and respiratory disease (including asthma).' Suspended particulate
(1) Excess deaths from short- and long-term exposures; (2) excess seasonal declines in matter (PM2.5)
pulmonary function, especially in children; (3) asthma exacerbation and possibly induction; (4) adverse birth outcomes, including low birth weight; (5) increased infant mortality; (6) increased respiratory symptoms in children, such as cough and bronchitis; and (7) increased hospitalization for both cardiovascular and respiratory disease, including asthma.

Source: United States Environmental Protection Agency 2022 W

Environmental Checklist
Air Quality
Air Quality Management
States are required to adopt enforceable plans, known as a State Implementation Plan (SIP), to achieve and maintain air quality meeting the NAAQS.

Since the SCAB currently exceeds ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS standard, the SCAQMD is required to implement strategies to reduce pollutant levels to achieve attainment of the NAAQS. The SCAQMD 2022 Air Quality Management Plan (2022 AQMP) is a regional blueprint designed to meet the NAAQS and demonstrate how attainment will be reached. The 2022 AQMP represents a thorough analysis of existing and potential regulatory control options, includes available, proven, and cost- effective strategies, and seeks to achieve multiple goals in partnership with other entities promoting reductions in greenhouse gases and toxic risk, as well as efficiencies in energy use, transportation, and goods movement. The prior AQMP, published in 2016, determined that, with implementation of the proposed control strategy, the SCAB could expect to reach attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone standard by July 15, 2024, and the 2012 annual PM2.5 by 2025. The 2006 24-hour PM2.5 did not meet the attainment date of December 31, 2019, which required SCAQMD to revise the plan to meet standard as early as possible. SCAQMD's 2022 AQMP, an update to the 2016 AQMP, was developed to identify and implement strategies and control measures to meet the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than the statutory attainment deadline of August 3, 2038 for the SCAB (SCAQMD 2022).

Air Pollutant Emission Thresholds
The SCAQMD has adopted guidelines for quantifying and determining the significance of air quality emissions (SCAQMD 2019).

The SCAQMD recommends quantitative regional significance thresholds for temporary construction activities and long-term project operation in the SCAB, shown in Table 2, are used to evaluate a project's potential air quality impacts (SCAQMD 2019).

Table 2 SCAQMD Regional Air Qualify Significance Thresholds NOx 100 55
voc 75 55
PM10
150
150
PM2.5
55 55
Sox
150
150
CO
550
550
NO.= Nitrogen Oxides; VOC = Volatile Organic Compounds; PM,c = Particulate Matter with a diameter no more than 10 microns; PM2.5 = Particulate Matter with a diameter no more than 2.5 microns; SO, = Sulfur Oxide; CO = Carbon Monoxide Source: SCAQMD 2019
Localized Significance Thresholds
In addition to the above regional thresholds, the SCAQMD has developed Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs) in response to the Governing Board's Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative (1-4), which was prepared to update the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Air Quality Handbook (1993). LSTs were devised in response to concern regarding exposure of individuals to criteria pollutants in local communities and have been developed for NOx, CO, PM10i Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 17

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
and PM2.5. LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that will not cause or contribute to an air quality exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard at the nearest sensitive receptor, taking into consideration ambient concentrations in each SRA, distance to the sensitive receptor, and project size. LSTs have been developed for emissions within construction areas up to five acres in size. However, LSTs only apply to on -site emissions sources and are not applicable to off -site mobile sources, such as cars on a roadway (SCAQMD 2008a, 2009). For residential and retail projects the majority of operational emissions are associated with project -generated vehicle trips not stationary sources. Therefore, for these land use types, LSTs are typically applied only to construction emissions.

In order to minimize efforts, the SCAQMD developed mass rate lookup tables as a simple screening procedure. If a project's on -site emissions do not exceed the screening levels for any pollutant, it can be concluded that the project would not cause or contribute to an adverse localized air quality impact. Screening levels are provided for various distances between the project boundary and the nearest sensitive receptor and various project site acreages. Screening levels increase, as the project distance between the boundary and the nearest receiver increases. This is because air pollutant dispersion increases with distance. Screening levels increase, as the acreage increases. This is because the distance between construction sources and sensitive receptors increases with project acreage.

The LST mass rate lookup tables account for ambient pollutant concentrations based on the project's source receptor area. LSTs are provided for receptors at a distance of 82 feet (25 meters), 164 feet (50 meters), 328 feet (100 meters), 656 feet (200 meters), 1,640 feet (500 meters) from the project disturbance boundary to the sensitive receptors.

The site is located in SRA-26 (Temecula Valley). The project area totals approximately five acres. The nearest sensitive receptors are students attending Temecula Montessori Academy, and the receptors are approximately 480 feet from the nearest project site boundary. To be conservative, the LSTs at the distance of 328 feet (100 meters) are used for a two -acre site (LSTs become more stringent with smaller project area acreages). The analysis uses the following LST values as shown in Table 3.

Table 3 SCAQMD LSTs for Construction
Gradual conversion of NOx to NO2 363
CO 2,781
PM10 38
PM2.s 10
SRA = source receptor area; Ibs/day = pounds per day; NOx/NO2= nitrogen oxides; CO = carbon monoxide; PM,o = particulate matter 10 micrometers in diameter or less; PM2.5= fine particulate matter 2.5 micrometers in diameter or less Source: SCAQMD 2009
Toxic Air Contaminants Thresholds
SCAQMD has developed significance thresholds for the emissions of toxic air contaminants (TAC) based on health risks associated with elevated exposure to such compounds. For carcinogenic compounds, cancer risk is assessed in terms of incremental excess cancer risk. A project would result in a potentially significant impact if it would generate an incremental excess cancer risk of 10 in 1 million (1 x 10) or a cancer burden of 0.5 excess cancer cases in areas exceeding 1 in 1 million IN:

Environmental Checklist
Air Quality
risks. Additionally, non -carcinogenic health risks are assessed in terms of a hazard index. A project would result in a potentially significant impact if it would result in a chronic and acute hazard index greater than 1.0 (SCAQMD 2019).

Sensitive Receptors
CARB and the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment have identified the following groups of individuals as the most likely to be affected by air pollution: the elderly over 65, children under 14, infants (including in utero in the third trimester of pregnancy), and persons with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, emphysema, and bronchitis (CARB 2005; Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment 2015). Some land uses considered more sensitive to air pollution than others due to the types of population groups or activities involved are referred to as sensitive receptors. Examples of these sensitive receptors are residences, schools, hospitals, religious facilities, and daycare centers. SCAQMD Risk Assessment Procedures define receptors as any location outside the boundaries of a facility at which a person could experience repeated, continuous exposure. The procedures further note that sensitive receptors include any residence (e.g., private homes, condominiums, apartments, and living quarters), schools (including preschools and daycare centers), health facilities (e.g., hospitals, retirement and nursing homes, long-term care hospitals, hospices), as well as prisons, dormitories, or similar live-in housing where children, chronically ill individuals, or other sensitive persons could be exposed to TACs (SCAQMD 2017).

The nearest sensitive receptors would be students attending the Temecula Montessori Academy, which provides programs for infants and preschool to third grade students.

Methodology
The following discussion is based on the Air Quality Report prepared for the project by Rincon Consultants dated August 2023 and is included as Appendix A. The report used project -specific information for construction and the VMT Analysis Technical Memorandum prepared by STC Traffic, Inc. in February 2021, which is included as Appendix B. The construction emissions were calculated using the Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 9.0.0. Refer to Appendix C for more details regarding the methodology.
a. Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? A project may be inconsistent with the AQMP if it would generate population, housing, or employment growth exceeding forecasts used in the development of the AQMP.

The 2022 AQMP, the most recent AQMP adopted by the SCAQMD, incorporates local city general plans and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)'s 2020 RTP/SCS socioeconomic forecast projections of regional population, housing, and employment growth (SCAQMD 2022, SCAG 2020a). The project involves the construction of a bridge over and across Murrieta Creek to connect Avenida Alvarado at the intersection of Diaz Road with Overland Drive at the intersection of Enterprise Circle West in the City. The construction of this project would not generate new population, housing, or employment. Therefore, the project would not generate air pollution emission that would impede or conflict with the 2022 AQMP.

Additionally, the federal clean air act requires a demonstration that federal actions conform to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) and similar approved plans in areas that are designated as non - attainment or have maintenance plans for criteria pollutants. Transportation measures, such as the Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 19

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
project, are analyzed for conformity with the SIP as part of the RTP and the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP). If the design concept and scope of a proposed transportation project are consistent with the project description in the applicable RTP and FTIP, and the assumptions in the regional emissions analysis for the RTP and FTIP, then the project would conform to the SIP, and no adverse regional air quality impact would occur as a result of the project.

SCAG, as the area's metropolitan planning organization, and the FHWA must make a determination that the applicable RTP and FTIP conform to the applicable SIP. Conformity to the SIP means that transportation activities will not create new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay the attainment of the NAAQS. Federal regulations also require SCAG to conduct an air quality conformity analysis of all regionally significant projects that increase the transportation system capacity. All regionally significant capacity -increasing transportation projects, regardless of funding sources, must be included in the RTIP.

The currently applicable RTP and FTIP for the project area are the Connect SoCal 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy and the 2023 FTIP (SCAG 2020a, 2023). Both plans were prepared by SCAG. The project is included in Connect SoCal and the 2023 FTIP under FTIP ID 991203A. The FHWA made a finding of conformity on the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS through Amendment #3 on June 9, 2023 (FHWA 2022). In addition, the FHWA approved the 2023 FTIP Consistency Amendment #23-03 and concurred that the associated conformity determination conformed to the applicable SIP in accordance with the provisions of 40 CFR Parts 51 and 93 on June 9, 2023 (FHWA 2023).

Therefore, the project is assumed to conform with the 2022 AQMP and the SIP. Furthermore, implementation of the project would ensure that the City would be consistent with the Connect SoCal RTP/SCS and the 2023 FTIP. No adverse regional or local air quality impact would occur as a result of the project.

NO IMPACT
b. Would the project 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?
Construction Emissions
The project would allow for the construction of a bridge that would accommodate four through travel lanes (two lanes in each direction), left -turn lane(s), and two 5-foot-wide shoulders served as Class II bike lanes, for a curb -to -curb width of 68 feet. In addition, a 6-foot-wide sidewalk would be included on the southern side of the bridge for pedestrians to cross the creek. The existing bike trail on the west side of the creek will intersect with the extended Overland Drive by a signal -controlled at -grade crossing.

Construction would involve grubbing/land clearing, grading/excavation, drainage/utilities/sub- grade, and paving. Exhaust emissions would be associated with use of heavy-duty construction equipment and truck trips hauling debris, soils, and construction materials; fugitive dust (PMlo and PM2.5) emissions would primarily result from earthwork activities (e.g., grubbing/land clearing and grading) activities. The paving operations would release VOCs. Construction emissions can vary substantially from day to day, depending on the level of activity, the specific type of operation and, for dust, the prevailing weather conditions. According to the City of Temecula General Plan, the City 20 Environmental Checklist
Air Quality
shall require individual development projects to comply with the following measures to minimize short term, construction -related PM10 and NOx emissions, and to minimize off -site impacts:
■ Water all active construction areas at least twice daily; ■ Cover all haul trucks or maintain at least two feet of freeboard; ■ Pave or apply water four times daily to all unpaved parking or staging areas; ■ Sweep or wash any site access points within 30 minutes of any visible dirt deposition on any public roadway;
■ Cover or water twice daily any on -site stockpiles of debris, dirt or other dusty material; ■ Suspend all operations on any unpaved surface if winds exceed 25 mph; ■ Hydroseed or otherwise stabilize any cleared area which is to remain in active for more than 96 hours after clearing is completed;
■ Ensure that all cut and fill slopes are permanently protected from erosion; ■ Require the construction contractor to ensure that all construction equipment is maintained in peak working order;
■ Limit allowable idling to 10 minutes for trucks and heavy equipment; ■ Encourage carpooling for construction workers;
■ Limit lane closures to off-peak travel periods;
■ Park construction vehicles off traveled roadways;
■ Wet down or cover dirt hauled off site;
■ Wash or sweep away access points daily;
■ Encourage receipt of materials during non -peak traffic hours; and, ■ Sandbag construction sites for erosion control.

In addition, demolition and grading for the project shall be performed in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 4032, Fugitive Dust. Contractor compliance with Rule 403 requirements would be mandated in the contractor's specifications and shall include the following measures:
■ Land disturbance shall be minimized to the extent feasible. Grading activities shall be limited to the disturbance of no more than five acres in the course of one day. • Haul trucks shall be covered when loaded with fill.
■ Paved streets shall be swept at least once per day where there is evidence of dirt that has been carried onto the roadway.
■ Watering trucks shall be used to minimize dust. Watering should be sufficient to confine dust plumes to the project work areas. Active, disturbed areas shall have water applied to them three times daily.
• For disturbed surfaces that will not be revegetated and that will be left inactive for four or more days, a chemical stabilizer shall be applied pursuant to the manufacturer's instruction. ■ For unpaved roads, chemical stabilizers shall be applied or the roads shall be watered once per hour during active operation.
■ Vehicle speed on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour. For open storage piles that will remain on site for two or more days, water shall be applied once per hour, or coverings shall be installed.
■ For paved road trackout, all haul vehicles shall be covered or shall comply with the vehicle freeboard requirements of Section 23114 of the California Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 21

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
Vehicle Code for both public and private roads. During high wind conditions (i.e., wind speeds in excess of 25 miles per hour), all earth -moving activities shall cease or water shall be applied to soil not more than 15 minutes prior to disturbing such soil.

Table 4 summarizes the estimated maximum daily emissions of VOC, NO, CO, S02, PMlo, and PM2.5 emissions per phase of construction. All construction -related criteria pollutant emissions would be below the SCAQMD regional thresholds. Therefore, project construction would not 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. Impacts would be less than significant.

Table 4 Project Construction Emissions
Grubbing/Land Clearing

1.30 15.19

3.27 30.60

0.05 3.92
Grading/Excavation

2.28 15.35

3.37 44.14

0.08 5.15
Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade

4.74 15.68

3.68 106.23

0.17 12.31
Paving

3.46 0.44

0.36 71.72

0.12 8.82
Maximum Daily

4.74 15.68

3.68 106.23

0.17 12.31
SCAQMD Significance Threshold
75 150
55 550
150
100
Exceed Threshold?
No
No
No
No
No
No
See Appendix C
Operational Emissions
As described in the Air Quality Report prepared for the project, the project would result in a reduction of operational emissions. While the VMT Analysis Technical Memorandum (STC Traffic, Inc. 2021, Appendix B) shows VMT increasing in the future (2,618 VMT per day in 2025 and 2,922 VMT per day in 2045), the analysis does not capture the fact that traffic would be redistributed on the local roadway network with the construction of the bridge. VMT within the study area would grow with or without the project due to population growth. The proposed project would improve traffic flow in the City and would not increase capacity. In actuality, the project would reduce VMT for current trips on the network as the new roadway segment lowers VMT for journeys from Overland Drive to Diaz Road and Avenida Alvarado. The distance from the Overland Drive/Enterprise Circle intersection to the Diaz Road/ Avenida Alvarado intersection is currently 0.7 mile. The distance between the two intersections across the creek is approximately 825 feet. This is an approximate reduction of 2,870 feet traveled per vehicle trip. With a reduction in overall trip distance for the area, the project would result in emissions reductions compared to the existing conditions. Therefore, project operation would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non -attainment, and impacts would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
C. Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? 22 Environmental Checklist
Air Quality
Carbon Monoxide Hotspots
A carbon monoxide hotspot is a localized concentration of carbon monoxide that is above a carbon monoxide ambient air quality standard. Localized carbon monoxide hotspots can occur at intersections with heavy peak hour traffic. Specifically, hotspots can be created at intersections where traffic levels are sufficiently high such that the local carbon monoxide concentration exceeds the federal one -hour standard of 35.0 ppm or the federal and state eight -hour standard of 9.0 ppm (SCAQMD 2016).

As described under criterion (b), the project would not generate new trips in the project area but provide another access point to improve connectivity for existing traffic traveling in between Overland Drive to Avenida Alvarado. The project would relieve congestion at other nearby intersections since the development of the bridge would create a new east to west roadway connection. Therefore, the project would not result in or substantially contribute to concentrations that exceed the one -hour or eight -hour CO standard. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Localized Significance Thresholds
Table 5 summarizes maximum daily on -site emissions associated with construction of the project.

The on -site construction emissions of NOx, CO, PMlo, and PM2.5 emissions would not exceed SCAQMD LST screening levels during any phase of construction. Therefore, the project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial criteria pollutant concentrations and impacts would be less than significant.

Table 5 On -site Construction Emissions
Grubbing/Land Clearing 3.92

30.60 15.19

3.27 Grading/Excavation 5.15

44.14 15.35

3.37 Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 12.31
106.23

15.68 3.68
Paving 8.82

71.72 0.44

0.36 Maximum Daily 12.31
106.23

15.68 3.68
Applicable LST; 2 acres at 100 meters 363
2,781
38 10
SRA = source receptor area; Ibs/day = pounds per day; NO./NO2 = nitrogen oxides; CO = carbon monoxide; PM,o = particulate matter 10
micrometers in diameter or less; PM2.5= fine particulate matter 2.5 micrometers in diameter or less
'Emissions only account for on -site construction emissions.

Source: Appendix C
Toxic Air Contaminants
Construction TAC
Construction -related activities would result in temporary project -generated emissions of diesel particulate matter (DPM) exhaust emissions from off -road, heavy-duty diesel equipment for site preparation, grading, building construction, and other construction activities. DPM was identified as a TAC by CARB in 1998 (CARB 2022). The potential cancer risk from the inhalation of DPM (discussed in the following paragraphs) outweighs the potential non -cancer health impacts and is therefore the focus of this analysis.

Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 23

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
Generation of DPM from construction projects typically occurs in a single area for a short period.

Construction of the proposed project would occur over approximately 17 months. The dose to which the receptors are exposed is the primary factor used to determine health risk. Dose is a function of the concentration of a substance or substances in the environment and the extent of exposure that person has with the substance. Dose is positively correlated with time, meaning that a longer exposure period would result in a higher exposure level for the Maximally Exposed Individual. The risks estimated for a Maximally Exposed Individual are higher if a fixed exposure occurs over a longer period of time. According to the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, health risk assessments, which determine the exposure of sensitive receptors to toxic emissions, should be based on a 70-year exposure period; however, such assessments should be limited to the period/duration of activities associated with the project. Thus, the duration of proposed construction activities (i.e., 23 months) is approximately six percent of the total exposure period used for 30-year health risk calculations. Current models and methodologies for conducting health -risk assessments are associated with longer -term exposure periods of 9, 30, and 70 years, which do not correlate well with the temporary and highly variable nature of construction activities, resulting in difficulties in producing accurate estimates of health risk (Bay Area Air Quality Management District 2017).

The maximum exhaust PM10 and PM2.5 emissions, which are used as surrogates for DPM, would occur during the drainage/utilities/sub-grade activities. These activities would last for approximately 11 months. PM emissions would decrease for the remaining construction period because construction activities, such as paving, would require less intensive construction equipment. While the maximum DPM emissions associated with demolition, site preparation, and grading activities would only occur for a portion of the overall construction period, these activities represent the worst -case condition for the total construction period. This would represent three percent of the total 30-year exposure period for health risk calculation. Given the aforementioned discussion, DPM generated by project construction would not create conditions where the probability is greater than one in ten million of contracting cancer for the Maximally Exposed Individual or to generate ground - level concentrations of non -carcinogenic TACs that exceed a Hazard Index greater than one for the Maximally Exposed Individual. Therefore, project construction would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial TAC concentrations, and impacts would be less than significant.

Operational TAC
The development of the project would not site new mobile sources of TAC in the general vicinity. As a bridge development, the project would be a new access point for existing vehicles traveling near or on Overland Drive and Avenida Alvarado. Existing vehicles and motorists would use the bridge for easier east to west access. Therefore, the project would not include substantial mobile TAC sources, nor would it result in the exposure of off -site sensitive receptors to significant amounts of carcinogenic or toxic air contaminants. Impacts would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
d. Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
For construction activities, odors would be short-term in nature and are subject to SCAQMD Rule 402 Nuisance (SCAQMD 1976). Construction activities would be temporary and transitory and associated odors would cease upon construction completion. Accordingly, the project would not 24 Environmental Checklist
Air Quality
create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people during construction, and short- term impacts would be less than significant.

Common sources of operational odor complaints include sewage treatment plants, landfills, recycling facilities, and agricultural uses. The proposed plan would not include any of these uses.

The project would construct a bridge to connect vehicles traveling to and from Overland Drive and Avenida Avenue. The project would not generate new vehicle trips but add an additional access point access for existing vehicles, motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists. This development is not considered a typical nuisance for odor. Therefore, operational odor impacts would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 25

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
This page intentionally left blank.
26 Environmental Checklist
Biological Resources
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a.

Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications,
on any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or
by the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b.

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

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?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
d.

Interfere substantially with the movement
of any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
e.

Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
f.

Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 27

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
This section is based on the City of Temecula's prior Final Initial Study, dated May 28, 2013, the Jurisdictional Delineation Report, dated January 2013, and the Habitat Assessment for Murrieta Creek Bridge and Overland Drive Extension and related surveys for the project, prepared by BonTerra Consulting (September 2012), the Least Bell's Vireo Protocol Survey Report, dated September 2019, the Jurisdictional Waters Delineation, dated April 1, 2020, the MSHCP Consistency Analysis, dated July 2021, and the MSHCP DetepmffiR-,+; n of Bielegieally Equival Rt or SWpe i9F o.-,,.-,,..,a + 4DBESP}, as amended March 2022, for the Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive (Avenida Alvarado Over Murrieta Creek) Federal Aid Project No. BR-NBIL (543), City Project No. PW 16-05, City of Temecula, Riverside County, California, prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon).

The DBESP was provided to the Western Riverside County Regien," en-serv"+i^^ "uthe t RCA, the California n,,.,-,.-+....,,nt ef. C.Sh VAIdlife (CDFW}, and theStatues-Fish -and %Vil lif Seryie {USFWS} (collectively referred to as the "Wildlife Agencies") for comment, and the 60-day response period concluded on September 05, 2022. As such, the project is in compliance with the Western Riverside MSHCP and the DBESP is considered to be approved." a. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
The project site is located within Subunit 1 (Murrieta Creek) of the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat r nser , *AA of -,.A'. 4MSHCP's} Southwest Area Plan. The project site is located in Criteria Area Cells 6783 and 6890, which contributes to Proposed Constrained Linkage 13 (Murrieta Creek). The land along Murrieta Creek is owned by the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (District). The project site is not located in a Criteria Area Plant Species Survey Area or within the Narrow Endemic Plant Survey Area; therefore, focused plant surveys for these species are not required.

The project site is within a Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia) Survey Area. A Step I Habitat Assessment and Step II Part A Focused Burrow Survey were completed in the Study Area (all areas of potential project -related effects and a 500-foot buffer) on May 10, 2019 and May 20, 2019, respectively, in accordance with methods outlined in the Burrowing Owl Survey Instructions for the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Area (County of Riverside 2006). This search identified marginally suitable habitat present in the Study Area along the banks of Murrieta Creek. This habitat is isolated and highly disturbed but contains a complex of several burrows of suitable size for burrowing owl. No burrowing owls or owl sign (e.g., prey remains, cast pellets, white -wash, or feathers) were observed in the Study Area during the Step I Habitat Assessment or Step II A focused Burrow Survey.

The project would impact Riparian/Riverine resources that are occupied by least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus), smooth tarplant (Centromadia pungens ssp. laevis), and yellow -breasted chat (Icteria virens), and potentially occupied by yellow warbler (Setophaga petechia), western pond turtle (Emys marmorata), and arroyo chub (Gila orcuttii). Specifically, the southern willow scrub and riparian scrub habitats in the Study Area provide habitat that is occupied by the least Bell's vireo. Updated focused surveys for this species were conducted between May 10 and July 19, 2019. The surveys were conducted in accordance with the USFWS Least Bell's Vireo Survey Guidelines, issued January 19, 2001. Eight (8) surveys were conducted during this time frame. The surveys occurred between dawn and 11:00 am each day within all portions of the Study Area containing potentially suitable riparian habitat. The proposed project would directly impact habitat for this species. Least Bell's vireo territories were observed within the arroyo willow thickets habitat along the banks of 28 Environmental Checklist
Biological Resources
Murrieta Creek in the Study Area. A Natural Environment Study was performed within the Biological Study Area and concluded that impacts to least Bell's vireo are expected to occur as a result of the project. As a result, a Rielegieal y liq ival^^+ ^~ Swpe.,^. PFeseFYatie~ (DBESP� report was prepared that described proposed mitigation for this impact (Appendix D). The project will adhere to the MSHCP Guidelines for Covered Proiects found in Sections 6.1.4, 7.5.1, and 7.5.3, and of the Western Riverside County Final MSHCP. The project will also implement all feasible BMPs from the Western Riverside County Final MSHCP during construction. A qualified biologist shall be onsite during construction activities to ensure that these guidelines are followed.

The removal of vegetation may also result in temporary impacts to nesting birds due to the temporarily reduced available nesting habitat. To reduce impacts to sensitive and special status species, mitigation measures 1310-1 through 310-5 from in the DBESP report will be incorporated into the project and will result in less than significant impacts.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED
b. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Riparian habitats are those habitats located along banks or rivers or streams. Sensitive natural communities are natural communities that are considered rare in the region by the USFWS, CDFW, or local regulatory agencies; that are known to provide habitat for sensitive animal or plant species; or are known to be significant wildlife corridors. The Study Area contains freshwater marsh, riparian scrub, southern willow thickets, non-native grassland, and developed/ornamental areas. Freshwater marsh, riparian scrub, southern willow thickets meet the definition of a Riparian/Riverine community. Project implementation would result in unavoidable permanent impacts to 0.09 acre and temporary impacts to 0.78 acre of freshwater marsh, permanent impacts to 0.06 acre and temporary impacts to 0.08 acre of riparian scrub, and permanent impacts to 0.01 acre and temporary impacts to 0.36 acre of southern willow scrub. Project implementation would result in unavoidable permanent impacts to 0.16 acre of Riparian/Riverine area and temporary impacts to

1.22 acres of Riparian/Riverine area. The MSHCP recommends avoidance of Riparian/Riverine areas, if feasible. Since avoidance is not feasible based on the nature of the proposed project, a DBESP describing the mitigation strategy to provide Riparian/Riverine resources of equivalent or superior habitat value to those being impacted was prepared. The mitigation measures identified in the DBESP report will be incorporated into the project and will result in less than significant impacts.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED
Would the project 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?
Wetlands are defined under the federal Clean Water Act as land that is flooded or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that normally does support, a prevalence of vegetation adapted to life in saturated soils. Wetlands include areas such as swamps, marshes, bogs, mudflats, and vernal pools. Murrieta Creek is under the jurisdiction of the U.S. ^F"v Y GE)~^S Of r^^i^^^Fs 4USACE}, the CDFW, and {RWQCB--Region 9, San Diego Region. Project implementation would result in impacts to 0.96 acres (0.08 acre permanent, 0.88 acres temporary) of wetland waters of the U.S., and 2.48 acres (0.33 acre permanent, 2.15 acres temporary) of wetland waters of the State. The DBESP describes the Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 29

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
mitigation strategy to provide Riparian/Riverine resources, which include jurisdictional wetland waters, of equivalent or superior habitat value to those being impacted. The mitigation measures identified in the DBESP report will be incorporated in the project and will result in less than significant impacts.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED
d. Would the project 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? A variety of biological resources are known to exist within the vicinity of the project site.

Implementation of future development of the project may have the potential to directly or indirectly impact sensitive species and habitats. The project is located within the Murrieta Creek Proposed Constrained Linkage 13, which connects core habitat at the Santa Rosa Plateau and Proposed Linkage 10 to conserved habitats in San Diego County. Murrieta Creek is constrained on all sides by existing urban development; therefore, wildlife is constrained to moving along the creek, which is used as a wildlife corridor. The proposed bridge across Murrieta Creek would be similar to the Winchester Bridge, approximately 1,000 feet northwest of the project site. It is assumed that wildlife species that currently move along the creek under the Winchester Road Bridge would continue along the creek as they currently do. However; night lighting and headlights on the proposed bridge could increase light levels within the creek, which could discourage nocturnal wildlife movement. Additionally, if vehicle noise and or the noise driving over the bridge substantially increases above ambient conditions in the creek, this could also discourage wildlife movement. As an MSHCP-covered roadway, the project is also subject to the guidelines provided in MSHCP Sections 7.5.1 and 7.5.3. Urban/Wildlands Interface guidelines presented in Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP are intended to address indirect effects associated with locating commercial, mixed uses and residential developments in proximity to a Conservation Area. Final project design will ensure BMPs are incorporated into the proposed project including the guidelines included in Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP as well as maintenance and conveyance of seasonal clean water flows through the project site. In addition, BMPs would be implemented during construction in accordance with the Western Riverside County Final MSHCP, as described below (Dudek 2003).

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED
e. Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
The City's General Plan includes a number of policies related to the protection of sensitive natural resources, including biological resources. The project will not conflict with any local ordinances or policies as they relate to the protection of biological resources. The City of Temecula has a Heritage Tree Ordinance designed to protect certain species of trees within the City. However, no trees designated in the ordinance are located within the project area. The City of Temecula General Plan outlines a number of policies which emphasize the interrelationship between the built and natural environment. The General Plan recognizes the importance of conserving important biological habitat and protecting plant and animal specifies of concern. As a result, the General Plan requires that development proposals identify significant biological resources. The MSHCP Consistency Analysis and DBESP report identified mitigation measures to reduce impacts to biological resources to less than significant. These mitigation measures will be incorporated into the project and will be consistent with the resources agencies' comments.
30 Environmental Checklist
Biological Resources

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED
f. Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
The City of Temecula and project site are located within the Western Riverside County MSHCP, a comprehensive, multi -jurisdictional Habitat Conservation Plan focusing on the conservation of 146 species and their associated habitats in Western Riverside County. The Plan's overall goal is to maintain biological and ecological diversity within the rapidly urbanizing area. The Plan Area encompasses approximately 1.26 million acres and includes the City of Temecula within its boundaries. The City is a participant in the MSHCP. As such, impacts on special status species covered by the MSHCP are considered fully mitigated by the City's participation in the MSHCP. The project's consistency with the provisions in the MSHCP are described in the MSHCP Consistency Analysis, dated July 2021, prepared by Rincon. The proposed project will not conflict with the provisions of the MSHCP with implementation of the below mitigation measures.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED
Mitigation Measures
- - --
-- -- - ---- - -- - -- -- -- -- - -- -- --- --
BI0-1 _Riparian /Riverine Resources
The project has been designed to minimize impacts on Riparian/Riverine Resources.

Riparian/Riverine resources mapped in the survey area generally overlap with resources under the jurisdiction of the USACE, the CDFW, and the RWQCB. Therefore, the following mitigation would satisfy the MSHCP's requirements for the loss of Riparian/Riverine resources, and jurisdictional resources.

Prior to the initiation of any construction -related activities that result in any ground disturbances and subsequent direct and/or indirect impacts on areas within these agencies' jurisdictions, the City of Temecula shall obtain all required permits/agreements/certifications from the USACE, the CDFW, the RWQCB, and the RCFC&WCD.

The City shall obtain all appropriate permits for impacts on USACE, CDFW, and RWQCB jurisdictional areas. Mitigation for the loss of jurisdictional areas and Riparian/Riverine resources may include (1) preservation of existing riparian habitat (preferably within or adjacent to an area identified as a Criteria Area, Core, or Linkage by the MSHCP) or (2) restoration of riparian habitat (preferably within or adjacent to an area identified as a Criteria Area, Core, or Linkage by the MSHCP). If the City chooses to mitigate Riparian/Riverine habitat through purchase or restoration, acreage shall be of equivalent or superior quality habitat at no less than a 1:1 ratio. Currently, the proposed mitigation strategy would: (1) restore areas temporarily impacted by the project onsite at a 1:1 ratio; and (2) provide offsite restoration for areas permanently impacted by the project. The resource agencies, including the WRC RCA and the USFWS, will review the proposed acquisition during the permitting process to ensure that the lands to be acquired by the City of Temecula are of equivalent or superior Final Initial Study — Mitigated Negative Declaration 31

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
quality to the resources impacted by the project. During site meetings, the resource agencies gave preliminary approval to restoring Riparian/Riverine habitat along Temecula Creek as mitigation for the project (Appendix D).

If the project would mitigate for impacts on Riparian/Riverine resources through restoration of riparian habitat (as currently planned), a detailed restoration program shall be prepared for approval by the USACE and the CDFW prior to construction and shall contain the following items:
■ Responsibilities and Qualifications. Responsibilities and qualifications of the personnel to implement and supervise the plan. The responsibilities of the City, specialists, and maintenance personnel that will supervise and implement the plan shall be specified. ■ Site Selection. Site selection for restoration and enhancement mitigation shall be determined in coordination with the City and the resource agencies. The mitigation site(s) shall be located in a dedicated open space area. The restoration site selected is located along Temecula Creek. ■ Site Preparation and Planting Implementation. Site preparation shall include (1) protection of existing native species; (2) trash and weed removal; (3) native species salvage and reuse (i.e., duff); (4) soil treatments (i.e., imprinting, decompacting); (5) temporary irrigation installation; (6) erosion -control measures (i.e., rice or willow wattles); (7) seed mix application; and (8) container species, if appropriate.
■ Schedule. A schedule shall be developed which includes planting to occur in late fall and early winter, between October 1 and January 30.
■ Maintenance Plan/Guidelines. The maintenance plan shall include (1) weed control; (2) herbivory control; (3) trash removal; (4) irrigation system maintenance; (5) maintenance training; (6) replacement planting; and (7) biological monitoring during maintenance activities that occur during the breeding season.
■ Monitoring Plan. The monitoring plan shall include (1) qualitative monitoring (i.e., photographs and general observations); (2) quantitative monitoring (i.e., randomly placed transects); (3) performance criteria as approved by the resource agencies; (4) monthly reports for the first year, and every other month for following years; and (5) annual reports for three to five years, which will be submitted to the resource agencies. The site shall be monitored and maintained for five years to ensure successful establishment of riparian habitat within the restored and created areas; however, if there is successful coverage prior to five years, the City may be released from monitoring requirements with the approval of the resource agencies. ■ Long-term Preservation. Long-term preservation of the site shall also be outlined in the conceptual mitigation plan to ensure the mitigation site is not impacted by future projects.

PERMANENT AND TEMPORARY PROJECT IMPACTS
To mitigate permanent impacts to 0.16 acre of Riparian/Riverine areas and temporary impacts to 1.22 acre of Riparian/Riverine areas (coterminous with CDFW jurisdiction), the City of Temecula shall perform habitat rehabilitation of a 1.23-acre area in the Temecula Creek Mitigation Parcel. The City of Temecula shall mitigate temporary impacts at a 1:1 ratio and permanent impacts at a 3:1 ratio for rehabilitation at the Temecula Creek mitigation site. Rehabilitation activities for permanent impacts would consist of 1) control of non-native weeds, and 2) replanting with appropriate native, riparian plant species that currently occur within the mitigation parcel. For temporary impacts, habitat shall be re -vegetated with a native seed mix suitable for use at each location after construction. This seed mix will be in addition to replanting cuttings, regular weeding and monitoring of the arroyo willow thicket that is currently on site.
32 Environmental Checklist
Biological Resources
All restoration activities shall be overseen by a qualified Restoration Specialist familiar with riparian habitat restoration implementation, monitoring, and reporting. The work will be performed by a Restoration Contractor. The Restoration Contractor is a qualified native landscape contractor with experience in riparian restoration, who is responsible for site preparation, installation, and maintenance of the mitigation area.

Table 6 Proposed Mitigation Site Acreage
Freshwater Marsh

0.09 3:1 0.78
1:1 1.05
Riparian Scrub

0.06 3:1 0.08
1:1 0.26
Southern Willow Scrub

0.01 3:1 0.36
1:1 0.39
Total

0.16 — 1.22
— 1.7
The Restoration Specialist shall identify the spatial distribution of native plantings for optimal habitat development based on various environmental factors, including, but not limited to, elevation and hydrology. Final quantities per species shall be determined based on site conditions after construction and as directed by the Restoration Specialist. Cuttings to be installed in the temporary impact areas shall be spaced irregularly and in clusters to emulate natural conditions.

Actual species installed shall be dependent on those species that are available at the time of implementation. A vegetative cover consisting of desirable riparian plant species is expected to develop from the installed material with proper management. Plant spacing is designed to achieve dense native cover within three years or less. It is expected that native understory species will naturally colonize and establish.

BI0-2 Least Bell's Vireo
The limits of project construction shall be clearly delineated with the use of fencing (lathe and rope, orange snow fencing, or stakes and flagging) prior to the initiation of construction. All removal of riparian vegetation shall be conducted during the non -breeding season for this species (i.e., September 16 to March 14). Vegetation removal within the creek shall be monitored by a qualified Biological Monitor.

To the extent practicable, construction of the project shall be conducted during the non -breeding season for the least Bell's vireo (i.e., September 16 to March 14) in order to avoid indirect noise impacts on this species. If project construction begins during the vireo nesting season, a qualified Biologist shall survey all riparian habitat within 500 feet of the construction limits for the presence of least Bell's vireo nests/territories prior to the start of construction. Three surveys shall be conducted within one week prior to the initiation of construction within or adjacent to riparian habitat. Any active nests/territories shall be mapped on an aerial photograph by the Biologist, and the location information shall be given to the USFWS and CDFW. The locatio33n of any least Bell's vireo nests/territories shall be marked on applicable construction plans. If no active nests/territories are found, construction may proceed. Surveys shall be updated once per week as long as construction is within 500 feet of riparian habitat. Surveys may be discontinued after if no vireos have been detected after eight weekly visits; if a vireo territory is observed, monitoring surveys shall be continued until vireo leave for the wintering grounds (August/September). A pre -construction least Bell's vireo survey report (including mapping of any active territories) shall be prepared by a qualified Biologist and shall be submitted to the USFWS and CDFW.

Final Initial Study — Mitigated Negative Declaration 33

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
Any active territories shall be protected as Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs) until no longer occupied to ensure compliance with the Federal and State Endangered Species Acts and Migratory Bird Treaty Act. To protect any active territory sites, the following restrictions on construction are required between March 15 and September 15 (or until territories are no longer active, as determined by a qualified Biologist): (1) no clearing of habitat shall be allowed within Murrieta Creek and (2) access and surveying shall not be allowed within approximately 100 feet of nests/territories (or as otherwise determined by a qualified Biologist). Any construction activities that would occur within Murrieta Creek during the breeding season shall be monitored by a qualified Biologist.

If construction would result in noise readings greater than 60 A -weighted decibels (dBA) at the edge of least Bell's vireo habitat (Murrieta Creek), construction shall not be allowed during the breeding season (March 15 to September 15) unless appropriate noise measures are implemented, as approved by the USFWS and the CDFW. Noise measures may include, but would not be limited to, soundwalls to reduce noise between the construction site and the vireo territory; use of construction equipment with noise -reducing alterations; or delay of noise -intensive construction (e.g., pile driving, demolition) until after the breeding season. Soundwalls shall be installed, as - needed, to maintain a noise level of less than 60 dBA at the edge of riparian habitat. Installation of the noise barriers shall be monitored by a qualified Biologist to ensure that riparian habitat is not inadvertently affected.

A noise monitoring methodology shall be used during the breeding season for construction within 500 feet of occupied habitat along Murrieta Creek. Noise monitoring stations shall be monitored weekly between March 15 and September 15 to ensure that noise levels remain less than 60 dBA. If noise monitoring determines that the noise level exceeds 60 dBA, noise barriers shall be modified, as recommended by a qualified Acoustical Technician, to reduce noise levels below 60 dBA.

BIO-3 Burrowing Owl
A pre -construction survey for burrowing owl will be conducted 30 days prior to construction in accordance with Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP. If burrowing owl is present in the impact area during the breeding season (March 1 to August 31), the burrow will be protected until nesting activity has ended. To protect the active burrow, a 500-foot buffer will be established around the active burrow.

Any encroachment into the buffer area around the active burrow will only be allowed if the Biologist determines that the proposed activity will not disturb the nest occupants. Construction can proceed when the qualified Biologist has determined that fledglings have left the nest. If burrowing owl is present in the impact area during the non -breeding season (September 1 to February 28), the burrowing owl will be flushed from the burrow and the burrow will be closed using CDFW-approved burrow -closing procedures. If no burrowing owls are observed, construction may proceed.

BIO-4 Night Lighting
Permanent night lighting used to light the bridge shall use best engineering practices to direct lighting to the roadway and shall minimize spillage of light into adjacent habitat areas to the extent practicable. Additionally, approved wildlife -friendly night lighting will be used. Lighting designs shall be submitted to the City of Temecula Planning Department for review and approval prior to the issuance of a grading permit for the project.
34 Environmental Checklist
Biological Resources
BI0-5 Noise
The bridge concrete deck shall receive grinding and grooving treatment per Caltrans bridge design standards to reduce vehicular tire noise.

Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 35

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
36 Environmental Checklist
Biological Resources
Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 37

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
m

Environmental Checklist
Cultural Resources
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
Would the project:

Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource
pursuant to §15064.5? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to §15064.5? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of dedicated
cemeteries?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
CEQA requires a lead agency determine whether a project may have a significant effect on historical resources (Public Resources Code [PRC], Section 21084.1) and tribal cultural resources (PRC Section 21074 [a][1][A]-[B]). A historical resource is a resource listed in, or determined to be eligible for listing, in the California Register of Historical Resources, a resource included in a local register of historical resources, or any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript that a lead agency determines to be historically significant (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5[a][1-3]).

A resource shall be considered historically significant if it:

1. Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California's history and cultural heritage;

2. Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past;

3. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values; or

4. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

In addition, if it can be demonstrated that a project would cause damage to a unique archaeological resource, the lead agency may require reasonable efforts be made to permit any or all of these resources to be preserved in place or left in an undisturbed state. To the extent that resources cannot be left undisturbed, mitigation measures are required (PRC, Section 21083.2[a], [b]).

PRC, Section 21083.2(g) defines a unique archaeological resource as an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it:

1. Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information;
Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 39

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive

2. Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type; or

3. Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person.
a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5?
b. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
An archaeological resource survey revealed that the project site consists of the undeveloped channel that is bordered by developed areas containing buildings and roadways. At the time of the survey, vegetation growth within the channel was dense, with poor ground visibility throughout (0-5 percent). No evidence of archaeological resources was identified during the survey.

On July 25, 2019, Rincon conducted a records search of the California Historical Resources Information System at the Eastern Information Center, located at University of California, Riverside.

The records search and literature review identified no known archaeological resources within or immediately adjacent to the project site. However, eight archaeological sites, including six prehistoric archaeological sites were identified within a 1-mile buffer. These sites are located on elevated landforms at least 20 feet above the active channel and annual floodplain. In addition, no evidence of archaeological remains was found during the pedestrian survey of the project site.

Although the presence of buildings and roadways precluded the inspection of the ground surface in portions of the project site, geoarchaeological data indicate that the area has a low potential to contain buried prehistoric and historic period cultural deposits and those that may be present are likely in a secondary context. Based on the results of the records search and literature review, survey, and geoarchaeological data, there is a low likelihood of encountering any archaeological resources within the project site. Though the potential is low that historic period or archaeological resources exist on site, there is a chance unanticipated discoveries of cultural resources would occur, resulting in a significant impact. Mitigation measures are included to reduce project impacts to a less than significant level.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED
C. Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
Evidence has been found that suggests human remains are present within % mile of the project site.

In addition, Native American populations were known to bury remains along water courses such as Murrieta Creek. Therefore, it is possible that remains may be unearthed during construction activities. If human remains are discovered during construction activities, the mitigation measures below would reduce project impacts to a less than significant level.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED
40 Environmental Checklist
Cultural Resources
Mitigation Measures
CR- I Retain a Qualified Archaeological Monitor
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the City shall retain a Riverside County qualified archaeological monitor to monitor all ground -disturbing activities in archaeological sensitive sediments in an effort to identify any unknown archaeological resources. The Project Archaeologist shall have the authority to temporarily redirect earthmoving activities in the event that suspected archaeological resources are unearthed during project construction. The Project Archeologist shall attend the pre -grading meeting with the City, Pechanga Tribe, the construction manager and any contractors and shall conduct a mandatory Cultural Resources Worker Sensitivity Training to those in attendance. The training shall include a brief review of the cultural sensitivity of the project site and surrounding area; what resources could potentially be identified during earthmoving activities; the requirements of the monitoring program; the protocols that apply in the event inadvertent discoveries of cultural resources are identified, including who to contact and appropriate avoidance measures until the find(s) can be properly evaluated; and any other appropriate protocols. All new construction personnel that will conduct earthwork or grading activities that begin work on the project following the initial Training shall take the Cultural Sensitivity Training prior to beginning work and the project archaeologist shall make themselves available to provide the training on an as - needed basis.

CR-2 Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement At least 30 days prior to beginning project construction the City shall contact the Pechanga Tribe to notify the Tribe of grading, excavation and the monitoring program, and to coordinate with the City of Temecula and the Tribe to develop a Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement.

The Agreement shall address the treatment of known cultural resources, the designation, responsibilities, and participation of professional Native American Tribal monitors during grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities; project grading and development scheduling; terms of compensation for the monitors; and treatment and final disposition of any cultural resources, sacred sites, and human remains discovered on the site. Tribal monitors shall have the authority to temporarily halt and redirect earth moving activities in the affected area in the event that suspected archaeological resources are unearthed. The Pechanga Tribe shall attend the pre -grading meeting with the City, Project Archaeologist, the construction manager and any contractors and shall conduct a mandatory Cultural Resources Worker Sensitivity Training to those in attendance. The training shall include a brief review of the cultural sensitivity of the project and the surrounding area; what resources could potentially be identified during earthmoving activities; the requirements of the monitoring program; the protocols that apply in the event inadvertent discoveries of cultural resources are identified, including who to contact and appropriate avoidance measures until the find(s) can be properly evaluated; and any other appropriate protocols.

CR-3 Pre -grade Report
Prior to beginning project construction, the Project Archaeologist shall file a Cultural Resource Monitoring Plan (CRIMP) with the City to document the proposed methodology for grading activity observation which will be determined in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe. Methodology shall include:
■ Project description and location;
■ Project grading and development scheduling;
Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 41

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
■ Roles and responsibilities of individuals on the project; ■ The pre -grading meeting and Cultural Resources Worker Sensitivity Training details; ■ The protocols and stipulations that the contractor, City, Consulting Tribe(s) and Project Archaeologist shall follow in the event of inadvertent cultural resources discoveries, including any newly discovered cultural resource deposits that shall be subject to a cultural resource's evaluation;
■ The type of recordation needed for inadvertent finds and the stipulations of recordation of sacred items; and,
■ Contact information of relevant individuals for the project.

CR-4 Inadvertent Discovery of Human Remains
If human remains are encountered, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the Riverside County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin. Further, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in place and free from disturbance until a final decision as to their treatment and disposition has been made. If the Riverside County Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission must be contacted within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission must then immediately identify the "most likely descendant(s)" of receiving notification of the discovery. The most likely descendant(s) shall then make recommendations within 48 hours of being granted access to the site, and engage in consultations concerning the treatment of the remains as provided in Public Resources Code 5097.98 and the Treatment Agreement described in TCR-2.

CR-5 Ownership of Cultural Resources
The landowner shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including sacred items, burial goods and all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project area to the appropriate Tribe for proper treatment and disposition.

CR-6 Avoidance of Sacred Sites
It is understood by all parties that, unless otherwise required by law, the site of any reburial of Native American human remains or associated grave goods shall not be disclosed and shall not be governed by public disclosure requirements of the California Public Records Act. The Coroner, pursuant to the specific exemption set forth in California Government Code 6254(r), parties, and Lead Agencies, shall be asked to withhold public disclosure information related to such reburial, pursuant to the specific exemption set forth in California Government Code 6254(r).

CR-7 Inadvertent Discovery of Cultural Resources
If inadvertent discoveries of subsurface archaeological/cultural resources are discovered during grading, the Developer, the project archaeologist, and the Tribe shall assess the significance of such resources and shall meet and confer regarding the mitigation for such resources. Pursuant to California Public Resources Code § 21083.2(b) avoidance is the preferred method of preservation for archaeological resources. If the Developer, the project archaeologist and the Tribe cannot agree on the significance or the mitigation for such resources, these issues will be presented to the City's Planning Director for a decision. The Planning Director shall make the determination based on the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act with respect to archaeological resources and 42 Environmental Checklist
Cultural Resources
shall take into account the religious beliefs, customs, and practices of the Tribe. Treatment of tribal cultural resources inadvertently discovered during the project's ground -disturbing activities shall be subject to the consultation process required by state law and AB 52:
■ All ground disturbance activities within 100 feet of the discovered cultural resources shall be halted until a meeting is convened between the Project Applicant, the Project Archaeologist, the Tribal Representative(s), and the Community Development Director to discuss the significance of the find.
■ At the meeting, the significance of the discoveries shall be discussed and after consultation with the Tribal Representative(s) and the Project Archaeologist, a decision shall be made, with the concurrence of the Community Development Director, as to the appropriate mitigation (documentation, recovery, avoidance, etc.) for the cultural resources. ■ Further ground disturbance, including but not limited to grading, trenching etc., shall not resume within the area of the discovery until an agreement has been reached by all parties as to the appropriate mitigation. Work shall be allowed to continue outside of the buffer area and will be monitored by additional Tribal Monitors, if needed.
■ Treatment and avoidance of the newly discovered resources shall be consistent with the Cultural Resources Management Plan and Monitoring Agreements entered into with the appropriate tribes. This may include avoidance of the cultural resources through project design, in -place preservation of cultural resources located in native soils and/or re -burial on the project property so they are not subject to further disturbance in perpetuity as identified in Non - Disclosure of Reburial Condition/Mitigation Measures.
■ If the find is determined to be significant and avoidance of the site has not been achieved, a Phase III data recovery plan shall be prepared by the Project Archeologist, in consultation with the Tribe, and shall be submitted to the City for their review and approval prior to implementation of the said plan.
■ Pursuant to Calif. Pub. Res. Code § 21083.2(b), avoidance is the preferred method of preservation for archaeological resources and cultural resources. If the Project Applicant and the Tribe(s) cannot agree on the significance or the mitigation for the archaeological or cultural resources, these issues will be presented to the City Community Development Director for decision. The City Community Development Director shall make the determination based on the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act with respect to archaeological resources, recommendations of the project archeologist and shall consider the cultural and religious principles and practices of the Tribe. Notwithstanding any other rights available under the law, the decision of the City Community Development Director shall be appealable to the City Planning Commission and/or City Council." Evidence of compliance with this mitigation measure, if a significant archaeological resource is found, shall be provided to City of Temecula upon the completion of a treatment plan and final report detailing the significance and treatment finding.

CR-8 Final Disposition of Inadvertent Discovery
In the event that Native American cultural resources are discovered during the course of grading (inadvertent discoveries), the following procedures shall be carried out for final disposition of the discoveries. One or more of the following treatments, in order of preference, shall be employed with the tribes. Evidence of such shall be provided to the City of Temecula Community Development Department:

Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 43

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
Preservation -In -Place of the cultural resources, if feasible. Preservation in place means avoiding the resources, leaving them in the place where they were found with no development affecting the integrity of the resources.

Reburial of the resources on the project property. The measures for reburial shall include, at least, measures and provisions to protect the future reburial area from any future impacts in perpetuity. Reburial shall not occur until all legally required cataloging and basic recordation have been completed, with an exception that sacred items, burial goods, and Native American human remains are excluded. Any reburial process shall be culturally appropriate. Listing of contents and location of the reburial shall be included in the confidential Phase IV report. The Phase IV Report shall be filed with the City under a confidential cover and not subject to Public Records Request.

If preservation in place or reburial is not feasible then the resources shall be curated in a culturally appropriate manner at a Riverside County curation facility that meets State Resources Department Office of Historic Preservation Guidelines for the Curation of Archaeological Resources ensuring access and use pursuant to the Guidelines. The collection and associated records shall be transferred, including title, and are to be accompanied by payment of the fees necessary for permanent curation. Evidence of curation in the form of a letter from the curation facility stating that subject archaeological materials have been received and that all fees have been paid, shall be provided by the landowner to the City. There shall be no destructive or invasive testing on sacred items, burial goods, and Native American human remains. Results concerning finds of any inadvertent discoveries shall be included in the Phase IV monitoring report. Evidence of compliance with this mitigation measure, if a significant archaeological resource is found, shall be provided to City of Temecula upon the completion of a treatment plan and final report detailing the significance and treatment finding.

CR-9 Final Inspection
Prior to final inspection, the Project Archeologist is to submit two (2) copies of the Phase IV Cultural Resources Monitoring Report that complies with the Planning Department's requirements for such reports. The Phase IV report shall include evidence of the required cultural/historical sensitivity training for the construction staff held during the pre -grade meeting. The Planning Department shall review the reports to determine adequate mitigation compliance. Provided the reports are adequate, the Planning Department shall clear this condition. Once the report(s) are determined to be adequate, two (2) copies shall be submitted to the Eastern Information Center (EIC) at the University of California Riverside (UCR) and one (1) copy shall be submitted to the Pechanga Cultural Resources Department.
44 Environmental Checklist
Energy
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Result in a potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption
of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
❑
❑
■ ❑
b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local
plan for renewable energy or energy
efficiency?
❑
❑
❑ ■
a. Would the project result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
The proposed project would use nonrenewable resources for construction of the project. The anticipated use of these resources is detailed in the following subsections. The Road Construction Emissions Model outputs for the air pollutant and GHG emissions modeling (Appendix C), were used to estimate energy consumption associated with the proposed project.

Construction Energy Demand
The project would require grubbing/land clearing, grading/excavation, drainage/utilities/sub-grade, and paving. During project construction, energy would be consumed in the form of petroleum - based fuels used to power off -road construction vehicles and equipment on the project site, construction worker travel to and from the project site, and vehicles used to deliver materials to the site. As shown in Table 7, project construction would require approximately 9,768 gallons of gasoline and approximately 266,783 gallons of diesel fuel. These construction energy estimates are conservative because they assume that the construction equipment used in each phase of construction is operating every day of construction.

Table 7 Estimated Fuel Consumption during Construction
Fuel Cor
Source Gasoline
Construction Equipment & Hauling Trips Not Applicable
Construction Worker Vehicle Trips
See Appendix E for energy calculation sheets.
9,768
266,783
Not Applicable
Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 45

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
Energy use during construction would be temporary in nature, and construction equipment used would be typical of similar -sized construction projects in the region. In addition, construction contractors would be required to comply with the provisions of California Code of Regulations Title 13 Sections 2449 and 2485, which prohibit diesel -fueled commercial motor vehicles and off - road diesel vehicles from idling for more than five minutes and would minimize unnecessary fuel consumption. Construction equipment would be subject to the USEPA Construction Equipment Fuel Efficiency Standard, which would also minimize inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary fuel consumption. Furthermore, per applicable regulatory requirements, such as the latest California Green Building Standard Codes standards, the project would comply with construction waste management practices to divert a minimum of 65 percent of construction debris. These practices would result in efficient use of energy necessary to construct the project. In the interest of cost - efficiency, construction contractors also would not utilize fuel in a manner that is wasteful or unnecessary. Therefore, the project would not involve the inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary use of energy during construction, and construction impacts related to energy consumption would be less than significant.

Operational Energy Demand
Operation of the project would lead to a slight reduction in gasoline and diesel fuel consumption associated with vehicle trips. As described in Section 3, Air Quality, the construction of the bridge would reduce distance traveled by 2,870 feet per vehicle trip. Existing vehicles would be able to cut through the industrial park area using Overland Drive and Avenida Alvarado instead of using Winchester Road or Via Montezuma. Also, the proposed project would not add capacity. It would not result in an increase in traffic volumes or resulting energy use in the form of electricity, natural gas or petroleum following completion of construction. Therefore, project operation would not result in potentially significant environmental effects due to the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy, and no impacts would occur.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
b. Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
The SCAG Connect SoCal RTP/SCS contains transportation strategies to achieve the following:
preserve and optimize the current and future system and implement capital improvement by mode to complete the system (2020b). These overarching transportations goals combined with the sustainable communities strategies for land use developments will help the SCAG achieve and exceed emissions reduction targets. The Connect SoCal RTP/SCS is intended to help to minimize energy consumption by improving the overall efficiency of the transportation system and land use patterns.

The proposed project would lead to the construction of a bridge that would provide safe all-weather access across Murrieta Creek; provide a reliable route for emergency vehicles, motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists; and provide an additional access point to the City's industrial park. This would improve traffic operations at the project site by diverting traffic from other nearby intersections to this new access point, which would reduce congestion and improve vehicular traffic flow. This type of project supports the efforts of the Connect SoCal RTP/SCS. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. No impact would occur.

NO IMPACT
46 Environmental Checklist
Geology and Soils
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a.

Directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake
fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or
based on other substantial evidence
of a known fault?
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
iii. Seismic -related ground failure,
including liquefaction?
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
iv. Landslides?
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
b.

Result in substantial soil erosion or the
loss of topsoil?
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
c.

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

Be located on expansive soil, as defined
in Table 1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial direct or
indirect risks to life or property?
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
e.

Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
f.

Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 47

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
a.i. Would the project directly or indirectly 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 Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? The seismically active region of Southern California is crossed by numerous faults. A fault is a fracture in the crust of the earth along which rocks on one side have moved relative to those on the other side. Most faults are the result of repeated displacements over a long period of time. A fault trace is the line on the earth's surfacing defining the fault. Fault rupture is the displacement that occurs along the surface of a fault during an earthquake. The California Geological Survey has established earthquake fault zones known as Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones around the surface traces of active faults to assist cities and counties in planning, zoning, and building regulation functions. These zones identify areas where potential surface rupture along an active fault could prove hazardous and identify where special studies are required to characterize hazards to habitable structures.

According to the report of Geotechnical Design Report, (Leighton Consulting, Inc., 2023) the proposed bridge structure does not fall within an Alquist-Priolo fault Zone; however, the easterly improvement consisting of street improvements outside the proposed bridge may fall within the Alquist-Priolo fault Zone. The nearest mapped trace of the Temecula/Wildomar trace of the Elsinore fault is located approximately 500 feet east of the proposed bridge. The Murrieta Creek fault associated with the Elsinore Fault zone is located approximately 2,000 feet west of the proposed bridge. The project does not include any occupiable structures, which would expose people to fault related hazards; however, Caltrans Guidelines for Structures Foundations Reports (Version 2.0, dated March 2006) requires active faults that have the potential to affect the project site be identified in accordance with Caltrans Seismic Hazard Map and Report 1996, or latest revision. The calculated Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) was approximately 0.54g for this site using Caltrans AIRS online tool V3.0.2. The project will incorporate all recommendations contained in the Geotechnical Design Report prepared for the project. Compliance with the applicable site preparation and design standards will ensure potential impacts related to strong seismic ground shaking would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
a.ii. Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking? According to the City of Temecula General Plan and various published earthquake hazard maps, the Elsinore fault, which is located to the east and west of the project site, traverses the City. Other faults surrounding the City include the San Andreas, San Jacinto, San Gabriel, Newport -Inglewood, Sierra Madre -Santa Susana-Cucamonga, Rose Canyon, Coronado Banks, San Diego Trough, and San Clemente Island faults. Several nearby faults, including the Elsinore and San Jacinto fault zones, are capable of generating strong ground motions at this location. The San Andreas Fault is located further away to the northeast but is capable of generating larger magnitude earthquakes. The project site is located in a seismically active area, as is the majority of Southern California. The project would be constructed to the standards of the most recent seismic Uniform Building and Safety Code and Caltrans Seismic Design Criteria, and will incorporate all recommendations contained in the Geotechnical Design Report prepared for the project (Leighton Consulting, Inc., 48 Environmental Checklist
Geology and Soils
2023). Compliance with the applicable site preparation and design standards will ensure potential impacts related to strong seismic ground shaking would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
a.iii. Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? Liquefaction is a seismic phenomenon in which loose, saturated, granular soils behave similarly to a fluid when subject to high -intensity ground shaking. Liquefaction occurs when the shock waves from an earthquake of sufficient magnitude and duration compact and decrease the volume of the soil; if drainage cannot occur, this reduction in soil volume will increase the pressure exerted on the water contained in the soil, forcing it upward to the ground surface. This process can transform stable soil material into a fluid -like state. This fluid -like state can result in horizontal and vertical movements of soils and building foundations from lateral spreading of liquefied materials and post -earthquake settlement of liquefied materials. Liquefaction occurs when three general conditions exist: 1) shallow groundwater; 2) low density non -cohesive (granular) soils; and 3) high -intensity ground motion.

According to the Geotechnical Design Report (2023), the project area is in a liquefaction zone.

Geotechnical exploratory borings were obtained for evaluation of potential dry seismic settlement and liquefaction induced settlement. The estimated total seismically induced settlement is expected to be less than two (2) inches along the bridge alignment. The differential settlement is expected to be less than one (1) inch over a horizontal distance of 100 feet or between adjacent bridge piers/abutments. Compliance with the applicable design standards will ensure potential impacts related to liquefaction would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
a.iv. Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides?
Landslide hazard areas are generally considered to exist when substantial slopes are located on or immediately adjacent to a subject property. There are no substantial slopes located within or near the project site that could potentially create a hazard associated with landslides. The channel slope stability was analyzed as part of the Geotechnical Design Report and the results of the technical analyses indicate adequate factor of safety against slope instability (Leighton Consulting, Inc., 2023).

Consequently, the potential for landslides to occur at the site is considered less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
b. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Soil erosion refers to the process by which soil or earth material is loosened or dissolved and removed from its original location. Erosion can occur by varying processes and may occur in the project site where bare soil is exposed to wind or moving water (both rainfall and surface runoff).

The processes of erosion are generally a function of material type, terrain steepness, rainfall or irrigation levels, surface drainage conditions, and general land uses.

The site may be susceptible to soil erosion during the short-term construction activities. As discussed in further detail in Section 10, Hydrology and Water Quality, short-term erosion effects during the construction phase of the project would be prevented through implementation of a Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 49

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which is required in accordance with the Countywide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Permit. The SWPPP specifies the Erosion Control and Sediment Control Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would be implemented during construction to control on -site and off -site erosion. Therefore, with implementation of an approved SWPPP, impacts resulting from erosion during construction would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Would the project 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?
As previously discussed under Responses 7.a.iii and 7.a.iv above, the project site is in a liquefaction zone, but the potential for surface manifestation of liquefaction is considered to be low. Subsidence occurs when a void is located or created underneath a surface, causing the surface to collapse.

Common causes of subsidence include withdrawal of groundwater or oil resources or wells beneath a surface. Subsidence is not known to have occurred in the project area and is unlikely to occur at the project site. Compliance with recommendations from the Report of Geotechnical Investigation will reduce risk of geologic hazards at the site to a less than significant level.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
d. Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? Expansive soils are typically associated with fine-grained clayey soils that have the potential to shrink and swell with repeated cycles of wetting and drying. expansive soils, if encountered within the project site, would be removed and/or replaced as part of standard construction practices pursuant to the City and/or 2016 California Building Code building requirements.

The Report of Geotechnical Investigation noted that two types of soils were encountered onsite including artificial alluvial consisting of silty sand and older alluvium consisting of loose to very dense silty sand, poorly graded sand and sand with silt. The Report did not specifically discuss the expansive potential of these soils, but it is assumed to be low given the lack of clays within subsurface soils. The Report of Geotechnical Investigation recommends soil materials below the subgrade be over excavated and replaced as compacted fill in accordance with Caltrans standard Specifications to reduce risk due to differential settlement. Compliance with recommendations for ground preparation from the Report of Geotechnical Investigation will reduce risk of any geologic hazards to a less than significant level.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
e. Would the project 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?
The project will not require the use of septic tanks or other wastewater disposal systems.

NO IMPACT
50 Environmental Checklist
Geology and Soils
f. Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Paleontological resources, or fossils, are the evidence of once -living organisms preserved in the rock record. They include both the fossilized remains of ancient plants and animals and the traces thereof (e.g., trackways, imprints, burrows, etc.). Paleontological resources are not found in "soil" but are contained within the geologic deposits or bedrock that underlies the soil layer. Typically, fossils are greater than 5,000 years old (i.e., older than middle Holocene in age) and are typically preserved in sedimentary rocks. Although rare, fossils can also be preserved in volcanic rocks and low-grade metamorphic rocks under certain conditions (Society of Vertebrate Paleontology [SVPj 2010). Fossils occur in a non -continuous and often unpredictable distribution within some sedimentary units, and the potential for fossils to occur within sedimentary units depends on several factors. It is possible to evaluate the potential for geologic units to contain scientifically important paleontological resources, and therefore evaluate the potential for impacts to those resources and provide mitigation for paleontological resources if they are discovered during construction of a development project.

Rincon evaluated the paleontological sensitivity of the geologic units that underlie the project site to assess the project's potential for significant impacts to scientifically important paleontological resources. The analysis was based on the results of a paleontological locality search and a review of existing information in the scientific literature regarding known fossils within geologic units mapped at the project site. According to the SVP (2010) classification system, geologic units can be assigned a high, low, undetermined, or no potential for containing scientifically significant nonrenewable paleontological resources. Following the literature review, a paleontological sensitivity classification was assigned to each geologic unit mapped within the project site. This criterion is based on rock units within which vertebrate or significant invertebrate fossils have been determined by previous studies to be present or likely to be present. The potential for impacts to significant paleontological resources is based on the potential for ground disturbance to directly impact paleontologically sensitive geologic units.

The project is located in the Murrietta, California United States Geological Survey 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle(s). The geology of the region surrounding the project site was mapped by Morton and Miller (2006) who mapped two geologic units, Quaternary young axial channel deposits and Quaternary young alluvial -valley deposits, at the surface within the project site.

Quaternary young axial channel deposits are found within Murrietta Creek and consist of slightly to moderately consolidated silt, sand, and gravel (Morton & Miller 2006). Quaternary young alluvial - valley deposits underlie the banks and roadways on either side of Murrietta Creek and consist of unconsolidated clay, silt, and sand. Both of these geologic units are Holocene in age and generally considered too young (i.e., less than 5,000 years old) to contain paleontological resources.

Therefore, Quaternary young axial channel deposits and Quaternary young alluvial -valley deposits have low paleontological sensitivity. However, the project's geotechnical investigation encountered older (i.e., Pleistocene -aged) alluvium and the Pauba Formation during test borings conducted within the project site (Leighton Consulting, Inc. 2023). Older alluvium was encountered at approximately 1,000 feet above sea level in areas mapped as Quaternary young axial channel deposits (i.e., approximately 10 feet below the surface) and Quaternary young alluvial -valley deposits (i.e., approximately 25 feet below the surface). Sediments corresponding to older alluvium or the Pauba Formation were encountered 20 feet below the surface in areas mapped as Quaternary young axial channel deposits and 45 feet below the surface in areas mapped as Quaternary young alluvial -valley deposits. Pleistocene -aged alluvium and the Pauba Formation are Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 51

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
known to produce significant paleontological resources within Riverside County (Jefferson 2010; Paleobiology Database 2023). Therefore, Pleistocene -aged alluvium and the Pauba Formation have high paleontological sensitivity.

Rincon requested a paleontological locality search from the Western Science Center on November 7, 2023. The records search recovered no known fossil localities within the project site (McDonald 2023). However, one known fossil locality from Quaternary -aged sediments occurs within one mile of the project site, and several others are known elsewhere in the Temecula Valley in areas mapped as Quaternary young axial channel deposits (Morton & Miller 2006).

Ground -disturbing activities within previously undisturbed sediments with high paleontological sensitivity could result in significant impacts to paleontological resources. Impacts would be significant if construction activities result in the destruction, damage, or loss of scientifically important paleontological resources and associated stratigraphic and paleontological data. Ground - disturbing activities for this project will include drilling for the bridge piers and abutments; excavations for the new and rerouted underground utilities within Avenida Alvarado, Diaz Road, and Overland Drive; and grading/excavations for channel improvement and stabilization. Drilling for the bridge abutments (within areas mapped as Quaternary young alluvial -valley deposits) and piers (in areas mapped as Quaternary axial channel deposits) are expected to reach approximately 60 feet and 135 feet below the surface, respectively. At these depths, these activities will impact high - sensitivity sediments (i.e., older alluvium and/or Pauba Formation) and, therefore, could significantly impact paleontological resources. Excavations for the new and rerouted underground utilities will reach up to 20 feet below the surface in areas mapped as Quaternary young alluvial - valley deposits, meaning that these excavations will not impact high -sensitivity sediments and are not expected to significantly impact paleontological resources. Ground disturbance for channel improvement is expected to only impact the uppermost layers of sediments and is not expected to significantly impact paleontological resources.

Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would reduce potential impacts to paleontological resources resulting from the drilling of the bridge piers and abutments to less than significant level and would effectively mitigate the project's impacts to these resources through paleontological monitoring to aid the recovery, identification, and curation of previously unrecovered fossils.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED
Mitigation Measures
GEO-1 Paleontological Resource Monitoring
Qualified Professional Paleontologist. Prior to excavation, the project applicant shall retain a Qualified Professional Paleontologist, as defined by the Society of Vertebrate paleontology (SVP; 2010). The Qualified Professional Paleontologist shall draft a Paleontological Resources Mitigation and Monitoring Plan, which shall direct all mitigation measures related to paleontological resources.

Paleontological Worker Environmental Awareness Program. Prior to the start of construction, the Qualified Professional Paleontologist or their designee shall conduct a paleontological Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training for construction personnel regarding the appearance of fossils and the procedures for notifying paleontological staff should fossils be discovered by construction personnel.
52 Environmental Checklist
Geology and Soils
Paleontological Monitoring. Full-time paleontological monitoring shall be conducted during drilling for the bridge piers that reaches more than 10 feet below the surface or for the bridge abutments that reaches more than 25 feet below the surface. Paleontological monitoring shall be conducted by a paleontological monitor with experience with collection and salvage of paleontological resources and who meets the minimum standards of the SVP (2010) for a Paleontological Resources Monitor. The Qualified Professional Paleontologist may recommend that monitoring be reduced in frequency or ceased entirely based on geologic observations.

Such decisions shall be subject to review and approval by the City of Temecula. In the event of a fossil discovery by the paleontological monitor or construction personnel, all construction activity within 50 feet of the find shall cease, and the Qualified Professional Paleontologist shall evaluate the find. If the fossil(s) is (are) not scientifically significant, then construction activity may resume. If it is determined that the fossil(s) is (are) scientifically significant, the following shall be completed:

Fossil Salvage. The paleontological monitor shall salvage (i.e., excavate and recover) the fossil to protect it from damage/destruction. Typically, fossils can be safely salvaged quickly by a single paleontological monitor with minimal disruption to construction activity. In some cases, larger fossils (such as complete skeletons or large mammal fossils) require more extensive excavation and longer salvage periods. Bulk matrix sampling may be necessary to recover small invertebrates or microvertebrates from within paleontologically sensitive deposits. After the fossil(s) is (are) salvaged, construction activity may resume. 13 Fossil Preparation and Curation. Fossils shall be identified to the lowest (i.e., most -specific) possible taxonomic level, prepared to a curation-ready condition, and curated in a scientific institution with a permanent paleontological collection along with all pertinent field notes, photos, data, and maps. Fossils of undetermined significance at the time of collection may also warrant curation at the discretion of the Qualified Professional Paleontologist.

Final Paleontological Mitigation Report. Upon completion of ground -disturbing activities (or laboratory preparation and curation of fossils, if necessary), the Qualified Professional Paleontologist shall prepare a final report describing the results of the paleontological monitoring efforts. The report shall include a summary of the field and laboratory methods employed; an overview of project geology; and, if fossils were discovered, an analysis of the fossils, including physical description, taxonomic identification, and scientific significance. The report shall be submitted to the City of Temecula and, if fossil curation occurred, the designated scientific institution.

Final Initial Study — Mitigated Negative Declaration 53

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
This page intentionally left blank.
54 Environmental Checklist
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may
have a significant impact on the
environment? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse
gases? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
Overview of Climate Change and Greenhouse Gases
Climate change is the observed increase in the average temperature of the Earth's atmosphere and oceans along with other substantial changes in climate (such as wind patterns, precipitation, and storms) over an extended period of time. Climate change is the result of numerous, cumulative sources of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions contributing to the "greenhouse effect," a natural occurrence which takes place in Earth's atmosphere and helps regulate the temperature of the planet. The majority of radiation from the sun hits Earth's surface and warms it. The surface, in turn, radiates heat back towards the atmosphere in the form of infrared radiation. Gases and clouds in the atmosphere trap and prevent some of this heat from escaping into space and re -radiate it in all directions.

GHG emissions occur both naturally and as a result of human activities, such as fossil fuel burning, decomposition of landfill wastes, raising livestock, deforestation, and some agricultural practices.

GHGs produced by human activities include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride. Different types of GHGs have varying global warming potentials (GWP). The GWP of a GHG is the potential of a gas or aerosol to trap heat in the atmosphere over a specified timescale (generally, 100 years). Because GHGs absorb different amounts of heat, a common reference gas (CO2) is used to relate the amount of heat absorbed to the amount of the gas emitted, referred to as "carbon dioxide equivalent" KOM, which is the amount of GHG emitted multiplied by its GWP. Carbon dioxide has a 100-year GWP of one. By contrast, methane has a GWP of 30, meaning its global warming effect is 30 times greater than CO2 on a molecule per molecule basis (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC] 2021).2
Z The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (2021) Sixth Assessment Report determined that methane has a GWP of 30. However, the 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan published by the California Air Resources Board uses a GWP of 25 for methane, consistent with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (2007) Fourth Assessment Report. Therefore, this analysis utilizes a GWP of 25.

Final Initial Study — Mitigated Negative Declaration 55

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
The United Nations IPCC expressed that the rise and continued growth of atmospheric CO2 concentrations is unequivocally due to human activities in the IPCC's Sixth Assessment Report (2021). Human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean, and land, which has led the climate to warm at an unprecedented rate in the last 2,000 years. It is estimated that between the period of 1850 through 2019, that a total of 2,390 gigatonnes of anthropogenic CO2 was emitted. It is likely that anthropogenic activities have increased the global surface temperature by approximately 1.07 degrees Celsius between the years 2010 through 2019 (IPCC 2021). Furthermore, since the late 1700s, estimated concentrations of CO2, methane, and nitrous oxide in the atmosphere have increased by over 43 percent, 156 percent, and 17 percent, respectively, primarily due to human activity (USEPA 2021). Emissions resulting from human activities are thereby contributing to an average increase in Earth's temperature. Potential climate change impacts in California may include loss of snow pack, sea level rise, more extreme heat days per year, more high ozone days, more large forest fires, and more drought years (State of California 2018).

Regulatory Framework
In response to climate change, California implemented Assembly Bill (AB) 32, the "California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006." AB 32 required the reduction of statewide GHG emissions to 1990 emissions levels (essentially a 15 percent reduction below 2005 emission levels) by 2020 and the adoption of rules and regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost- effective GHG emissions reductions. On September 8, 2016, the Governor signed Senate Bill (SB) 32 into law, extending AB 32 by requiring the State to further reduce GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 (the other provisions of AB 32 remain unchanged). On December 14, 2017, CARB adopted the 2017 Scoping Plan, which provides a framework for achieving the 2030 target. The 2017 Scoping Plan relies on the continuation and expansion of existing policies and regulations, such as the Cap -and -Trade Program and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, and implementation of recently adopted policies and legislation, such as SB 1383 (aimed at reducing short-lived climate pollutants including methane, hydrofluorocarbon gases, and anthropogenic black carbon) and SB 100 (discussed further below). The 2017 Scoping Plan also puts an increased emphasis on innovation, adoption of existing technology, and strategic investment to support its strategies. As with the 2013 Scoping Plan Update, the 2017 Scoping Plan does not provide project - level thresholds for land use development. Instead, it recommends local governments adopt policies and locally -appropriate quantitative thresholds consistent with a statewide per capita goal of six metric tons (MT) of CO2e by 2030 and two MT of CO2e by 2050 (CARB 2017).

Other relevant state laws and regulations include:

SB 375. The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 (SB 375), signed in August 2008, enhances the state's ability to reach AB 32 goals by directing the CARB to develop regional GHG emission reduction targets to be achieved from passenger vehicles by 2020 and 2035. Metropolitan Planning Organizations are required to adopt a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), which allocates land uses in the Metropolitan Planning Organization's Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). On March 22, 2018, CARB adopted updated regional targets for reducing GHG emissions from 2005 levels by 2020 and 2035. SCAG was assigned targets of an 8 percent reduction in per capita GHG emissions from passenger vehicles by 2020 and a 19 percent reduction in per capita GHG emissions from passenger vehicles by 2035 (CARB 2018). In the SCAG region, SB 375 also provides the option for the coordinated development of subregional plans by the subregional councils of governments and the county transportation commissions to meet SB 375 requirements.
56 Environmental Checklist
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Significance Thresholds
Individual projects do not generate sufficient GHG emissions to influence climate change directly.

However, physical changes caused by a project can contribute incrementally to significant cumulative effects, even if individual changes resulting from a project are limited. The issue of climate change typically involves an analysis of whether a project's contribution towards an impact would be cumulatively considerable. "Cumulatively considerable" means the incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, other current projects, and probable future projects (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064[h][1]).

According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b), projects can tier from a qualified GHG reduction plan, which allows for project -level evaluation of GHG emissions through the comparison of the project's consistency with the GHG reduction policies included in a qualified GHG reduction plan.

This approach is considered by the Association of Environmental Professionals (2016) in its white paper, Beyond Newhall and 2020, to be the most defensible approach presently available under CEQA to determine the significance of a project's GHG emissions.

This analysis utilizes two thresholds to evaluate the significance of the project's GHG emissions: the SCAQMD-recommended bright -line threshold and consistency with applicable plans, policies, and regulations for the reduction of GHG emissions.

Considering that no specific GHG threshold or qualified GHG reduction plan has been recommended or adopted by the City of Temecula, it is appropriate to refer to guidance from other agencies when discussing GHG emissions. In guidance provided by the SCAQMD's GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group in September 2010, SCAQMD considered a tiered approach to determine the significance of residential and commercial projects. The draft tiered approach is outlined in meeting minutes dated September 29, 2010 (SCAQMD 2010):
■ Tier 1. If the project is exempt from further environmental analysis under existing statutory or categorical exemptions, there is a presumption of less than significant impacts with respect to climate change. If not, then the Tier 2 threshold should be considered. ■ Tier 2. Consists of determining whether the project is consistent with a GHG reduction plan that may be part of a local general plan, for example. The concept embodied in this tier is equivalent to the existing concept of consistency in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3), 15125(d) or 15152(a). Under this Tier, if the project is consistent with the qualifying local GHG reduction plan, it is not significant for GHG emissions. If there is not an adopted plan, then a Tier 3 approach would be appropriate.
■ Tier 3. Establishes a screening significance threshold level to determine significance. The Working Group has provided a recommendation of 10,000 MT of CO2e per year for industrial projects and 3,000 MT of CO2e per year for non -industrial projects. ■ Tier 4. Establishes a service population threshold to determine significance. The Working Group has provided a recommendation of 4.8 MT of CO2e per year for land use projects.

The project would not be statutory or categorically exempt, and therefore Tier 1 does not apply. As previously stated, the City of Temecula does not have a local, qualified GHG reduction plan for the project to tier from, and Tier 2 would not apply. Service population is defined as employees plus residents. Since the project is related to the operation of a bridge for vehicular traffic, it would not generate any residents or require new employees; therefore, a service population threshold would not provide an accurate depiction of project GHG emission impacts. Thus, for the purposes of this analysis, the bright -line threshold developed by the SCAQMD of 3,000 MT of CO2e per year for non - Final Initial Study — Mitigated Negative Declaration 57

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
industrial projects is used in this analysis to determine the significance of GHG emissions in accordance with Tier 3.

According to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3), a project's incremental contribution to a cumulative impact can be found not cumulatively considerable if the project would comply with an approved plan or mitigation program that provides specific requirements that would avoid or substantially lessen the cumulative problem in the geographic area of the project. To qualify, such plans or programs must be specified in law or adopted by the public agency with jurisdiction over the affected resources through a public review process to implement, interpret, or make specific the law enforced or administered by the public agency. Examples of such programs include a "water quality control plan, air quality attainment or maintenance plan, integrated waste management plan, habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plans [and] plans or regulations for the reduction of GHG emissions." Therefore, a lead agency can make a finding of less than significant for GHG emissions if a project complies with adopted programs, plans, policies and/or other regulatory strategies to reduce GHG emissions. The proposed project's consistency with applicable plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions is evaluated qualitatively. A project is considered consistent with the provisions of these documents if it meets the general intent in reducing GHG emissions in order to facilitate the achievement of local and state -adopted goals and does not impede attainment of those goals.

Therefore, this analysis utilizes two thresholds to evaluate the significance of the project's GHG emissions: the SCAQMD-recommended bright -line threshold and consistency with applicable plans, policies, and regulations for the reduction of GHG emissions.

Methodology
GHG emissions associated with project construction and operation were estimated using the Road Construction Emissions Model outputs with the assumptions described under Section 3, Air Quality, in addition to the following:

Amortization of Construction Emissions. In accordance with SCAQMD recommendation, GHG emissions from construction of the proposed project were amortized over a 30-year period and added to annual operational emissions to determine the project's total annual GHG emissions (SCAQMD 2008b).
a. Would the project generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Construction of the proposed project would generate temporary GHG emissions primarily as a result of operation of construction equipment on -site as well as from vehicles transporting construction workers to and from the project site and heavy trucks to transport building materials and soil export. As shown in Table 8, construction of the proposed project would generate an estimated total of 2,413 MT of CO2e. Amortized over a 30-year period pursuant to SCAQMD guidance, construction of the proposed project would generate an estimated 80 MT of CO2e per year. Neither the total construction emissions nor the amortized emissions would exceed the 3,000 MT CO2e threshold. Furthermore, construction activities would cease upon completion and would not be a continuous source of GHG emissions. During project operations, the total amount of vehicle miles traveled would be reduced by providing a more direct connection for travelers in the area.

Accordingly, mobile source GHG emissions would be reduced during project operations as compared to existing conditions. Impacts would be less than significant. 58 Environmental Checklist
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Table 8 Estimated Construction GHG Emissions
Grubbing/Land Clearing
74 Grading/Excavation
90 Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade
1,838
Paving
411
Total
2,413
Total Amortized over 30 Years
80 See Appendix C

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
b. Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
The SCAG ConnectSoCal RTP/SCS was created to help California reach its GHG reduction goals by reducing GHG emissions from passenger cars by 8 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and 19 percent by 2035 in accordance with SB 375, which is also part of the CARB 2017 Scoping Plan (2020b). The Connect SoCal RTP/SCS includes ten goals with corresponding implementation strategies for focusing growth near destinations and mobility options, promoting diverse housing choices, leveraging technology innovations, and supporting implementation of sustainability policies (2020b). As described in Section 3, Air Quality, under criterion (a), the project is included in Connect SoCal RTP/SCS under FTIP ID 991203A. The project would conform with the SCAG ConnectSoCal RTP/SCS and support the efforts of SB 375 and subsequently the CARB 2017 Scoping Plan.

Therefore, given the aforementioned, the project is consistent with state and local policies for reducing GHG emissions and no impacts would occur.

NO IMPACT
Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 59

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
This page intentionally left blank.
we

Environmental Checklist
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a.

Create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
b.

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?
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
c.

Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within

0.25 mile of an existing or proposed
school?
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
d.

Be located on a site that is included on a
list of hazardous material 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?
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
e.

For a project located in an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would
the project result in a safety hazard or
excessive noise for people residing or
working in the project area?
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
f.

Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
g.

Expose people or structures, either
directly or indirectly, to a significant risk
of loss, injury, or death involving wildland
fires?
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
Final
Initial Study — Mitigated Negative Declaration
61 City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
a. Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Construction or operation of the proposed project would not involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Therefore, the project would not create a hazard to the public or environment through the use, transport or disposal of hazardous materials.

NO IMPACT
b. Would the project 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?
The proposed project will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. The proposed project does not involve the use of hazardous materials and thus will not emit hazardous materials into the environment or impact the public through day-to-day operations. In addition, the project will not require the handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances and waste.

NO IMPACT
Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school? The proposed project will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. The proposed project does not involve the use of hazardous materials and thus will not emit hazardous materials into the environment or impact the public through day-to-day operations. In addition, the project will not require the handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances and waste.

NO IMPACT
d. Would the project be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous material 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?
The proposed project is not located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. A search of the California State Department of Toxic Substances Control EnviroStor database shows that the project is not located on or within a quarter mile of any hazardous materials sites. The project would not create a significant hazard to the public in this regard.

NO IMPACT
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? The project is not located near any airports and therefore would not subject people to safety hazards associated with public or private airports.
62 Environmental Checklist
Hazards and Hazardous Materials

NO IMPACT
f. Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
The project adds additional roadway connections from the west of Murrieta Creek to the east of Murrieta Creek and thus improved circulation and access across Murrieta Creek. The project does not interfere with emergency response and evacuation plans. Traffic Interference will be kept to a minimum during construction per standard City procedure to ensure consistency with emergency response and evacuation needs; therefore the proposed project would not result in a significant impact in this regard.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
g. Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires?
The project does not involve any habitable structures and there are no wildland areas within the project vicinity which would create a significant fire hazard in the project area.

NO IMPACT
Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 63

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
This page intentionally left blank.
64 Environmental Checklist
Hydrology and Water Quality
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade surface
or ground water quality?
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
b. Substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
c. 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:
(i) Result in substantial erosion or
siltation on- or off -site;
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
(ii) Substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in
flooding on- or off -site;
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
(iii) Create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
(iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones,
risk release of pollutants due to project
inundation?
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation
of a water quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater management
plan?
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration
65 City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
The analysis in this section is based on the Water Quality Assessment Report (Engineering Resources of Southern California, Inc. [ERSC] 2019) and the Hydrology and Hydraulics Report (ERSC 2020) prepared for the project, included in Appendices F and H, respectively. a. Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? Construction activities would disturb approximately 4.89 acres of soil. Soil disturbance would increase the potential for erosion and sedimentation. If construction activities occur during the rainy season, or in the event of heavy storms, soils from the site could be entrained, eroded, and transported off -site or to the downstream receiving waters. In addition, chemicals, liquid products, petroleum products (e.g., paints, solvents, and fuels), and concrete -related waste may be spilled or leaked and have the potential to be transported into Murrieta Creek via stormwater runoff.

Construction within Murrieta Creek would include channel grading, including slope excavation for the concrete slope protection and construction of the pier foundations. Construction within the creek would occur within the dry seasons. However, low flow may be present within the channel bottom that would require diversion to provide a dry area for construction activities. Water is anticipated to be diverted using barriers such as sandbags, k-rails, or plastic sheathing. For construction of the pier foundation piling, the contractor may use slurry to maintain the stability of the drilled holes.

Construction projects that disturb one or more acres of soil are subject to the requirements of the State Water Resource Control Board's (SWRCB's) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities, Order No. 2022-0057-DWQ, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) No. CAS000002 (Construction Stormwater General Permit), which requires preparation and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to control the discharge of pollutants, including sediment, into surface water drainages.

The City would be required to obtain coverage under the Construction Stormwater General Permit and prepare and implement a SWPPP that specifies the stormwater monitoring and construction BMPs required to reduce pollutants in stormwater runoff. Construction BMPs would include, but would not be limited to, Erosion Control and Sediment Control BMPs designed to minimize erosion and retain sediment on site, and Good Housekeeping BMPs to prevent spills, leaks, and off -site discharge of construction debris and waste. As discussed in the Water Quality Assessment Report prepared for the project, construction BMPs are anticipated to include construction scheduling, streambank stabilization, wind erosion controls, gravel bag berms, gravel bag check dams, sediment sweeping and vacuuming, and material and waste handling and storage. Additionally, construction activities such as staging or stockpiling of construction materials or waste in areas where pollutants can be discharged into storm drains would be prohibited in compliance with the City municipal code. Compliance with the Construction General Permit and City municipal code and implementation of BMPs to control pollutant discharge into Murrieta Creek would ensure that project construction would not violate water quality standards or substantially degrade surface water. Impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

According to the Geotechnical Design Report (Leighton Consulting, Inc., 2023), groundwater was encountered during geotechnical borings at approximately 2 to 11.5 feet below ground surface [bgs] in the bottom of Murrieta Creek and approximately 19 to 26 feet bgs along the top of the berms/slope. Due to the seasonal fluctuations of groundwater levels, groundwater could occur at depths as shallow as approximately 6 inches bgs. Therefore, groundwater dewatering is anticipated to be required during construction of the bridge abutments and piers. During excavation below the

Environmental Checklist
Hydrology and Water Quality
groundwater table, groundwater levels would be lowered to the bottom of the excavation using a system of collection ditches and sump pumps to provide a workable condition. Slurry may be used for stabilization of the work area. Water or slurry from the drilled holes would be pumped into a tank on the creek bank. Dewatered groundwater is anticipated to be discharged into Murrieta Creek. Therefore, coverage under San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board's General Waste Discharge Requirements for Groundwater Extraction Discharges to Surface Waters within the San Diego Region, Order No. 119-2015-0013, NPDES No. CAG919003, (Groundwater Dewatering Permit) would be required. Groundwater may contain elevated levels of total dissolved solids, nitrates, or other constituents that could affect surface water quality. However, groundwater dewatering would be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Groundwater Dewatering Permit, which requires testing and treatment, as necessary, of groundwater prior to its release into surface waters to ensure that effluent limitations are not exceeded. The projects plans and specification would require that the contractor not discharge slurry into Murrieta Creek. As a result, groundwater dewatering during excavation activities would not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Operation
The project would result in an increase in impervious surface, which could potentially increase stormwater runoff, erosion, and pollutant discharge to Murrietta Creek. Generally, pollutants of concern associated with roadway/bridge projects include oil and grease, sediment, nutrients, nitrate discharges, litter, and metals.

Project design and operation would be required to comply with the requirements of the San Diego RWQCB's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges from the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) Draining the Watersheds within the San Diego Region, Order No. R9-2013-0001, as amended by R9-2015- 0001 and R9- 2015-0100, NPDES No. CAS0109266 (San Diego MS4 Permit). The San Diego MS4 Permit] requires that a Water Quality Management Plan be prepared for projects that details the operational BMPs that would be implemented to capture, treat, and reduce pollutants of concern in stormwater runoff.

As discussed in the Water Quality Assessment Report (Appendix F) prepared for the project, Source Control, and Treatment BMPs proposed for the project. Source Control BMPs are preventative measures that are implemented to prevent the introduction of pollutants into stormwater.

Proposed Source Control BMPs would include education for property owners, drainage facility inspection and maintenance, street sweeping, and storm drain stenciling and slope protection. Site Design BMPs are stormwater management strategies that emphasize conservation and use of existing site features to reduce the amount of runoff and pollutant loading generated from a project site. Proposed Site Design BMPs would include preservation of existing vegetation and channel and slope protection (permanent soil stabilization including concrete slope protection under the bridge abutments and erosion control hydroseed mix on graded areas within the creek). In addition, all proposed slopes with slope gradient of 2:1 or flatter would be planted with deep rooted, drought tolerant erosion protection vegetation native to the area. Slopes steeper than 2:1 gradient would be lined with concrete for erosion protection and slope stability. Treatment Control BMPs are structural BMPs designed to treat and reduce pollutants in stormwater runoff prior to releasing it to receiving waters. Proposed Treatment Control BMPs include curb inlet media filters in the proposed catch basins. The proposed BMPs would target and reduce pollutants of concern from stormwater runoff from the project site in compliance with the San Diego MS4 Permit requirements. The curb Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 67

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
inlet media filters are specifically designed to capture and reduce fine to course sediments/pollutants, including trash and debris, total suspended solids, nutrients, metals, and hydrocarbons. In addition, street maintenance and vehicle washing and maintenance would be prohibited within the project area in areas that discharge to Murrieta Creek. The project includes concrete slope protection on the earthen embankments and the cutoff walls and bridge pier foundations would be buried underground to provide scour protection and reduce the potential for soil erosion. Compliance with NPDES requirements and City municipal code requirements, including incorporation of operational BMPs into the project design to target pollutants of concern, would ensure that potential impacts related to violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or degradation of water quality during project operation would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
b. Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
Rancho California Water District's current service area represents 99,000 acres, and the District has 878 miles of water mains, 35 storage reservoirs, one surface reservoir (Lake Vail), 53 groundwater wells, and 36,759 service connections. Approximately 109,000 people are served by Rancho California Water District, which relies on imported water from Metropolitan Water District of Southern California to meet much of its water demands. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California obtains its water from the Colorado River and Northern California, via the State Water Project (SWP). Both sources are over -allocated and water supplies can be significantly limited during dry weather years and droughts. Additionally, water quality and Endangered Species Act requirements in the Sacramento -San Joaquin Bay Delta could further reduce Metropolitan Water District of Southern California's SWP allocations. Water delivered to homes and businesses is a blend of groundwater (35%) and import water (65%).

As discussed under Impact HWQ-1 above, groundwater dewatering is anticipated to be required during construction of the bridge abutments and piers. Dewatered groundwater would be discharged to Murrieta Creek. However, groundwater dewatering would be temporary during construction of the bridge abutments and pier foundations. In addition, dewatered groundwater would be discharged to Murrieta Creek, which is an earthen bottom. where some infiltration back to groundwater could occur. Due to the temporary nature of groundwater dewatering activities, impacts to groundwater supplies and recharge would be less than significant.

The project does not propose uses that would substantially deplete groundwater supplies. Water use during operation would be minimal and limited to irrigation for the proposed landscaping. In addition, according to the Water Quality Assessment Report (Appendix F) prepared for the project, the increase in impervious surface area would be minimal compared to the size of the overall watershed and would therefore not substantially interfere with groundwater recharge efforts during operation.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
.:

Environmental Checklist
Hydrology and Water Quality
c. (i) Would the project 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?
As discussed further in checklist question c(iv), below, the construction of the bridge abutments and piers would provide adequate conveyance and would allow flood waters in Murrieta Creek to flow unimpeded. Therefore, the project would not substantially alter the course of a stream or river. The project will also allow the bridge and roadway flows to discharge to the Creek. It is anticipated that there will be no significant increase to the flow, volume, rate, depth or seasonal changes of 100-year storm flows due to the small amount of additional impervious surface compared to the overall size of the watershed. As discussed in checklist question a, above, BMPs would be implemented during project construction and operation to reduce the potential for erosion and siltation to occur. In addition, the project includes concrete slope protection on the earthen embankments and the bridge foundations would be designed to minimize scour. Potential for erosion and accretion due to the construction of the project is less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
c. (ii) Would the project 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 off -site? The project would introduce minimal impervious surfaces associated with construction of a new bridge over Murrieta Creek. In addition, as discussed in more detail in checklist question c(iv) below, the proposed bridge would provide adequate conveyance capacity for the 100-year flow in the Murrieta Creek. The project will include minimal drainage changes within the creek. Activities will include minor re -grading of the creek near the bridge, construction of bridge piers, and construction of concrete slope protection and cutoff wall to protect the bridge abutments from scour. The project would not substantially increase the water surface elevation within Murrieta Creek, and would therefore not substantially increase flooding during 100-year storm events. The project would not introduce impervious surfaces that would substantially increase the amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or off- site. Impacts related to flooding would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
c. (iii) Would the project 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 that 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?
As discussed in more detail in checklist question c(iv), the proposed bridge would not substantially alter the capacity of Murrieta Creek to convey flood flows during a 100-year storm event. The project includes storm drainage systems to convey stormwater from the bridge and new impervious areas to Murrieta Creek, which has sufficient capacity to accommodate increased stormwater discharge. Therefore, the project would not exceed the capacity of a downstream storm drain system. As discussed in checklist question a, above, BMPs would be implemented during project Final Initial Study — Mitigated Negative Declaration 69

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
construction and operation which would reduce pollutants in stormwater runoff. Therefore, the project would not provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Impacts would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
c. (iv) Would the project 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? According to the City of Temecula General Plan and the Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map (No 06065C2720G), the project site is located within the 100-year Flood Zone and Dam Inundation Area. Murrieta Creek has the potential to become flooded when major rainstorms cause stream overflows. Lake Skinner is a 42,800-acre feet reservoir located northeast of Temecula. Diamond Valley Lake is an 800,000 acre-feet reservoir located north of Temecula. The failure of Lake Skinner or Diamond Valley Lake could result in flooding along parts of Murrieta Creek.

The bridge would be constructed to provide adequate conveyance of the 100-year flows. According to the Hydrology and Hydraulics Report (Appendix H) prepared for the project, the bridge itself would be constructed above the 100-year water surface elevation with enough freeboard' to allow flood water to pass beneath the bridge during a 100-year storm event. While the project would include construction of bridge piers within Murrieta Creek, the project would result in a minimal (up to 0.03 foot) increase in the water surface elevation during a 100-year storm event. In addition, backwater 4caused by the project would not affect Winchester Road bridge, which is located approximately 1,200 feet upstream. Because the bridge would be designed to allow for conveyance of 100-year flood flows, impacts related to redirection of flood flows impacts would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would the project risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
According to the City of Temecula General Plan, the site is approximately 25 miles inland from the Pacific Ocean and at an elevation of greater than 1,060 feet above sea level and thus not subject to the effects of tsunamis. The site is not located near any large water bodies that would potentially be affected by a seiche. Therefore, the project site would not be inundated by either of these natural phenomena.

As discussed in checklist question c(iv) above, the project site has a potential to be inundated during a 100-year storm event or as a result of failure of Lake Skinner or Diamond Valley Lake dams.

However, the bridge itself would be constructed above the 100-year water surface elevation and would therefore not be inundated during a 100-year storm event. In addition, the project does not involve use or storage of large quantities of hazardous materials or other pollutants that could be released as a result of inundation. The project includes concrete slope protection on the earthen embankments and the cutoff walls and bridge pier foundations would be buried underground to provide scour protection and reduce the potential for soil erosion and release of erosion -related s Freeboard is the distance between the top of the water surface and the bottom of the bridge deck.

Backwater is the increase in water surface elevation upstream of a bridge. 70 Environmental Checklist
Hydrology and Water Quality
pollutants in the event inundation occurs below the bridge within Murrieta Creek. Impacts related to release of pollutants from inundation would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
e. Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
The project site overlies the Temecula Valley Groundwater Basin, which is designated as a very -low priority basin by the Department of Water Resources (DWR) pursuant Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), and development of a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) was not required. Therefore, there is no GSP that is applicable to the project. The project would therefore not conflict with a sustainable groundwater management plan.

The Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), adopted by the San Diego RWQCB, is the water quality control plan applicable to the project site. The Basin Plan defines beneficial uses, establishes water quality objectives, and establishes programs to ensure the quality of surface water and groundwater is managed to achieve water quality objectives to protect beneficial uses. As discussed in checklist question a, above, the preparation of a SWPPP and WQMP would ensure the project would not result in excessive runoff or pollutant discharge during project construction BMPs would be implemented during construction and operation, which would reduce potential construction and operation impacts to water quality. Project adherence to the BMPs required by the SWPPP and WQMP would reduce potential water quality impacts to a less than significant level.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 71

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
This page intentionally left blank.
72 Environmental Checklist
Land Use and Planning
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Physically divide an established
community? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
b. Cause a significant environmental impact
due to a conflict with any land use plan,
policy, or regulation adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
a. Would the project physically divide an established community? The proposed project involves the extension of an existing roadway and the construction of a bridge across Murrieta Creek. The project adds additional connections from east and west across Murrieta Creek, and thus does not divide an established community.

NO IMPACT
b. Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
The project is part of a designated roadway on the General Plan. The project will not conflict with any land use policies. The project helps circulation as envisioned by the City's General Plan Circulation Element.

NO I M PACT
Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 73

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
This page intentionally left blank.
74 Environmental Checklist
Mineral Resources
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
Would the project:

Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would be of
value to the region and the residents of
the state? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
b. Result in the loss of availability of a
locally important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan, or other land
use plan? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
a. Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
According to the General Plan, the State Division of Mines and Geology has prepared a mineral resources report entitled Mineral Land Classification of the Temescal Valley Area, Riverside County, California, Special Report 165, which evaluated mineral deposits within the Temecula Planning Area.

According to the Report, the Temecula Planning Area was classified as a Mineral Resources Zone-3a (MRZ-3a), which determined that the area contains sedimentary deposits, which have the potential to supply sand and gravel for concrete and crushed stones for aggregate; however, these areas are not considered to contain mineral resources of significant economic value. No impact is anticipated.

NO IMPACT
b. Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? According to the General Plan, the State Division of Mines and Geology has prepared a mineral resources report entitled Mineral Land Classification of the Temescal Valley Area, Riverside County, California, Special Report 165, which evaluated mineral deposits within the Temecula Planning Area.

NO IMPACT
Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 75

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
This page intentionally left blank.
76 Environmental Checklist
Noise
Less than
Significant
Potentially
with Less than
Significant
Mitigation Significant
Impact
Incorporated Impact No Impact
Would the project result in:
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the vicinity of the project in
excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
❑
❑ ■ ❑
b. Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
c. For a project located within the vicinity of
a private airstrip or an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or
working in the project area to excessive
noise levels? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
The following analysis is based upon the project's Noise Study Report (Caltrans 2020; Appendix G).

Overview of Noise and Vibration
Noise
Sound is a vibratory disturbance created by a moving or vibrating source, which is capable of being detected by the hearing organs. Noise is defined as sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or undesired and may therefore be classified as a more specific group of sounds. The effects of noise on people can include general annoyance, interference with speech communication, sleep disturbance, and, in the extreme, hearing impairment (Caltrans 2013).

HUMAN PERCEPTION OF SOUND
Noise levels are commonly measured in decibels (dB) using the A -weighted sound pressure level (dBA). The A -weighting scale is an adjustment to the actual sound pressure levels so that they are consistent with the human hearing response. Decibels are measured on a logarithmic scale that quantifies sound intensity in a manner similar to the Richter scale used to measure earthquake magnitudes. A doubling of the energy of a noise source, such as doubling of traffic volume, would increase the noise level by 3 dB; dividing the energy in half would result in a 3 dB decrease (Caltrans 2013).

Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 77

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
Human perception of noise has no simple correlation with sound energy: the perception of sound is not linear in terms of dBA or in terms of sound energy. Two sources do not "sound twice as loud" as one source. It is widely accepted that the average healthy ear can barely perceive changes of 3 dBA, increase or decrease (i.e., twice the sound energy); that a change of 5 dBA is readily perceptible (8 times the sound energy); and that an increase (or decrease) of 10 dBA sounds twice (half) as loud (10.5 times the sound energy) (Caltrans 2013).

SOUND PROPAGATION AND SHIELDING
Sound changes in both level and frequency spectrum as it travels from the source to the receiver.

The most obvious change is the decrease in the noise level as the distance from the source increases. The manner by which noise reduces with distance depends on factors such as the type of sources (e.g., point or line), the path the sound will travel, site conditions, and obstructions.

Sound levels are described as either a "sound power level" or a "sound pressure level," which are two distinct characteristics of sound. Both share the same unit of measurement, the dB. However, sound power (expressed as Lpw) is the energy converted into sound by the source. As sound energy travels through the air, it creates a sound wave that exerts pressure on receivers, such as an eardrum or microphone, which is the sound pressure level. Sound measurement instruments only measure sound pressure, and noise level limits are typically expressed as sound pressure levels.

Noise levels from a point source (e.g., construction, industrial machinery, air conditioning units) typically attenuate, or drop off, at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance. Noise from a line source (e.g., roadway, pipeline, railroad) typically attenuates at about 3 dBA per doubling of distance (Caltrans 2013). Noise levels may also be reduced by intervening structures; the amount of attenuation provided by this "shielding" depends on the size of the object and the frequencies of the noise levels. Natural terrain features, such as hills and dense woods, and man-made features, such as buildings and walls, can significantly alter noise levels. Generally, any large structure blocking the line of sight will provide at least a 5-dBA reduction in source noise levels at the receiver (Federal Highway Administration [FHWA] 2011). Structures can substantially reduce exposure to noise as well. The FHWA's guidance indicates that modern building construction generally provides an exterior -to -interior noise level reduction of 10 dBA with open windows and an exterior -to - interior noise level reduction of 20 to 35 dBA with closed windows (FHWA 2011).

DESCRIPTORS
The impact of noise is not a function of loudness alone. The time of day when noise occurs and the duration of the noise are also important factors of project noise impact. Most noise that lasts for more than a few seconds is variable in its intensity. Consequently, a variety of noise descriptors have been developed.

Leq is one of the most frequently used noise metrics; it considers both duration and sound power level. The Leq is defined as the single steady-state A -weighted sound level equal to the average sound energy over a time period. When no time period is specified, a 1-hour period is assumed. The Lmax is the highest noise level within the sampling period, and the Lmin is the lowest noise level within the measuring period. Normal conversational levels are in the 60 to 65-dBA Leq range; ambient noise levels greater than 65 dBA Leq can interrupt conversations (Federal Transit Administration [FTA] 2018).

Noise that occurs at night tends to be more disturbing than that occurring during the day.

Community noise is usually measured using Day -Night Average Level (DNL or LDN), which is the 1Zs]

Environmental Checklist
Noise
24-hour average noise level with a +10 dBA penalty for noise occurring during nighttime hours (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.). Community noise can also be measured using Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL or LDEN), which is the 24-hour average noise level with a +5 dBA penalty for noise occurring from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and a +10 dBA penalty for noise occurring from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (Caltrans 2013).5 The relationship between the peak -hour Leq value and the LDN/CNEL depends on the distribution of noise during the day, evening, and night; however noise levels described by LDN and CNEL usually differ by 1 dBA or less. Quiet suburban areas typically have CNEL noise levels in the range of 40 to 50 CNEL, while areas near arterial streets are in the 50 to 60+ CNEL range (FTA 2018).

Groundborne Vibration
Groundborne vibration of concern in environmental analysis consists of the oscillatory waves that move from a source through the ground to adjacent buildings or structures and vibration energy may propagate through the buildings or structures. Vibration may be felt, may manifest as an audible low -frequency rumbling noise (referred to as groundborne noise), and may cause windows, items on shelves, and pictures on walls to rattle. Although groundborne vibration is sometimes noticeable in outdoor environments, it is almost never annoying to people who are outdoors. The primary concern from vibration is that it can be intrusive and annoying to building occupants at vibration -sensitive land uses and may cause structural damage.

Typically, ground -borne vibration generated by manmade activities attenuates rapidly as distance from the source of the vibration increases. Vibration amplitudes are usually expressed in peak particle velocity (PPV) or root mean squared (RMS) vibration velocity. The PPV and RMS velocity are normally described in inches per second (in/sec). PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of a vibration signal. PPV is often used as it corresponds to the stresses that are experienced by buildings (Caltrans 2020).

High levels of groundborne vibration may cause damage to nearby building or structures; at lower levels, groundborne vibration may cause minor cosmetic (i.e., non-structural damage) such as cracks. These vibration levels are nearly exclusively associated with high impact activities such as blasting, pile -driving, vibratory compaction, demolition, drilling, or excavation. The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) has determined vibration levels with potential to damage nearby buildings and structures; these levels are identified in Table 9.

Table 9 AASHTO Maximum Vibration Levels for Preventing Damage Historic sites or other critical locations

0.1 Residential buildings, plastered walls 0.2-0.3
Residential buildings in good repair with gypsum board walls 0.4-0.5 Engineered structures, without plaster 1.0-1.5
Source: Caltrans 2020
s Because DNL and CNEL are typically used to assess human exposure to noise, the use of A -weighted sound pressure level (dBA) is implicit. Therefore, when expressing noise levels in terms of DNL or CNEL, the dBA unit is not included.

Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 79

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
Numerous studies have been conducted to characterize the human response to vibration. The vibration annoyance potential criteria recommended for use by Caltrans, which are based on the general human response to different levels of groundborne vibration velocity levels, are described in Table 10.

Table 10 Vibration Annoyance Potential Criteria
Severe

2.0 0.4
Strongly perceptible

0.9 0.10
Distinctly perceptible

0.25 0.04
Barely perceptible

0.04 0.01
in/sec = inches per second; PPV = peak particle velocity ' Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include impact pile drivers, pogo -stick compactors, crack -and -seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment.

Source: Caltrans 2020
Regulatory Framework
City of Temecula Municipal Code
Section 9.20.060 of the Temecula Municipal states that no person shall engage in or conduct construction activity, when the construction site is within one -quarter mile of an occupied residence, between 6:30 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., Monday through Friday, and shall only engage in or conduct construction activity between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. on Saturday. No construction activity shall be undertaken on Sunday and nationally recognized holidays. The City of Temecula does not have a quantitative standard for construction noise.

City of Temecula General Plan Noise Element
The Noise Element of the City of Temecula General Plan contains policies and programs that focus on protecting the quality of life for noise -sensitive uses from the persistent hazards of excessive noise. Relevant policies to the proposed project include:
■ Policy 1.2: Limit the hours of construction activity next to residential areas to reduce noise intrusion in the early morning, late evening, weekends, and holidays. ■ Policy 4.4: Coordinate with Caltrans to ensure the inclusion of noise mitigation measures in the design of new highways or improvement projects in the Planning Area.

Caltrans
Caltrans Standard Specifications Section 14-8.02 includes noise control requirements that state construction noise levels shall not exceed 86 dBA Lrr,a,, at 50 feet from the job site activities between the hours of 9:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. (Caltrans 2018). Therefore, project construction noise impacts are analyzed against this standard.

For Caltrans projects, traffic noise impacts are considered to occur at receptor locations where predicted noise levels would be 12 dB or greater than existing ambient noise levels, or where predicted noise levels approach or exceed the noise abatement criteria (NAC) for the applicable activity category. Table 11 summarizes NAC corresponding to various land use activity categories. 01 Environmental Checklist
Noise
Activity categories and related traffic noise impacts are determined based on the actual or permitted land use in a given area.

Table 11 Activity Categories and Noise Abatement Criteria (23 CFR 772) A 57 Exterior
Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve an important public need and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to continue to serve its intended purpose.

Bz 67 Exterior
Residential.

CZ 67 Exterior
Active sport areas, amphitheaters, auditoriums, campgrounds, cemeteries, day care centers, hospitals, libraries, medical facilities, parks, picnic areas, places of worship, playgrounds, public meeting rooms, public or nonprofit institutional structures, radio studios, recording studios, recreation areas, Section 4(f) sites, schools, television studios, trails, and trail crossings.

D 52 Interior
Auditoriums, day care centers, hospitals, libraries, medical facilities, places of worship, public meeting rooms, public or nonprofit institutional structures, radio studios, recording studios, schools, and television studios.

E 72 Exterior
Hotels, motels, offices, restaurants/bars, and other developed lands, properties, or activities not included in A—D or F.

F
Agriculture, airports, bus yards, emergency services, industrial, logging, maintenance facilities, manufacturing, mining, rail yards, retail facilities, shipyards, utilities (water resources, water treatment, electrical), and warehousing.

G
Undeveloped lands that are not permitted.
'The L,q(h) activity criteria values are for impact
determination only and are not design standards for noise abatement measures. All values are A -weighted decibels (dBA).

Z Includes undeveloped lands permitted for this activity category.

Existing Noise Environment
The project site is surrounded by existing service commercial and light industrial development with a place of worship. A field noise study was conducted to measure the existing noise environment.

Short-term monitoring was conducted at four locations on Wednesday, June 17, 2020, using an Extech 407780A Type 2 sound level meter (serial number 160507863). The calibration of the meter was checked before and after the measurement using an Extech 407744 professional acoustic calibrator (serial number H373147). Measurements were taken over a 20-minute period at each site. Short-term monitoring was conducted along the alignment. The short-term measurement locations are identified in Figure 3. A summary of noise measurements is provided in Table 12. The dominant noise source in the area was observed as vehicular traffic. Other noise sources associated with adjacent land uses include heating, ventilation, and air conditioning units, landscape maintenance machinery, pumps, and heavy equipment.

Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 81

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
Figure 3 Noise Measurement Locations
Imagery provided by Microsoft Bing and its licensors © 2020. 82 Environmental Checklist
Noise
Table 12 Summary of Short-term Noise Level Measurements 1 27525 Enterprise Circle West 10:00— 10:20 a.m. 50 feet from Enterprise 58.2 54.4 76.3 Circle West
2 27462 Enterprise Circle West 10:30— 10:50 a.m. 50 feet from Enterprise 60.1 57.6 81.2 Circle West
3 27495 Diaz Road 12:30 — 12:50 p.m. 50 feet from Diaz Road 70.1 56.9 83.4 4 41976 Avenida Alvarado 1:00 — 1:20 p.m. 60 feet from Diaz Road 69.8 57.1 85.6 a. Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Construction
Construction noise would be associated with the use of heavy-duty construction equipment used for clearing and grading, trenching and installing underground utilities, spreading and compacting materials, and paving. In addition, drilled piles would be required in Murrieta Creek for the installation of piles.

Construction equipment with heavy-duty diesel engines typically generate maximum noise levels from 80 to 90 dBA at a distance of 50 feet (FHWA 2006). Table 13 summarizes typical construction equipment noise levels. Equipment goes through varying load cycles, and there are breaks for the operators and for non -equipment tasks, such as measurement. Thus, average hourly noise levels would be less than maximum noise levels. Typical noise levels from earthworks activities reach 82 dBA Leq at 50 feet from the center of construction activity when assessing the loudest pieces of equipment working simultaneously.

Maximum noise levels would occur when the loudest construction equipment is nearest to a noise sensitive receiver. Due to the linear nature of roadway construction, noise levels would be intermittent and the intensity of construction activities in a given area varies substantially.

Based on previous experience, construction activities would progress at a rate of approximately 100 feet per day and would include an active work area of approximately 300 feet. Due to the length of the active work area, 300 feet, when the active work area is directly adjacent to a given receiver, construction activities throughout the day would be an average distance of 150 feet along an active portion of the alignment from the receiver. For example, the average distance from construction equipment to a receiver that is 50 feet from the centerline of alignment would be 158 feet.

Although construction equipment may temporarily be located at the point on the alignment nearest to a receiver, over time equipment would move along the alignment. Therefore, the distance from a receiver to the centerline of the alignment is not the same as the average distance during a given day from the receiver to construction equipment. Thus, average noise levels correlate to the area of active construction.

Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 83

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
Table 13 Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels
Auger Drill Rig
85 20%
Backhoe
80 40%
Blasting
94 1%
Chain Saw
85 20%
Clam Shovel
93 20%
Compactor (ground)
80 20%
Compressor (air)
80 40%
Concrete Mixer Truck
85 40%
Concrete Pump
82 20%
Concrete Saw
90 20%
Crane (mobile or stationary)
85 20%
Dozer
85 40%
Dump Truck
84 40%
Excavator
85 40%
Front End Loader
80 40%
Generator (25 kilovolt amps or less)
70 50%
Generator (more than 25 kilovolt amps)
82 50%
Grader
85 40%
Hydra Break Ram
90 10%
Impact Pile Driver (diesel or drop)
95 20%
In situ Soil Sampling Rig
84 20%
Jackhammer
85 20%
Mounted Impact Hammer (hoe ram)
90 20%
Paver
85 50%
Pneumatic Tools
85 50%
Pumps
77 50%
Rock Drill
85 20%
Roller
74 40%
Scraper
85 40%
Tractor
84 40%
Vacuum Excavator (vac -truck)
85 40%
Vibratory Concrete Mixer
80 20%
Vibratory Pile Driver
95 20%
dBA = A -weighted decibels; Lmax = maximum sound level
Source: Federal Highway Administration 2006
84 Environmental Checklist
Noise
Construction along the project site would be characterized by hard site attenuation rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance. This analysis conservatively assumes no attenuation from barriers and topography. The nearest receivers are approximately 50 feet from the road (e.g., Overland Drive).

Thus, when assessing the loudest pieces of equipment working simultaneously on the proposed alignment, noise levels would attenuate to approximately 72 dBA Leq at the nearest receivers.

Therefore, construction noise levels would not exceed the Caltrans Standard Specifications Section 14-8.02 noise control requirements from job site activities between the hours of 9:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m., and impacts would be less than significant.

Operation
Traffic noise levels were predicted using the FHWA Traffic Noise Model (TNM) Version 2.5 (TNM 2.5). Key inputs to TNM 2.5 were the locations of roadways, traffic mix and speed, shielding features (e.g., topography and buildings), noise barriers, ground type, and receptors. Three- dimensional representations of these inputs were developed using computer -aided design drawings, aerials, and topographic contours. Full model inputs are described in the project's Noise Study Report (Appendix G).

The City of Temecula does not have standards for traffic noise increases from a proposed project.

Therefore, the Caltrans standard of a 12 dB increase or greater than existing ambient noise levels, or where predicted noise levels approach or exceed the NAC for the applicable activity category is used for this analysis. Commercial and light industrial land uses (Caltrans Activity Category F) and places of worship (Caltrans Activity Category C and D) were identified in the project area (see Figure 5 for locations).Table 14 summarizes the traffic noise modeling results for existing conditions and design - year conditions with and without the project. Predicted design -year traffic noise levels with the project are compared to existing conditions and to design -year no -project conditions. The comparison to existing conditions is included in the analysis to identify traffic noise impacts as defined under 23 CFR 772. The comparison to no -project conditions indicates the direct effect of the project. As shown in Table 14, traffic noise levels at modeled receivers range from 46 to 71 dBA Leq for existing conditions and range from 48 to 72 dBA Leq for design -year conditions.

Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 85

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
Table 14 Summary of Noise Modeling
Receiver Land Activity Without With Incri
Number Area Use Category (NAC) Units Address Existing Project Project Loudest Hour Noise Level 1 A SC F 1 27479 Enterprise Circle W. 54 56 61 7
2 A Pow C 1 27452 Enterprise Circle W. 58 59 60 2
5 None
1 None
3 A SC
F
1 27495 Commerce Center Dr.
58 59
63 5
4 None
4 A SC
F
1 27496 Commerce Center Dr.
59 60
62 3
2 None
5 B SC
F
1 27531 Commerce Center Dr.
56 57
63 7
6 None
6 B SC
F
1 27515 Commerce Center Dr.
58 58
60 2
2 None
7 B SC
F
1 27511 Commerce Center Dr.
61 62
65 4
3 None
8 B SC
F
1 27516 Commerce Center Dr.
54 55
57 3
2 None
9 C Ind
F
1 42030 Avenida Alvarado
46 47
48 2
1 None
10 C Ind
F
1 41976 Avenida Alvarado
68 69
69 1
0 None
11 C Ind
F
1 27461 Diaz Rd.
68 69
70 2
1 None
12 D Ind
F
1 42011 Avenida Alvarado
59 60
60 1
0 None
13 D Ind
F
1 43015 Black Deer Loop
71 72
72 1
0 None
14 D Ind
F
1 43020 Black Deer Loop
71 72
72 1
0 None
NAC = noise abatement criteria
dB(A) = A -weighted decibels
Leq(1) = equivalent sound level at one hour
Ind = Industrial
SC = Service Commercial
PoW = Places of Worship
0 4"R
r
ll
�a
Area B
Area A II �`
i
r,
i( �\• `?ear' ,� � "
Boundarya°
lyaC° OoQ
P �
Improvements
h Location
0�a ,
.CA

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
Figure 5 Impact Area A Receivers
Y ) )44
J• Y
Project Boundary tS.

NIP
O Receiver 1
0 40 8o N � t ` J
s� 5
maaery amvided by Microsoft Bi— and its licensors ® 2020_ 0 Environmental Checklist
Noise
Figure 6 Impact Area B Receivers
y� A14�y f
/ - r 7 )
OL
1'► . .

Project Boundary
Project Improvements
OReceiver �.
0 50 loo N $
Feet —
lmoaery orovided by Microsoft Bina and its I icensors D 2020.

Final Initial Study -Mitigated Negative Declaration 89

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
Figure 7 Impact Area C Receivers
' 1 io
-W
Project Boundary _
Project Improvements \ r�„'�
0 Receiver `
0 5p loo N
9 Feet
Y
tmaaery orovided by Microsoft Bina and its I icensars © 2020. - 0 Figure 8 Impact Area D Receivers
Pro•ect
w
12 ' >
' I
�y If
>�
Boundary
Project Improvements
OReceiver
0 50 loo N
1 i I A
Fe et
'maaery orovided by Microsoft Bina and its I is
Environmental Checklist
Noise
Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 91

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
The traffic noise modeling results in Table 14 indicate that traffic noise levels at residences in Area A are predicted to be in the range of 60 to 63 dBA Leq in the design -year. The results also indicate that the increase in noise between existing conditions and the design -year is predicted to be up to 7 dB.

Because the predicted noise levels in the design -year are not predicted to approach or exceed the noise abatement criterion at the Calvary Church (Categories C and D) or result in a substantial increase in noise, no traffic noise impacts are predicted in Area A.

The traffic noise modeling results in Table 14 indicate traffic noise levels at residences in Area B are predicted to be in the range of 57 to 65 dBA Leq in the design -year, and that the increase in noise will be up to 7 dB in the design -year. Because there is no noise abatement criterion for Category F uses in this area and because the project would not result in a substantial increase in noise, no traffic noise impacts are predicted to occur in this area and noise abatement does not need to be considered in Area B.

The traffic noise modeling results in Table 14 indicate traffic noise levels at commercial uses in Area C will be 48 to 70 dBA Leq in the design -year. The results also indicate that the increase in noise between existing conditions and the design -year is 2 dB. Because there is no noise abatement criterion for Category F uses in this area and because the project would not result in a substantial increase in noise, no traffic noise impacts are predicted to occur in this area and noise abatement does not need to be considered in this area.

The traffic noise modeling results in Table 14 indicate traffic noise levels at commercial uses in Area C will be 60 to 72 dBA Leq in the design -year. The results also indicate that the increase in noise between existing conditions and the design -year is 0 dB. Because there is no noise abatement criterion for Category F uses in this area and because the project would not result in a substantial increase in noise, no traffic noise impacts are predicted to occur in this area and noise abatement does not need to be considered in this area.

Because the church has an interior noise abatement criterion in addition to the exterior criterion, interior noise must be considered at the church as well. From Table 6 in the FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Guidance document, the building noise reduction factor for standard construction with ordinary windows closed is 20 dB. The interior noise level in the church in the design -year is therefore predicted to be 40 dBA Leq. Because this predicted design -year noise level does not exceed the interior NAC of 52 dBA Leq, no interior traffic noise impacts are predicted at the church. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant from operational noise.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
b. Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Project construction would not involve activities typically associated with excessive groundborne vibration such as pile driving or blasting. The equipment utilized during project construction that would generate the highest levels of vibration would include rollers, loaded trucks, and bulldozers.

The City of Temecula has not adopted standards to assess vibration impacts during construction and operation. However, Caltrans has developed limits for the assessment of vibrations from transportation and construction sources. The Caltrans vibration limits are reflective of standard practice for analyzing vibration impacts on structures from continuous and intermittent sources.

The thresholds of significance used in this analysis to evaluate vibration impacts are based on these impact criteria, as summarized in Table 10.
92 Environmental Checklist
Noise
Project construction may require operation of vibratory equipment such as vibratory rollers, loaded trucks, and bulldozers within 50 feet from the road (e.g., Overland Drive). As shown in Table 15, vibration levels from individal pieces of construction equipment would not exceed the threshold at which damage can occur to residential structures, 0.20 in/sec PPV, or the threshold at which transient vibration sources would be distinctly perceptible to 0.25 in/sec PPV. Construction vibration levels at all other buildings in the immediate vicinity would be less than the levels shown in Table 15 because vibration levels would further attenuate with distance. Therefore, vibration impacts would be less than significant.

Table 15 Vibration Levels at Sensitive Receivers
Vibratory Roller

0.098
Large Bulldozer

0.042
Loaded Truck

0.036
Threshold

0.20 Threshold Exceeded?
No

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
The airport closest to the project site is the French Valley Airport, located approximately four miles northeast of the project site. The project site is not located within noise contours shown in Exhibit FV-5 of the River County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (County of Riverside 2011). In addition, the project site is not in close proximity to a private airstrip. Therefore, the project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels from airport noise.

No impact would occur.

NO IMPACT
Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 93

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
This page intentionally left blank.
94 Environmental Checklist
Population and Housing
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by
proposing new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (e.g., through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
❑
❑
■ ❑
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
❑
❑
❑ ■
a. Would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
The project would not induce substantial population growth in the area, as no homes are proposed.

It is anticipated that the construction workers would be hired from nearby areas. The presence of construction workers would be temporary and would not lead to a demand for permanent housing, goods, or services in the area.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
b. Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
The project alignment is located in an open space area adjacent to a creek. Therefore, the project would have no impact on the City's existing housing stock.

NO IMPACT
Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 95

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
This page intentionally left blank.

Environmental Checklist
Public Services
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
a. Would the project result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with
the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, or the need for
new or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental impacts,
in order to maintain acceptable service
ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the
public services:
1 Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
2 Police protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
3 Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
4 Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
5 Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
a.1. Would the project result insubstantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire protection facilities, or the need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives?
Fire protection and emergency medical services are provided to the City and the project site by the Temecula Fire Department, who contracts with the Riverside County Fire Department.

Implementation of the project would not require new fire protection services, and would provide a more direct travel connection which would improve emergency response; therefore, no impact would occur.

NO IMPACT
a.2. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered police protection facilities, or the need for new or physically altered police protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives?
Police services for the City and the project site are provided by the City of Temecula Police Department (PD), who contracts with the Riverside County Sheriff Department. Implementation of the project would not increase the need for police protection services and would provide a more Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 97

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
direct travel connection that would improve emergency response; therefore, no impact would occur.

NO IMPACT
a.3. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered schools, or the need for new or physically altered schools, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives? The project site is located within the Temecula Valley Unified School District. There is no housing or commercial component related to the project which would have any impact on local schools.

Therefore, there will be no impact on school services.

NO IMPACT
a.4. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered parks, public facilities, or the need for new or physically altered parks, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives? Operation of future development of the project would introduce temporary construction workers and residents on the project site. The project complements the City's trail system and would not have an impact on City parks.

NO IMPACT
a.5. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of other new or physically altered public facilities, or the need for new or physically altered public facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives? The proposed project poses no uses which would result in an unusually heavy burden on maintenance on public facilities. Therefore, the project will not result in a significant impact on other public facilities.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
W.

Environmental Checklist
Recreation
Less than
Significant
Potentially
with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
Impact
Incorporated
Impact No Impact
a. Would the project increase the use of
existing neighborhood and regional parks
or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
❑
❑
❑ ■
b. Does the project include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
The proposed project would not have an impact to the existing parks; however, it will connect to an existing Class I trail that runs along the west bank of Murrieta Creek. The project will add an additional connection to the trail as a result of the project, improving access to recreational resources. No impacts are anticipated as a result of the project.

NO IMPACT
b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The proposed project does not involve the construction of or expansion of a recreational facility.

The project will provide an additional connection to the existing Class I trail that runs along the west bank of Murrieta Creek, which will have short-term impacts to the use of the trail. It is anticipated that construction would not result in an adverse effect on the environment, since construction would be short-term in nature and would not be intensive. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Final Initial Study — Mitigated Negative Declaration 99

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
This page intentionally left blank.

Environmental Checklist
Transportation
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project:
a. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance
or policy addressing the circulation
system, including transit, roadway,
bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
❑
❑
■
❑
b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision
(b)?
❑
❑
❑
■
c. Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible use (e.g., farm equipment)?
❑
❑
❑
■
d. Result in inadequate emergency access?
❑
❑
❑
■
a. Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? The project will not result in any activities that increase vehicular traffic on area roadways. The extension of Overland Road and the construction of the new bridge across Murrieta Creek are identified in the Temecula Five Year Capital Improvement Program in the City's General Plan Circulation Element. The project spans Murrieta Creek adding another east/west connection between two north/south arterials resulting in improved circulation for all transportation modes.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
b. Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3 describes specific considerations for evaluating a project's transportation impacts. Generally, VMT is identified as the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts. For the purposes of this CEQA section, "vehicle miles traveled" refers to the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project. Lead agencies are required to approve a VMT significance threshold by July 1, 2020. As discussed previously, the project will not result in any additional vehicular trips, as the project does not generate vehicle trips. The project also would provide a more direct travel connection that would shorten the average length of vehicle trips in the project area and therefore incrementally reduce VMT. The project will be consistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b).

NO I M PACT
Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 101

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
C. Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible use (e.g., farm equipment)? The proposed project improvements would not include any sharp curves or hazardous roadway design elements. The project will be designed in accordance with Caltrans design standards, as a result, no impacts would occur.

NO IMPACT
d. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Adequate emergency vehicular access will be provided during and after project construction via Commerce Center Drive and Diaz Road.

NO IMPACT

Environmental Checklist
Tribal Cultural Resources
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in a Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, or cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:

Listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in Public
Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), or ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. A resource determined by the lead
agency, in its discretion and supported by
substantial evidence, to be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code
Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead
agency shall consider the significance of
the resource to a California Native
American tribe.
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
As of July 1, 2015, California AB 52 of 2014 was enacted and expands CEQA by defining a new resource category, "tribal cultural resources." AB 52 establishes that "A project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment" (PRC Section 21084.2). It further states that the lead agency shall establish measures to avoid impacts that would alter the significant characteristics of a tribal cultural resource, when feasible (PRC Section 21084.3).

PRC Section 21074 (a)(1)(A) and (B) defines tribal cultural resources as "sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe" and is:

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

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

Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 103

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
AB 52 also establishes a formal consultation process for California tribes regarding those resources.

The consultation process must be completed before a CEQA document can be certified. Under AB 52, lead agencies are required to "begin consultation with a California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project." Native American tribes to be included in the process are those that have requested notice of projects proposed within the jurisdiction of the lead Agency.
a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)?
b. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1? The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) was contacted on January 21, 2020 for a search of its Sacred Lands File (SLF). The NAHC responded on January 30, 2020, stating that the search of the SLF was positive and recommended contacting the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians for more information.

On March 20, 2020, the following Native American Tribes were sent initial consultation letters:
■ Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians
■ Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians
■ Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians
■ Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians
■ Torres -Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians
Four responses were received, each of which is summarized below:

1. Tuba Ebru Ozdil, Cultural Resources Analysist for the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians, replied on March 20, 2020, requesting formal consultation with the City and additional detailed information about the proposed project. Additionally, Ms. Ozdil requested that the Tribe be formally notified and involved during the entire environmental review process for the duration of the project because the project area lies within the Tribe's aboriginal territory.

2. Cheryl Madrigal, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer of the Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians, replied on July 10, 2020. Ms. Madrigal requested copies of any geotechnical reports, cultural survey reports (including archaeological results and shapefiles), archaeological search results, and grading plans. Ms. Madrigal indicated the Tribe would be participating fully in the environmental review process for the project because the project area lies within the Luiseno territory and is within their specific area of historic interest.

3. Joseph Ontiveros, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer of the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, replied on July 8, 2020, deferring consultation for this project to the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians.

4. Patricia Garcia -Plotkin, Director of Historic Preservation for the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, replied on July 9, 2020, deferring consultation for this project to the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians.
104

Environmental Checklist
Tribal Cultural Resources
Based on the positive results of the Sacred Lands File search coupled with ethnographic settlement patterns, the area is considered sensitive for tribal cultural resources. This sensitivity was echoed during confidential government -to -government consultation meetings that occurred between City and Pechanga representatives on November 7, 2022, and April 18, 2023. Both archaeological and Native American monitoring were requested during consultation. Therefore, Mitigation Measures CR-1 through CR-9 are required to bring impact to a less than significant level.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED
Final Initial Study — Mitigated Negative Declaration 105

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
This page intentionally left blank.

Environmental Checklist
Utilities and Service Systems
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or storm water
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
b. Have sufficient water supplies available
to serve the project and reasonably
foreseeable future development during
normal, dry and multiple Dry years?
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
c. Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the
project's projected demand in addition to
the provider's existing commitments?
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or
local standards, or in excess of the
capacity of local infrastructure, or
otherwise impair the attainment of solid
waste reduction goals? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
e. Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
a. Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
The project could require minor relocations of existing utility infrastructure associated with Rancho California Water District, Southern California Edison, Southern California Gas Company, Charter Communications, and Frontier Communications located near the Diaz Road and Avenida Alvarado intersection. Utility coordination will be initiated with each utility company in the final phase of design, prior to project implementation. Such coordination would ensure that any necessary utility relocations would not cause significant environmental effects. The project will not require the Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 107

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
construction of major new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities beyond those evaluates as part of the proposed project. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
b. Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? Water would be supplied to the project site by Rancho California Water District. According to their analysis of water supply reliability in the 2021 Water Shortage Contingency Plan, the District will have sufficient water supply to meet the projected demands through the year 2045 under all scenarios considered, including normal year, single dry year, and multiple dry years (Rancho California Water District 2021).

Project construction will result in minor water usage during construction for dust suppression but would be adequately served by existing water supplies. Long-term operation of the project would not require any water use. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
The project will not result in the need for any new water or wastewater treatment facilities, nor would it add any demand to existing facilities.

NO IMPACT
d. Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
Solid waste generated during project construction would be disposed of at Lamb Canyon Sanitary Landfill, which has an expected closure year of 2040 and is located at 16411 Lamb Canyon Road in Beaumont, CA, approximately 33 miles north of the project site. Operation of the project would not result in substantial generation of solid waste that would exceed standards or infrastructure capacity. This impact would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
e. Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
All solid waste will be disposed of at an approved site in compliance with federal, state and county regulations.

NO IMPACT
IS

Environmental Checklist
Wildfire
Less than
Significant
Potentially
with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
Impact
Incorporated
Impact No Impact
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
a. Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
❑
❑
❑ ■
b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks and
thereby expose project occupants to
pollutant concentrations from a wildfire
or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
c. Require the installation or maintenance
of associated infrastructure (such as
roads, fuel breaks, emergency water
sources, power lines or other utilities)
that may exacerbate fire risk or that may
result in temporary or ongoing impacts to
the environment? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
d. Expose people or structures to significant
risks, including downslopes or
downstream flooding or landslides, as a
result of runoff, post -fire slope instability,
or drainage changes? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
C. Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? d. Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslopes or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post fire slope instability, or drainage changes? The project site is not located within or near an area designated as a state responsibility area (Cal Fire, 2007, 2011) nor is it classified as a very high fire hazard severity zone or located near a very high fire hazard severity zone (Cal Fire, 2007, 2011). The project site is mapped as Non-VHFHSZ per the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps prepared Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 109

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
under the Fire and Resource Assessment Program. The nearest State Responsibility Area very high fire hazard severity zone is located along the hillside approximately 1.02 miles west of the project site. The nearest Local Responsibility Area very high fire hazard severity zone is approximately 0.44 miles southwest of the project site. No further analysis of this issue is required in the EIR.

NO IMPACT
W

Does the project:
a. Have the potential to substantially
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish
or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, substantially reduce
the number or restrict the range of a rare
or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or
prehistory?
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Less than
Significant
Potentially
with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
Impact
Incorporated
Impact No Impact
❑
■
❑ ❑
b. Have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that
the incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects)? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
c. Have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or
indirectly? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
G. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? The project would impact Riparian/Riverine resources that are occupied by least Bell's vireo, smooth tarplant, Pacific (western) pond turtle, and arroyo chub. Special Status Plant Surveys and surveys for least Bell's vireo and burrowing owl were conducted. Least Bell's Vireo territories were observed within the southern willow scrub habitat along the banks of Murrieta Creek in the survey area. A Natural Environment Study was performed within the Biological Study Area and concluded that impacts to least Bell's vireo are expected to occur as a result of the project. The removal of vegetation may also result in temporary impacts to nesting birds due to the temporarily reduced Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
available nesting habitat. To lessen impacts to sensitive and special status species, mitigation measures will be incorporated into the project and will result in less than significant impacts.

There is a high potential for cultural and paleontological resources in the area; however, identified mitigation measures to avoid or reduce impacts on these resources will be incorporated into the project such that important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory would not be eliminated.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED
b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? As concluded in Sections 1 through 20, the project would have no impact, less than significant impact, or less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated, with respect to all environmental issues considered in this document. Cumulative impacts related to several resource areas have been addressed in the individual resource sections of this Initial Study, including air quality and GHG emissions (see CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3)). As discussed in Section 3, Air Quality, and in Section 8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, the project would result in less than significant impacts associated with air quality and GHG emissions during project construction and operation.

The impact analysis in these sections uses thresholds that already account for cumulative (regional impacts). Therefore, air quality and GHG emissions associated with operation and construction would be less than significant and would not be cumulatively considerable.

Cumulatively considerable impacts could occur if the construction of other projects occurs at the same time as the proposed project and in the same vicinity, such that the effects of similar impacts of multiple projects combine to expose a resource to greater levels of impact than would occur under the proposed project. For example, the proposed project and other cumulative projects could impact the same environmental resources, such as biological resources. The project may temporarily impact the habitat utilized by special status species, but the project would incorporate mitigation measures to reduce the project's contribution to cumulative impacts to a less -than - significant level.

This Initial Study determined that, for some of the other resource areas (e.g., agriculture and forestry resources, land use and planning, mineral resources, population and housing, recreation, etc.), the project would have no impact compared to existing conditions. Therefore, the project would not contribute to cumulative impacts related to these issues. Other issues (e.g., cultural resources, geology, hazards and hazardous materials, and tribal cultural resources) are by their nature project -specific and impacts at one location do not add to impacts at other locations or create additive impacts. As such, cumulative impacts would be less than significant (not cumulatively considerable).

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
W11

Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
In general, impacts to human beings are associated with air quality, hazards and hazardous materials, and noise impacts. As detailed in Section 3, Air Quality, the project would not result, either directly or indirectly, in substantial adverse effects related to air quality through construction or operation. As discussed in Section 9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, project operation would not involve the routine use of extremely hazardous materials. Compliance with applicable regulations during project construction would reduce potential impacts on human beings related to hazards and hazardous materials to a less than significant level. During project construction, noise impacts would be limited to the daytime hours, and construction activities would not generate noise above the FTA threshold for construction noise at a sensitive land use; therefore, construction noise impacts would be temporary and less than significant. Project operation would not result in a substantial increase in noise. Consequently, operational noise would not significantly impact nearby sensitive receivers. Therefore, the project would not have environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. These impacts would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 113

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
This page intentionally left blank.
114

References
References
Bibliography
Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 2017. California Environmental Quality Act. May. https://www.baagmd.gov/— /media/files/planning-and-
research/ceqa/cega_guidelines_may2017-pdf.pdf?la=en (accessed February 2022).

California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2017. California's 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan.

December 14, 2017. https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf (accessed February 2022).
2022. Overview: Diesel Exhaust Health. n.d. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/overview- diesel-exhaust-and-
health#:-:text=ln%201998%2C%20CARB%20identified%20DPM,and%20other%20adverse% 20health%20effects. (accessed February 2022).

California Department of Finance (DOF). 2019. E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2011-2019 with 2010 Census Benchmark. Available at:
http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-5/ (accessed May 2019).

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal Fire), Fire Hazard Severity Zones in State Responsibility Area (Western Riverside County), Adopted by Cal Fire on November 7, 2007.

Available at: https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6752/fhszs_map60.pdf . Accessed on March 2020.

California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). 2019. Enviro5tor. Available at:
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/ (accessed May 2019).

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2011. California Scenic Highway Mapping System. Available at: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/ (accessed March 2020).
2013. Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. (CT-HWANP-RT-13- 069.25.2). http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/noise/pub/TeNS_Sept_2013B.pdf (accessed February 2022).
2018. Standard Specifications.
http://ppmoe.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/oe/construction_contract_standards/std_specs/2018_Std Specs/2018_StdSpecs.pdf (accessed February 2022).

California Energy Commission. 2021. "California Retail Fuel Outlet Annual Reporting (CEC-A15) Results." https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/transportation- energy/california-retail-fuel-outlet-annual-reporting (accessed February 2022).

CalRecycle. 2019. Solid Waste Information System (SWIS) Facility Detail, Mesquite Regional Landfill (13-AA-0026). Available at: https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/swfacilities/Directory/13-AA- 0026/ (accessed March 2020).

City of Temecula Sustainability Plan, adopted June 22, 2010. Available online at:
http://laserfiche.cityoftemecula.org/weblink/2/doc/241368/Electronic.aspx .

City of Temecula, Temecula General Plan, 1993, Updated 2005.

Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 115

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
City of Temecula General Plan Land Use Element, 2005. Available at:
https:Htemeculaca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/284/Land-Use-PDF?bidld= City of Temecula General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element, 2005. Available at:
https:Htemeculaca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/287/Open-Space-Conservation-PDF?bidld= Cole, J. W. 1987. Mineral Land Classification of the Greater Los Angeles Area: Classification of Sand and Gravel Resource Areas, Claremont -Upland Production -Consumption Region. Special Report 143: Part VI. Available at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/index.html?map=mlc Dudek & Associates, Inc. 2003. Western Riverside County Final MSHCP. https://www.wrc- rca.org/Permit_Docs/MSHCP/MSHCP-Volume%201.pdf (accessed February 2022).

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2011. Highway Traffic Noise: Analysis and Abatement Guidance. (FHWAHEP-10-025).
https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/noise/assets/fhwa-noise-guidance-dec- 2011 (accessed February 2022).
2022. California 2023 FSTIP Approval. December 16, 2022. 2023. 2020-2045 RTP/SCS (Connect SoCal) Amendment No. 3 Transportation Cconformity Ddetermination. June 9. https://scag.ca.gov/post/2020-2045-rtpscs-connect-socal- amendment-3-transportation-conformity-determination (accessed November 2023).

Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. (DOT-T- 95-16.) Office of Planning, Washington, DC. Prepared by Harris Miller Miller & Hanson, Inc.

Burlington, MA.
2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment.
https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/research- innovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no- 0123_0.pdf (accessed February 2022).

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ar4-wgl-spm-1.pdf (accessed February 2022).
2021. Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Masson- Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S. L. Connors, C. Pean, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L.

Goldfarb, M. I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T. K. Maycock, T.

Waterfield, O. Yelek�i, R. Yu and B. Zhou (eds.)] Cambridge University Press. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wgl/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Full_Report.pdf (accessed February 2022).

Jefferson, G.T. 2010. A catalogue of late Quaternary vertebrates from California. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County Technical Report. Volume 7, pp. 5-172.

Leighton Consulting, Inc. 2023. Update Geotechnical Design Report Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive, dated November 6, 2023.

References
McDonald, A. 2023. Collections search of the Western Science Center for the Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive Project, dated November 8, 2023.

Morton, D.M. and F.K. Miller. 2006. Geologic map of the San Bernardino and Santa Ana 30' x 60' quadrangles, California. [map.] United States Geological Survey, Open -File Report OF-2006- 1217, scale 1:100,000.

Paleobiology Database. 2023. The Paleobiology Database, http://paleobiodb.org/ (accessed November 2023).Rancho California Water District. 2021. Water Shortage Contingency Plan. https://www.ranchowater.com/DocumentCenter/View/6146/2021-Water-Shortage- Contingency-Plan (accessed March 2022).

Riverside, County of. 2011. Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. https://www . rca I u c. o rg/ P o rta I s/13/37 % 20-
%20Vol. % 202%20Fre nch % 20Va I ley% 20Amd % 202011. pdf?ve r=2016-08-15-152723-573 (accessed February 2022).

Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP). 2010. Standard Procedures for the Assessment and Mitigation of Adverse Impacts to Paleontological Resources. Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Impact Mitigation Guidelines Revision Committee. https://vertpaleo.org/wp- content/uploads/2021/01/SVP_Impact_Mitigation_Gu ideIines-1.pdf.

South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2008a. Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. Revised July. http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default- source/ceqa/handbook/localized-significance-thresholds/final-Ist-methodology- document.pdf?sfvrsn=2 (accessed February 2022).
2008b. Attachment E - Draft Guidance Document - Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Significance Threshold. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-cega-significance- thresholds/ghgattachmente.pdf (accessed February 2022). 2009. Appendix C - Mass Rate LST Look -Up Tables. Revised October 21. http://www.agmd.gov/docs/defauIt-so urce/cega/hand boo k/localized-significance- thresholds/appendix-c-mass-rate-Ist-look-up-tables.pdf?sfvrsn=2 (accessed February 2022). 2010. Minutes for the GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder Working Group #15. http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-ceqa- significance-thresholds/year-2008-2009/ghg-meeting-15/ghg-meeting-l5-minutes.pdf (accessed February 2022).
2016. National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) Attainment Status for South coast Air Basin. February. http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management- plans/naaqs-caaqs-feb20l6.pdf?sfvrsn=14 (accessed February 2022). 2017. Risk Assessment Procedure for Rules 1401, 1401.1 and 212. Version 8.1. September 1, 2017. http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/permitting/rule-1401-risk- assessment/riskassessproc-v8-l.pdf?sfvrsn=l2 (accessed February 2022). 2019. South Coast AQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds. Revised April. http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/scaqmd-air-quality- significance-thresholds. pdf (accessed February 2022).

Final Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration 117

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
.2021. Agenda Item 2 Overview of 2022 AQMP. November.
http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management- plans/2022-air-quality-management-plan/pm-pres-agenda-item-2-overview-of-2022-aqmp- 110421.pdf?sfvrsn=6 (accessed February 2022).
2022. 2022 Air Quality Management Plan. December 2. Available at:
https://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management- plans/2022-air-quality-management-plan/final-2022-aqmp/final-2022-agmp.pdf?sfvrsn=16 (accessed November 2023)
Southern California Council of Governments (SCAG). 2020a. Connect SoCal Transportation System Project List. Adopted on September 3, 2020. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file- attachments/0903fconnectsocal_project-list_O.pdf?1606000813 (accessed February 2022). 2020b. Connect SoCal (2020 - 2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy). https:Hscag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/0903fconnectsocal- plan_O.pdf?1606001176 (accessed February 2022).
2021. Final 2021 Federal Transportation Improvement Program Technical Appendix Volume III of III/Part A. March. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/f2021-ftip- project-listing-a.pdf?1614887998 (accessed February 2022).

State of California. 2018. California's Fourth Climate Change Assessment Statewide Summary Report. August 27, 2018. https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019- 11/Statewide_Reports-SUM-CCCA4-2018-013_Statewide_Summary_Report_ADA.pdf (accessed October 2021).

United States Energy Information Administration. 2021. California State Profile and Energy Estimates. Last updated February 18, 2021. https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA (accessed February 2022).

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2021. "Climate Change Indicators:

Atmospheric Concentrations of Greenhouse Gases." Last modified: April 2021. epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-atmospheric-concentrations- greenhouse-gases (accessed October 2021).
2022. Criteria Air Pollutants. N.d. https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants (accessed February 2022).

HW.*

References
List of Preparers
Rincon Consultants, Inc. prepared this IS-MND in collaboration with the City of Temecula. Persons involved in data gathering analysis, project management, and quality control are listed below.

Rincon Consultants, Inc.

Richard Daulton, MURP, Principal -in -Charge
Taylor Freeman, Project Manager
Jason Montague, Senior Planner
Nicole West, Supervisor Planner
Bill Vosti, Program Manager — Air Quality, GHG Emissions, and Noise Jared Reed, Senior Biologist
Christopher Hughes, Marine Scientist/Biologist
Hannah Haas, Supervisor Archaeologist
Mark Strother, Archaeologist
Jennifer DiCenzo, Paleontological Program Manager
Andrew McGrath, Paleontologist
Allysen Valencia, GIS Analyst
Dario Campos, Publishing Specialist and Technical Editor Yaritza Ramirez, Publishing Specialist
Final Initial Study — Mitigated Negative Declaration 119

City of Temecula
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
This page intentionally left blank.
120

Appendix A
Air Quality Report (Rincon Consultants Inc., August 2023)

AIR QUALITY REPORT
Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive
(Avenida Alvarado over Murrieta Creek)
City of Temecula, Riverside County, California
District 8, County of Riverside
Federal Aid Project No. BR-NBIL (543); City Project No. PW16-05 Prepared by
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
2215 Faraday Avenue, Suite A
Carlsbad, CA 92008
August 2023

This document contains blank pages to accommodate two-sided printing.

Prepared by:

AIR QUALITY REPORT

MURRIETA CREEK BRIDGE AT OVERLAND DRIVE
(AVENIDA ALVARADO OVER MURRIETA CREEK)

CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 8
Federal Aid Project No. BR-NBIL (543)
City Project No. PW16-051
Bill Vosti, Senior Environmental Planner
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
2215 Faraday Avenue, Suite A
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Date: 08/14/23
5-
Concurred by: Date:

Sean Yeung, P.E.

Senior Environmental Engineer
Planning, Local Assistance
Caltrans, District 8
464 West Fourth Street, 6th Floor, MS 760
San Bernardino, CA 92401-1400
Approved by:

Nino Abad
Associate Civil Engineer
City of Temecula
(951) 308-6385
[email protected]
9/20/2023
Date: _ 08/14/23
For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document is available in alternative formats. Please contact the City of Temecula at (951) 240-4225 or the Caltrans District 8 Relay Service TTY number, 711, or 1-800-735-2929.

Contents
Contents
Listof Appendices.....................................................................................................................................................................v Listof Tables.............................................................................................................................................................................. vi Listof Figures........................................................................................................................................................................... vii Acronyms and Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................................viii

1. Proposed Project Description..................................................................................................1

1.1 Introduction.............................................................................................................................................................1

1.2 Location and Background..................................................................................................................................1

1.3 Purpose and Need................................................................................................................................................5

1.4 Baseline and Forecasted Conditions for No -Build and Project Alternatives..................................5

1.4.1 Existing Roadways and Traffic Conditions....................................................................................7

1.4.2 No -Build Alternatives...........................................................................................................................9

1.4.3 Project Build Alternatives................................................................................................................. 11

1.4.4 Comparison of Existing/Baseline and Build Alternatives..................................................... 14

1.5 Construction Activities and Schedule......................................................................................................... 15

2. Regulatory Setting................................................................................................................... 25 2.1 Pollutant -Specific Overview............................................................................................................................ 25 2.1.1 Criteria Pollutants............................................................................................................................... 25 2.1.2 Mobile Source Air Toxics.................................................................................................................. 29 2.1.3 Greenhouse Gases.............................................................................................................................. 31 2.1.4 Asbestos.................................................................................................................................................32

2.2 Regulations...........................................................................................................................................................33

2.2.1 Federal and California Clean Air Act............................................................................................ 33 2.2.2 Transportation Conformity.............................................................................................................. 33 2.2.3 National Environmental Policy Act(NEPA)................................................................................ 34 2.2.4 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).......................................................................... 34 2.2.5 Local.........................................................................................................................................................34

3. Affected Environment.............................................................................................................36

3.1 Climate, Meteorology, and Topography.................................................................................................... 36 3.2
Existing Air Quality............................................................................................................................................. 37 3.2.1 Criteria Pollutants and Attainment Status................................................................................. 39 3.2.2 Mobile Source Air Toxics..................................................................................................................41

3.2.3 Greenhouse Gas and Climate Change........................................................................................42

3.3 Sensitive Receptors............................................................................................................................................42

3.4 Conformity Status...............................................................................................................................................43

3.4.1 Regional Conformity..........................................................................................................................43

3.4.2 Project -Level Conformity.................................................................................................................45

3.4.3 Interagency Consultation................................................................................................................45

3.5 NEPA Analysis/Requirement...........................................................................................................................46

Contents

3.6 CEQA Analysis/Requirement..........................................................................................................................46

4. Environmental Consequences...............................................................................................47

4.1 Impact Criteria.....................................................................................................................................................47

4.2 Short -Term Effects (Construction Emissions)...........................................................................................47

4.2.1 Construction Equipment, Traffic Congestion, and Fugitive Dust.....................................47

4.2.2 Asbestos.................................................................................................................................................50

4.2.3 Lead.......................................................................................................................................................... 51 4.3 Long -Term Effects (Operational Emissions).............................................................................................. 51 4.3.1 CO Analysis............................................................................................................................................ 52 4.3.2 PM Analysis........................................................................................................................................... 55 4.3.3 NO2 Analysis......................................................................................................................................... 57 4.3.4 Mobile Source Air Toxics Analysis................................................................................................ 58 4.3.5 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis............................................................................................ 61 4.4 Cumulative/Regional/Indirect Effects.........................................................................................................62

5. Minimization Measures..........................................................................................................63

5.1 Short -Term (Construction).............................................................................................................................. 63

5.2 Long -Term (Operational).................................................................................................................................64

6. Conclusions................................................................................................................................65

7. References..................................................................................................................................66

8. Appendices................................................................................................................................ 68 Transportation Air Quality Conformity Findings Checklist...................................................71 Interagency Consultation Documentation............................................................................... 72 iv

List of Appendices
List of Appendices
Appendix A RTP and TIP Listings for the Project
Appendix B FHWA Conformity Determination
Appendix C Transportation Air Quality Conformity Findings Checklist Appendix D Interagency Consultation Documentation
Appendix E Construction Emissions Calculations

List of Tables
List of Tables
Table 1. Summary of Existing Traffic Conditions............................................................................................................7 Table 2. Summary of Future No -Build Traffic Conditions...........................................................................................9 Table 3. Summary of Build Traffic Conditions.............................................................................................................. 12 Table 4. Summary of Long -Term Operational Impacts on Traffic Conditions ................................................. 15 Table 5. Construction Activities and Schedule............................................................................................................ 16 Table 6. Construction Equipment Assumptions.......................................................................................................... 17 Table 7. Project Construction Vehicle Miles Traveled(VMT).................................................................................. 20 Table 8. Table of State and Federal Ambient Air Quality Standards. Accessed February 1, 2021, www.arb.ca.gov/research/aags/aags2.pdf ............................................................................................................ 26 Table 9. State and Federal Criteria Air Pollutant Effects and Sources................................................................. 28 Table 10. State and Federal Attainment Status........................................................................................................... 39 Table 11. Air Quality Concentrations for the Past Three Years..............................................................................40 Table 12. Mobile Source Air Toxic Measured Concentrations in the Project Vicinity...................................42 Table 13. Sensitive Receptors Located Within 500 feet of the Project Site......................................................43 Table 14. Status of Plans Related to Regional Conformity......................................................................................45 Table 15. Construction Activities and Schedule for RCEM Input..........................................................................48 Table 16. Project Construction Emissions for Roadways.........................................................................................49 Table 17. Project Construction GHG Emissions........................................................................................................... 61 vi

List of Figures
List of Figures
Figure 1. Map of the Project Location...............................................................................................................................3 Figure2. Map of the Project Boundary .............................................................................................................................4 Figure 3. Projected National MSAT Trends, 2010-2050 (Source:
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/air quality/air toxics/policy and guidance/msat/).......... 30 Figure 4. Predominant Wind Patterns Near the Project.......................................................................................... 37 Figure 5. Map of Air Quality Monitoring Stations Located Near the Project .................................................. 38 vii

Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Term Definition
OF
Degrees Fahrenheit
AADT
Average annual daily traffic
AB
Assembly Bill
ARB
California Air Resources Board
CAA
Federal Clean Air Act
CAAA
Clean Air Act Amendments
CAFE
Corporate Fuel Economy
Caltrans
California Department of Transportation
CCAA
California Clean Air Act
CEQA
California Environmental Quality Act
CFR
Code of Federal Regulations
CH4
Methane
CO
Carbon monoxide
COz
Carbon dioxide
COze
Carbon dioxide equivalent
City
Temecula
EMFAC
Emissions Factors
EO
Executive Order
FCAA
Federal Clean Air Act
FHWA
Federal Highway Administration
FTA
Federal Transit Administration
FTIP
Federal Transportation Improvement Program
GHG
Greenhouse gas
GWP
Global warming potential
HzS
Hydrogen sulfide
I-5
Interstate 5

Acronyms and Abbreviations
Term
Definition
IRIS
Integrated Risk Information System
LOS
Level of service
MMT
Million metric tons
MOVES
Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator
mph
Miles per hour
MPO
Metropolitan Planning Organization
MSAT
Mobile Source Air Toxics
MT
Metric tons
N2O
Nitrous oxide
NAAQS
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NATA
National Air Toxics Assessment
NEPA
National Environmental Policy Act
NHTSA
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
NO2
Nitrogen dioxide
NOx
Nitrogen oxide
03 Ozone
PM
Particulate matter
PM10
Particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter
PM2.s
Particulate matter less than 2.S microns in diameter
ppb
Parts per billion
ppm
Parts per million
Protocol
Transportation Project -Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol
RCEM
Roadway Construction Emissions Model

RCFC&WCD
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District ROGs
Reactive organic gases
RTP
Regional Transportation Plan
SCAG
Southern California Association of Governments
SCS
Sustainable Communities Strategy
SIP
State Implementation Plan
ix

Acronyms and Abbreviations
Term
Definition
SCAQMD
South Coast Air Quality Management District
SMAQMD
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District SOz
Sulfur dioxide
Sox
Sulfur oxides
TCE
Temporary construction easements
TCWG
Transportation Conformity Working Group
USDOT
United States Department of Transportation
U.S. EPA
United States Environmental Protection Agency
VMT
Vehicle miles traveled
VRP
Visibility -reducing particles
VOCs
Volatile organic compounds
WRCC
Western Region Climatic Center
WRCOG
Western Riverside Council of Governments
x

1. Proposed Project Description

1.1 Introduction
The City of Temecula (City), in cooperation with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) District 8, proposes the construction of a bridge over and across Murrieta Creek to connect Avenida Alvarado at the intersection of Diaz Road with Overland Drive at the intersection of Enterprise Circle West in the City. The bridge will replace the existing 2-lane low-water crossing at Via Montezuma with a 4-lane bridge at Overland Drive and Avenida Alvarado over Murrieta Creek. The project's open -to -traffic year would be 2025.The City is lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

The project would extend from the terminus of Overland Drive near the Enterprise Circle West intersection, over Murrieta Creek, along Diaz Road, approximately 600 feet on either side of Avenida Alvarado, and about 500 feet along Avenida Alvarado.

The purpose of this air quality analysis is to describe the existing regional and local air quality of the project area, identify the potential air quality impacts of the project, and demonstrate air quality conformity of the project with the State Implementation Plan (SIP), as required by the federal Clean Air Act (CAA). This report also identifies measures to mitigate or minimize pollutant emissions that could occur during project construction.

1.2 Location and Background
The project is located in the northwest area in the City of Temecula, spanning and adjacent to Murrieta Creek. The project would extend from the terminus of Overland Drive near the Enterprise Circle West intersection, over Murrieta Creek, along Diaz Road, approximately 600 feet on either side of Avenida Alvarado, and about 500 feet along Avenida Alvarado. The project's regional location is shown in Figure 1 and the Project Location is shown on Figure 2.

Roadways at the location of the proposed bridge consist of the intersection of Diaz Road and Avenida Alvarado on the west side of the Creek. Diaz Road parallels the Creek, has a width of 76 feet and consists of two northbound and two southbound through lanes, and Avenida Alvarado has a width of 64 feet with one eastbound and one westbound travel lane. To the east of the Creek, Overland Drive terminates at Commerce Center Drive. Overland Drive was recently extended to Enterprise Circle West under a separate Overland Drive Extension Project (City Project PW 16-06). The project involved the demolition of two buildings, roadway improvements including construction of curbs and gutters, sidewalks, storm drains, utility facilities, traffic signage, and intersection improvements at Overland Drive/Commerce Center Drive and Overland Drive/Enterprise Circle West.

Enterprise Circle West is 44 feet in width with one northbound and one southbound lane and

1. Proposed Project Description
Overland Drive between Enterprise Circle West and Commerce Center Drive is 68 feet in width with two westbound and two eastbound lanes.

An existing pedestrian and bike trail parallels the west side of the Creek to the east of Diaz Road.

Nearby Creek crossings include the Winchester Road Bridge, approximately 0.3 mile north, and the Via Montezuma low-water crossing, approximately 0.5 mile south.

The project is included in the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS (Amendment #3, approved June 9, 2023; RTP ID 991203) and the conforming 2023 FTIP (Amendment 23-03, approved June 9, 2023; FTIP ID 991203A). The project is described in the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS (Amendment #3, approved June 9, 2023) as "in western Riv Co in the City of Temecula: phase 1: extend overland drive (4 lanes) from commerce center drive to Avenida Alvarado/Diaz Rd intersection. See 991203a for phase 2 bridge project." The project is described in the 2023 FTIP (Amendment 23-03, approved June 9, 2023) as "in western Riv Co in the City of Temecula: Phase 2: replace 2-lane low water crossing with 4-lane bridge (BR#OOL0087) over Murrieta Creek at Avenida Alvarado. See 991203 for Phase 1" (see Appendix A). In the approved 2023 FTIP (Amendment 23-03, approved June 9, 2023), there is $4,382 available for project funding in the following FY 22/23. There are no available funds for FY 23/24, FY 24/25, and FY 25/26 because the funding in FY 22/23 is sufficient to complete all preconstruction tasks (preliminary engineering and right-of-way work). Once the right-of-way work is certified by Caltrans, the $19,167 currently available for project funding in FY 26/27 will be moved forward to FY 24/25 or FY 25/26 through the Annual Survey process.

The project was discussed among stakeholders at a Transportation Conformity Working Group (TCWG) meeting on July 28, 2020, pursuant to the interagency consultation requirement of 40 CFR

1. Proposed Project Description
Lake
Elsinore ;� Canyon Lake Menifee Home+ig°^'PI"
yew Pori
SyonPd
c,
pailroad
Lakeland t
Village s
Rd Scott Rd
Ca � sa
Wildomar `yo
o French Valley
Oa Clinton keith Rd �.

Lake Skinner
urrieta
Imagery provided by Esri and its licensors © 2019-
Project Location - N
Federal Project No. h
BR-NBIL(543)
14 y ;y
W
Lancaster
© Palmdale
VictonAlle
Santa Clarita
Angeles
Simi National
Valley Purest
Twentynine
Palms
os Angeles Fv—, Ontario
Joshua Tree
qv
Riverside EC
Cathedral National
Anaheim Corona
city Park
Santa Ana
Indio
T�A7
Oceanside
San Diego
Figure 1. Map of the Project Location.
3 1. Proposed Project Description
Oki
�� 'a! `` 's•
r
A,
Project Boundary - .l ' w,
Federal Project No. BR-NBIL(543)
0 135 270 N
Feet '
Imagery provided by Microsoft Bing and its licensors ® 2020.

Figure 2. Map of the Project Boundary.
m

1. Proposed Project Description

1.3 Purpose and Need
The purpose of the project is to construct a bridge over and across Murrieta Creek to connect Avenida Alvarado at the intersection of Diaz Road with Overland Drive at the intersection of Enterprise Circle West in the City of Temecula.

The proposed improvements will accomplish the following in the project area:

1. Provide safe all-weather access across Murrieta Creek

2. Provide reliable route for emergency vehicles, motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists

3. Provide an additional access point to the City's industrial park Murrieta Creek bisects Temecula west of Interstate 15 (1-15) and separates industrial park and open space areas in the western City limits from the rest of the City. Murrieta Creek is an important riparian resource within the City, which protects water quality, conveys stormwater, and contains important biological resources and habitats. In addition, the Creek is an important archaeological area with known and unknown archaeological sites. Therefore, there are limited Creek crossings in the City.

A low-water crossing of Murrieta Creek currently exists at Via Montezuma, approximately 0.5 miles south of Overland Drive. The low-water crossing is frequently closed in wet seasons and is not a reliable route to cross the Creek during storm and flooding events. The crossing is scheduled to be removed in the future by a separate channel improvements project. Therefore, there is a need for an additional all-weather creek crossing location for employees and residents to access the industrial and open space areas to the west of Murrieta Creek.

1.4 Baseline and Forecasted Conditions for No -Build and Project Alternatives
The project proposes to construct a bridge over Murrieta Creek to connect Avenida Alvarado with Overland Drive in the City of Temecula, Riverside County. The Murrieta Creek Bridge at Overland Drive is anticipated to be a concrete girder structure spanning approximately 348 linear feet over Murrieta Creek. The bridge would accommodate four through travel lanes (two lanes in each direction), left -turn lane(s), and two 6-foot-wide shoulders served as Class II bike lanes, for a curb -to - curb width of 68 feet. In addition, a 6-foot-wide sidewalk would be included on the southern side of the bridge for pedestrians to cross the creek. The existing bike trail on the west side of the creek will intersect with the extended Overland Drive by a signal -controlled at -grade crossing.

Upon completion of the Murrieta Creek Bridge project, the proposed street configuration would be consistent with the four -lane roadway segment on Overland Drive to the east. In addition to the construction of the bridge, various roadway and utility improvements would occur at the western

1. Proposed Project Description
and eastern bridge approaches. In order to match the roadway section on Avenida Alvarado on the west side of the bridge, the project would transition the lane configuration in the eastern portion of Avenida Alvarado to be consistent with the four -lane configuration of the bridge. Intersections improvements to Overland Drive/Enterprise Circle West, Overland Drive/Commerce Center Drive and Diaz Road/Avenida Alvarado would include the installation of traffic signals and associated signing, striping, streetlights, and utilities. Reconstruction and roadway improvements along Diaz Road and Avenida Alvarado would include undergrounding electrical utilities, construction of curb, gutter, and sidewalks, relocating sewer and water facilities, and adding traffic signage and striping.

As a part of the bridge construction, one abutment would be constructed on each end of the bridge, along with two piers within the Murrieta Creek. Earth embankments with concrete slope protection and cutoff walls buried underground would also be installed on the east and west side of the Creek.

The foundation of the bridge piers involving large -diameter cast -in -drilled -hole concrete piles will be installed below the channel bottom, which is deep enough for protection from scour. The channel bottom will remain earthen without any concrete or rip rap lining. The bridge girder would provide cell openings to accommodate future utilities and electrical conduits for streetlights and traffic signal communication.

The project will also include the following additional improvements:
• Railing Architectural treatment: The bridge design will incorporate concrete barriers, metal hand and bicycle railings, and standard architectural treatments.

Landscaping: Landscaping modifications or improvements in the right-of-way along the bridge approach, Overland Drive/Enterprise Circle West and Diaz Road/Avenida Alvarado intersections, and along Diaz Road and Overland Drive.

Right -of -Way Requirements: The right of way on the east side of the creek has been acquired by the City as part of the completed Overland Drive Extension Project (City Project PW 16-06); however, due to raise of the Diaz Road and Avenida Alvarado street grade, portions of four driveways and parkways in three private properties at the westerly approach will be reconstructed. Temporary construction easements (TCE's) will be acquired at these locations. There will be a street easement for the bridge and its approaches in the Creek, which is to be acquired from Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD). A temporary construction easement at the northeast corner of the Overland Drive/Enterprise Circle West intersection may be required to reconstruct an ADA-compliant curb ramp.
• Construction Traffic Controls: Diaz Road, Avenida Alvarado, and Overland Drive will include temporary striping to divert traffic away from work areas. The temporary striping will allow for staged construction of roadway and intersection improvements to maintaining vehicle and pedestrian and bicyclist access at all times. The TCE for grading in the channel is to be acquired through an encroachment permit from RCFC&WCD. Permanent and temporary construction easements in four private properties at the easterly side of the Creek may be required to construct storm drains, a retaining wall, and the bridge approach embankment.

1. Proposed Project Description

1.4.1 Existing Roadways and Traffic Conditions
Roadways at the location of the proposed bridge consist of the intersection of Diaz Road and Avenida Alvarado on the west side of the Creek. Diaz Road parallels the Creek, has a width of 76 feet and consists of two northbound and two southbound through lanes, and Avenida Alvarado has a width of 64 feet with one eastbound and one westbound travel lane. To the east of the Creek, Overland Drive terminates at Commerce Center Drive. Overland Drive was recently extended to Enterprise Circle West under a separate Overland Drive Extension Project (City Project PW 16-06). The project involved the demolition of two buildings, roadway improvements including construction of curbs and gutters, sidewalks, storm drains, utility facilities, traffic signage, and intersection improvements at Overland Drive/Commerce Center Drive and Overland Drive/Enterprise Circle West.

Enterprise Circle West is 44 feet in width with one northbound and one southbound lane and Overland Drive between Enterprise Circle West and Commerce Center Drive is 68 feet in width with two westbound and two eastbound lanes. Traffic volumes along the existing roadways affected by the project are shown in Table 1.

An existing pedestrian and bike trail parallels the west side of the Creek to the east of Diaz Road.

Nearby Creek crossings include the Winchester Road Bridge, approximately 0.3 mile north, and the Via Montezuma low-water crossing, approximately 0.5 mile south.

Table 1. Summary of Existing Traffic Conditions.

AADT
Average
Average
Speed
Scenario/
Location
o Truck
/o
VMT (mi)
Speed
During Off -
Analysis Year
Total
Truck
During Peak
peak Travel
Travel (mph)
(mph)
Existing/Baseline
Diaz Road
Year 2019
from
NB, AM: 19
Winchester
NB, PM: 14
NB: 18
14,335
1,003
7 3,340
Road to
SB, AM: 45
SB: 45
Avenida
SB, PM: 45
Alvarado
Diaz Road
between
NB, AM: 44
Avenida
NB, PM: 45
NB: 45
12,655
886
7 4,493
Alvarado
SB, AM: 45
SB: 43
and Via
SB, PM: 43
Montezuma
EB, AM: 21
Avenida
Alvarado
2,001
140
7 1,159
EB, PM: 15
EB: 17
west of Diaz
WB, AM: 35
WB: 35
Road
WB, PM: 35

1. Proposed Project Description
AADT
Average
Average
Speed
Scenario/
Location
o /o Truck
VMT (mi)
Speed
During Off -
Analysis Year
Total
Truck
During Peak
peak Travel
Travel (mph)
(mph)
Overland
Drive
between
Diaz Road
N/A
N/A
7 N/A
N/Az
N/Az
and
Enterprise
Circle
Overland
Drive
EB, AM: 35
between
EB, PM: 35
EB: 35
Enterprise
2,977
208
7 211
Circle and
WB, AM: 18
WB: 18
Commerce
WB, PM: 18
Center Drive
Overland
Drive
between
EB, AM: 13
Commerce
EB, PM: 5
EB: 7
6,959
487
7 1,246
Center Drive
WB, AM: 35
WB: 35
and
WB, PM: 35
Jefferson
Avenue
Overland
Drive
between
20,215
1,415
7 7,298
N/Az
N/Az
Jefferson
Avenue and
Ynez Road
Winchester
Road
EB, AM: 19
between
EB, PM: 10
EB: 12
Diaz Road
25,068
1,755
7 3,735
and
WB, AM: 16
WB: 13
Enterprise
WB, PM: 13
Circle
Source: STC Traffic, Inc. 2021
NB = Northbound; SB = Southbound
According to the traffic engineer for the project, Avenida Alvarado would carry approximately 7 percent trucks (STC Traffic, Inc. 2020). This is the current truck volume for 1-15 at SR 79, and is appropriate for evaluation of the project as it is a cross -street of 1-15 and runs parallel to the future extension of Avenida Alvarado. z The model used by the traffic engineer for the project does not go out farther than this location; therefore, it does not generate average speeds for this intersection, which relies upon intersections further out in the model to generate speeds through the intersection.

1. Proposed Project Description

1.4.2 No -Build Alternatives
Under the No -Build Alternatives, no bridge would be constructed in the project area. Traffic volumes under the opening year (2025) and horizon year (2045) traffic scenarios are shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Summary of Future No -Build Traffic Conditions.

AADT
Average
Average
Speed
Scenario/
Speed
Location
%Truck
VMT (mi)
During Off -
Analysis Year
Total
Truck
During Peak
peak Travel
Travel (mph)
(mph)
Opening
Diaz Road
NB, AM: 19
NB: 13
Year/2025
from
NB, PM: 12
SB:45
Winchester
16,055
1,124
7 3,741
SB, AM: 45
Road to
SB, PM: 45
Avenida
Alvarado
Diaz Road
between
NB, AM: 44
Avenida
NB, PM:45
NB:45
14,174
992
7 5,032
Alvarado
SB, AM: 45
SB: 45
and Via
5B, PM: 45
Montezuma
EB, AM: 21
EB: 17
Avenida
Alvarado
2,241
157
7 1,298
EB, PM: 14
WB: 35
west of Diaz
WB, AM: 35
Road
WB, PM: 35
Overland
Drive
between
Diaz Road
N/A
N/A
7 N/A
N/A
N/A
and
Enterprise
Circle**
Overland
EB, AM: 35
EB: 35
Drive
EB, PM: 35
WB: 18
between
WB, AM: 18
Enterprise
3,334
233
7 237
Circle and
C
WB, PM: 18
Commerce
Center Drive

1. Proposed Project Description
AADT
Average
Average
Speed
Scenario/
Speed
Location
% Truck
VMT (mi)
During Off -
Analysis Year
Total
Truck
During Peak
peak Travel
Travel (mph)
(mph)
Overland
EB, AM: 13
EB: 8
Drive
EB, PM: 7
WB: 35
between
WB, AM: 35
Commerce
7,794
546
7 1,395
WB, PM: 35
Center Drive
and
Jefferson
Avenue
Overland
Drive
between
22,641
1,585
7 8,173
N/Az
N/Az
Jefferson
Avenue and
Ynez Road
Winchester
EB, AM: 18
EB: 9
Road
EB, PM: 7
WB: 13
between
WB, AM: 15
Diaz Road
28,076
1,965
7 4,183
WB, PM: 13
and
Enterprise
Circle
Horizon Year/2045
Diaz Road
NB, AM: 16
NB: 14
from
NB, PM: 13
SB: 45
Winchester
18,062
1,264
7 4,208
SB, AM: 45
Road to
Avenida
SB, PM: 45
Alvarado
Diaz Road
between
NB, AM: 44
Avenida
NB, PM: 45
NB: 45
15,945
1,116
7 5,660
Alvarado
SB, AM: 45
SB: 45
and Via
SB, PM: 45
Montezuma
EB, AM: 12
EB: 5
Avenida
Alvarado
2,521
176
7 1,460
EB, PM: 3
WB: 35
west of Diaz
WB, AM: 35
Road
WB, PM: 35
Overland
N/A
N/A
Drive
between
Diaz Road
N/A
N/A
7 N/A
and
Enterprise
Circle**
IN

1. Proposed Project Description
AADT
Average
Average
Speed
Scenario/
Speed
Location
% Truck
VMT (mi)
During Off -
Analysis Year
Total
Truck
During Peak
peak Travel
Travel (mph)
(mph)
Overland
EB, AM: 35
EB: 35
Drive
EB, PM: 35
WB: 18
between
WB, AM: 18
Enterprise
3,751
263
7 266
WB, PM: 18
Circle and
C
Commerce
Center Drive
Overland
EB, AM: 12
EB: 9
Drive
EB, PM: 8
WB: 35
between
WB, AM: 35
Commerce
8,768
614
7 1,569
WB, PM: 35
Center Drive
and
Jefferson
Avenue
Overland
Drive
between
25,471
1,783
7 9,195
N/Az
N/Az
Jefferson
Avenue and
Ynez Road
Winchester
EB, AM: 17
EB: 11
Road
EB, PM: 8
WB: 10
between
WB, AM: 15
Diaz Road
31,586
2,211
7 4,706
WB, PM: 10
and
Enterprise
Circle
Source: STC Traffic, Inc. 2021
NB = Northbound; SIB = Southbound
According to the traffic engineer for the project, Avenida Alvarado would carry approximately 7 percent trucks (STC Traffic, Inc. 2020). This is the current truck volume for 1-15 at SR 79, and is appropriate for evaluation of the project as it is a cross - street of 1-15 and runs parallel to the future extension of Avenida Alvarado. z The model used by the traffic engineer for the project does not go out farther than this location; therefore, it does not generate average speeds for this intersection, which relies upon intersections further out in the model to generate speeds through the intersection.

1.4.3 Project Build Alternatives
The Project Build Alternative is described under Section 1.4.1. Traffic volumes under the opening year (2025) with project and horizon year (2045) with project traffic scenarios are shown in Table 3.

1. Proposed Project Description
Table 3. Summary of Build Traffic Conditions.

AADT
Average
Average
Speed
Scenario/
Speed
Location
%Truck
VMT (mi)
During Off -
Analysis Year
Total
Truck'
During Peak
peak Travel
Travel (mph)
(mph)
Opening Year +
Diaz Road
NB, AM: 18
NB: 13
Project/2025
from
NB, PM: 13
SB: 25
Winchester
18,863
1,320
7 4,395
SB, AM: 24
Road to
SB, PM: 25
Avenida
Alvarado
Diaz Road
between
NB, AM: 34
Avenida
NB, PM: 31
NB: 31
14,174
992
7 5,032
Alvarado
SB, AM: 45
SB: 45
and Via
SB, PM: 45
Montezuma
EB, AM: 21
EB: 20
Avenida
Alvarado
2,241
157
7 1,298
EB, PM: 19
WB: 35
west of Diaz
WB, AM: 35
Road
WB, PM: 35
Overland
EB, AM: 20
EB: 16
Drive
EB, PM: 16
WB: 14
between
WB, AM: 11
Diaz Road
6,400
448
7 998
and
WB, PM: 13
Enterprise
Circle**
Overland
EB, AM: 14
EB: 9
Drive
EB, PM: 9
WB: 16
between
WB, AM: 24
Enterprise
8,868
621
7 630
Circle and
C
WB, PM: 16
Commerce
Center Drive
Overland
EB, AM: 12
EB: 8
Drive
EB, PM: 7
WB: 19
between
WB, AM: 22
Commerce
13,328
933
7 2,386
WB, PM: 18
Center Drive
and
Jefferson
Avenue
12 1. Proposed Project Description
AADT
Average
Average
Speed
Scenario/
Speed
Location
% Truck
VMT (mi)
During Off -
Analysis Year
Total
Truck'
During Peak
peak Travel
Travel (mph)
(mph)
Overland
Drive
between
22,641
1,585
7 8,173
N/AZ
N/A2
Jefferson
Avenue and
Ynez Road
Winchester
EB, AM: 19
EB: 10
Road
EB, PM: 7
WB: 13
between
WB, AM: 15
Diaz Road
25,269
1,769
7 3,765
and
WB, PM: 13
Enterprise
Circle
Horizon Year
Diaz Road
NB, AM: 17
NB: 13
+Project/2045
from
NB, PM: 12
SB: 23
Winchester
21,221
1,485
7 4,944
SB, AM: 22
Road to
Avenida
SB, PM: 22
Alvarado
Diaz Road
between
NB, AM: 32
Avenida
NB, PM: 27
NB: 28
15,945
1,116
7 5,660
Alvarado
SB, AM: 45
SB: 45
and Via
SB, PM: 45
Montezuma
EB, AM: 17
EB: 16
Avenida
Alvarado
2,521
176
7 1,460
EB, PM: 16
WB: 35
west of Diaz
WB, AM: 35
Road
WB, PM: 35
Overland
EB, AM: 21
EB: 19
Drive
EB, PM: 18
WB: 12
between
WB, AM: 13
Diaz Road
7,600
532
7 1,186
WB, PM: 12
and
Enterprise
Circle
Overland
EB, AM: 13
EB: 10
Drive
EB, PM: 9
WB: 14
between
WB, AM: 15
Enterprise
9,636
675
7 684
WB, PM: 14
Circle and
C
Commerce
Center Drive
13 1. Proposed Project Description
AADT
Average
Average
Speed
Scenario/
Location
% Truck
VMT (mi)
Speed
During Off -
Analysis Year
Total
Truck'
During Peak
peak Travel
Travel (mph)
(mph)
Overland
EB, AM: 11
EB: 8
Drive
EB, PM: 7
WB: 20
between
WB, AM: 24
Commerce
Center Drive
14,653
1,026
7 2,623
WB, PM: 20
and
Jefferson
Avenue
Overland
Drive
between
25,471
1,783
7 9,195
N/Az
N/Az
Jefferson
Avenue and
Ynez Road
Winchester
EB, AM: 18
EB: 11
Road
EB, PM: 9
WB: 9
between
WB, AM: 15
Diaz Road
28,427
1,990
7 4,236
and
WB, PM: 9
Enterprise
Circle
Source: STC Traffic, Inc. 2021
NB = Northbound; SB = Southbound
' According to the traffic engineer for the project, Avenida Alvarado would carry approximately 7 percent trucks (STC Traffic, Inc. 2020). This is the current truck volume for 1-15 at SR 79, and is appropriate for evaluation of the project as it is a cross - street of 1-15 and runs parallel to the future extension of Avenida Alvarado.

Z The model used by the traffic engineer for the project does not go out farther than this location; therefore, it does not generate average speeds for this intersection, which relies upon intersections further out in the model to generate speeds through the intersection.

1.4.4 Comparison of Existing/Baseline and Build Alternatives The project's VMT Analysis Technical Memorandum (STC Traffic, Inc., 2021) showed that project study area VMT will be 2,618 VMT per day under the Opening Year (2025) scenario and 2,922 VMT per day in the Horizon Year (2045). Project study area VMT is shown to be increasing because the project study area VMT analysis does not consider redistribution of traffic and potential VMT reductions on routes outside of the project study area (e.g., Rancho California). The project study area was determined by the City for traffic flow purposes and not for VMT purposes. In reality, the proposed project does not increase capacity, and would reduce VMT for current trips on the network as the new roadway segment lowers VMT for journeys from Overland Drive to Diaz Road and Avenida Alvarado. The distance from the Overland Drive/Enterprise Circle intersection to the Diaz Road/ Avenida Alvarado intersection is currently 0.7 miles. The distance between the two intersections 14 1. Proposed Project Description
across the creek is approximately 825 feet. This is an approximate reduction of 2,870 feet traveled per vehicle trip.

Table 4 summarizes design features and operational impacts on traffic conditions near the proposed project, including VMT, AADT, and average speed.

Table 4. Summary of Long -Term Operational Impacts on Traffic Conditions.

Scenario/
Analysis Year
Design Features and Operational Impacts on Traffic Conditions The peak and off-peak speeds analysis shows that during the Opening Year + Project/2025 scenario, speeds will be lower on the Diaz Road and Overland Drive segments compared to the Existing/Baseline Year 2019, Opening Year/2025, and Horizon Year/2045 scenarios.

Opening Year +
The project's VMT Analysis Technical Memorandum (STC Traffic, Inc., 2021) Project/2025
showed that project study area VMT will be an additional 2,618 VMT per day during the Opening Year + Project/2025 scenario compared to without the project. The project study area was determined by the City for traffic flow purposes and not for VMT purposes. In reality, the proposed project does not increase capacity, and would reduce VMT for current trips on the network as the new roadway segment lowers VMT forjourneys from Overland Drive to Diaz Road and Avenida Alvarado.

The peak and off-peak speeds analysis shows that during the Horizon Year + Project/2045 scenario, speeds will be lower on the Diaz Road and Overland Drive segments compared to the Existing/Baseline Year 2019, Opening Year/2025, and Horizon Year/2045 scenarios.

Horizon Year
The project's VMT Analysis Technical Memorandum (STC Traffic, Inc., 2021) +Project/2045
showed that project study area VMT will be an additional 2,922 VMT per day during the Horizon Year +Project/2045 scenario compared to without the project.

The project study area was determined by the City for traffic flow purposes and not for VMT purposes. In reality, the proposed project does not increase capacity, and would reduce VMT for current trips on the network as the new roadway segment lowers VMT forjourneys from Overland Drive to Diaz Road and Avenida Alvarado.

1.5 Construction Activities and Schedule
Diaz Road, Avenida Alvarado, and Overland Drive will include temporary striping to divert traffic away from work areas. The temporary striping will allow for staged construction of roadway and intersection improvements to maintaining vehicle and pedestrian and bicyclist access at all times. 15 1. Proposed Project Description
Temporary and short-term access impact may occur during construction, and will require coordination with property owners, the public, and other stakeholders.

Although construction is planned to last approximately 2 years, no construction activities are anticipated to last more than five years at any individual site. Emissions from construction -related activities are thus considered temporary as defined in 40 CFR 93.123(c)(5); and are not required to be included in PM hot -spot analyses to meet conformity requirements. The milestone completion dates included in Table 5 are anticipated from project construction.

The length of the project construction period, including advertise and award and project closure, is approximately two years, and the following milestone completion dates are anticipated:

Table 5. Construction Activities and Schedule.

Construction Phase
Description/List of Activities
Begin Date
Completion
Working
Date
Days
Advertisement and Award
Advertisement and Award
N/A
10/2/2023
1/31/2024
N/A
Site Preparation
Traffic Control and
Shift traffic on Diaz Road and
Demolition
remove asphalt pavement
2/1/2024
2/22/2024
15 Prepare the site to access the
Clearing and Grubbing
channel bottom from east and
2/23/2024
3/25/2024
20 west approaches
Channel Grading
Grade channel slopes at bridge
Grading Channel Slopes
and tie in to upstream and
3/26/2024
4/29/2024
25 downstream transition
Stage I Construction
Bridge Construction -
Install pile foundations
5/1/2024
7/17/2024
55 Foundation
Bridge Construction —
Construct pier columns, abutment
Substructure
walls, and slope linings
7/18/2024
10/17/2025
65 Bridge Construction —
Construct girders and railings
10/18/2025
2/7/2025
80 Superstructure
Grading/Embankment
Construct east and west
Backfill/Pavement
approaches, and east side of Diaz
2/10/2025
4/11/2025
45 Road
Stage II Construction
Traffic Control and
Shift traffic on Diaz Road and
Demolition
remove pavement
4/14/2025
5/12/2025
20 Grading/Embankment
Construct west side of Diaz Road
Backfill/Pavement
and extend Avenida Alvarado
5/13/2025
7/29/2025
55 In

1. Proposed Project Description
Construction Phase
Description/List of Activities
Begin Date
Completion
Working
Date
Days
Project Closure
Demobilization/Project
Closure
N/A
7/30/2025
9/30/2025
N/A
Source: STC Traffic, Inc. 2021
The following project equipment in Table 6 would be used for the project.

Table 6. Construction Equipment Assumptions.

Activity and
Working Days
Equipment
Amount
8-Hour Days or
Total Round Trips
# of Site
Workers
Site Preparation
Traffic Control and
Demolition — 15 Days
Excavators
2 15 Days
8 Loaders
2 15 Days
Rubber Tired Dozers
1 15 Days
Traffic Control Trucks
1 5 Days
Hauling Trucks -
Asphalt Concrete and
Concrete Recycling (Site 1)
N/A
32 Round Trips
Hauling Trucks -
Construction Debris (Site 2)
N/A
10 Round Trips
Clearing and Grubbing
— 20 Days
Excavators
2 20 Days
10 Dozers
2 20 Days
Loaders
2 20 Days
Hauling Trucks -
Construction Debris (Site 2)
N/A
20 Round Trips
Channel Grading
Grading Channel
Slopes — 25 Days
Scrapers
2 25 Days
12 Excavators
3 25 Days
Dozers
2 25 Days
Backhoe Loader/Loader
2 25 Days
Hauling Trucks -
Construction Debris (Site 2)
N/A
10 Round Trips
Stage I Construction
Bridge Construction —
Foundation — 55 Days
Pile Drilling Rigs
1 55 Days
16 Cranes
2 55 Days
Excavators
2 55 Days
Loaders
2 55 Days
17 1. Proposed Project Description
Activity and
Working Days
Equipment
Amount
8-Hour Days or
Total Round Trips
# of Site
Workers
Ready Mix Concrete Trucks
(Site 4)
N/A
120 Round Trips
Concrete/Slurry Pump Truck
2 15 Days
Generator Sets
1 55 Days
Bridge Construction —
Substructure — 65 Days
Cranes
2 65 Days
16 Excavators
1 65 Days
Loaders
1 65 Days
Ready Mix Concrete Trucks
N/A
92 Round Trips
Concrete Pump Truck
1 10 Days
Generator Sets
1 65 days
Bridge Construction —
Superstructure — 80
Days
Cranes
1 80 Days
16 Ready Mix Concrete Trucks
N/A
110 Round Trips
Concrete Pump Truck
1 10 Days
Bid Well
1 5 Days
Generator Sets
2 80 Days
Forklifts
2 80 Days
Grading/Embankment
Backfill/Pavement — 45
Days
Scrapers
1 40 Days
12 Excavators
2 40 Days
Dozers
2 40 Days
Rollers
1 40 Days
Backhoe Loader/Loader
2 40 Days
Asphalt Paving Machine
1 5 Days
Asphalt Paver Finisher
1 5 Days
Generator Sets
2 45 Days
Hauling Truck — Borrow
(Site 3)
N/A
64 Round Trips
Hauling Truck — Asphalt
Concrete (Site 1)
N/A
52 Round Trips
Stage II Construction
Traffic Control and
Demolition — 20 Days
Excavators
2 20 Days
10 Loaders
2 20 Days
Rubber Tired Dozers
1 20 Days
Traffic Control Trucks
1 5 Days
Hauling Trucks -
Asphalt Concrete and
Concrete Recycling (Site 1)
N/A
44 Round Trips
m

1. Proposed Project Description
Activity and
Working Days
Equipment
Amount
8-Hour Days or
Total Round Trips
# of Site
Workers
Hauling Trucks -
Construction Debris (Site 2)
N/A
10 Round Trips
Scrapers
1 45 Days
14 Excavators
2 45 Days
Dozers
2 45 Days
Rollers
1 45 Days
Backhoe Loader/Loader
2 45 Days
Grading/Embankment
Backfill/Pavement — 55
Asphalt Paving Machine
1 10 Days
Days
Asphalt Paver Finisher
1 10 Days
Generator Sets
2 55 Days
Hauling Truck — Borrow
(Site 3)
N/A
96 Round Trips
Hauling Truck — Asphalt
Concrete (Site 1)
N/A
48 Round Trips
Source: STC Traffic, Inc. 2021
W

1. Proposed Project Description
The estimated construction vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is shown in Table 9.

Table 7. Project Construction Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT).

Activity and
Working
Equipment
Amou
8-Hour Days or
# of Site
Workers
Equipment
Origin
Distance
from Origin
Round Trip
Distance
Number of Total VMT
Round Trips
nt
Total Round Trips
Days
Site Preparation
Excavators
2 15 Days
8 Average
-

33.9 2

67.8 Loaders
2 15 Days
Average
-

33.9 2

67.8 Rubber Tired
1 15 Days
Average
-

33.9 1

33.9 Dozers
Traffic Control
1 5 Days
Average
-

33.9 1

33.9 Traffic
Control and
Trucks
Hauling Trucks -
Demolition —
15 Days
Asphalt Concrete
N/A
32 Round Trips
Site 1

2.5 5
32 160
and Concrete
Recycling (Site 1)
Hauling Trucks -
Construction
N/A
10 Round Trips
Site 2

29.3 58.6
10 586
Debris (Site 2)
10 Already on
Excavators
2 20 Days
site
Clearing and
Dozers
2 20 Days
Average
-

33.9 2

67.8 Grubbing —
Loaders
2 20 Days
Already on
20 Days
site
Hauling Trucks -
Construction
N/A
20 Round Trips
Site 2

29.3 58.6
20 1172
Channel Grading
Scrapers
2 25 Days
12 Average
-

33.9 2

67.8 20

1. Proposed Project Description
Activity and
Working
Days
Equipment
Amou
nt
8-Hour Days or
Total Round Trips
# of Site
Workers
Equipment
Origin
Distance
from Origin
Round Trip
Distance
Number of
Round Trips
Total VMT
Excavators
3 25 Days
Already on
site
-
-
-
Dozers
2 25 Days
Already on
site
-
-
-
-
Grading
Channel
Backhoe
Loader/Loader
2 25 Days
Average
-

33.9 2

67.8 Slopes — 25
Days
Hauling Trucks -
Construction
N/A
10 Round Trips
Site 2

29.3 58.6
10 586
Stage I Construction
Pile Drilling Rigs
1 55 Days
16 Average
-

33.9 1

33.9 Cranes
2 55 Days
Average
-

33.9 2

67.8 Excavators
2 55 Days
Already on
site
-
-
-
-
Bridge
Construction
Loaders
2 55 Days
Already on
site
-
-
-
-
— Foundation
Ready Mix
— 55 Days
Concrete Trucks
N/A
120 Round Trips
Site 4

2.5 5
120
600
(Site 4)
Concrete/Slurry
Pump Truck
2 15 Days
Site 4

2.5 5
1 5
Generator Sets
1 55 Days
Average
-

33.9 1

33.9 Cranes
2 65 Days
16 Already on
site
-
-
-
-
Excavators
1 65 Days
Already on
site
-
-
-
Bridge
Construction
—
Substructure
— 65 Days
Loaders
1 65 Days
Already on
site
-
-
-
-
Ready Mix
Concrete Trucks
N/A
92 Round Trips
Site 4

2.5 5
92 460
Concrete Pump
Truck
1 10 Day s
Already on
site
-
-
-
-
21 1. Proposed Project Description
Activity and
Working
Days
Equipment
Amou
nt
8-Hour Days or
Total Round Trips
# of Site
Workers
Equipment
Origin
Distance
from Origin
Round Trip
Distance
Number of
Round Trips
Total VMT
Generator Sets
1 65 days
Already on
site
-
-
-
Cranes
1 80 Days
16 Already on
site
-
-
-
-
Ready Mix
Concrete Trucks
N/A
110 Round Trips
Site 4

2.5 5
110
550
Bridge
Concrete Pump
Truck
1 10 Day s
Already on
site
-
-
-
-
Construction
—
Superstructur
Bid Well
1 5 Days
Average
-

33.9 1

33.9 e — 80 Days
Generator Sets
2 80 Days
Already on
site
-
-
-
-
Forklifts
2 80 Days
Average
-

33.9 2

67.8 Scrapers
1 40 Days
12 Already on
site
-
-
-
-
Excavators
2 40 Days
Already on
site
-
-
-
Dozers
2 40 Days
Already on
site
-
-
-
-
Rollers
1 40 Days
Average
-

33.9 1

33.9 Grading/Emb
ankment
Backfill/Pave
Backhoe
Loader/Loader
2 40 Days
Average
-

33.9 2

67.8 Asphalt Paving
Machine
1 5 Days
Average
-

33.9 1

33.9 ment — 45
Days
Asphalt Paver
Finisher
1 5 Days
Average
-

33.9 1

33.9 Generator Sets
2 45 Days
Already on
site
-
-
-
-
Hauling Truck —
Borrow
N/A
64 Round Trips
Site 3

33.5 67
64 4288
(Site 3)
22 1. Proposed Project Description
Activity and
# of Site
Equipment
Distance
Round Trip
Number of
Total VMT
Working
Equipment
Amou
8-Hour Days or
Workers
Origin
from Origin
Distance
Round Trips
nt
Total Round Trips
Days
Hauling Truck —
Asphalt Concrete
N/A
52 Round Trips
Site 1

2.5 5
32 160
(Site 1)
Stage II Construction
Excavators
2 20 Days
10 Already on
-
-
-
-
site
Loaders
2 20 Days
Already on
-
-
-
-
Rubber Tired
1 20 Days
Average

33.9 1

33.9 Traffic
Dozers
Traffic Control
1 5 Days
Average
-

33.9 1

33.9 Control and
Demolition —
Trucks
Hauling Trucks -
20 Days
Asphalt Concrete
N/A
44 Round Trips
Site 1

2.5 5
44 220
and Concrete
Recycling (Site 1)
Hauling Trucks -
Construction
N/A
10 Round Trips
Site 2

29.3 58.6
10 586
Scrapers
1 45 Days
14 Already on
-
-
-
-
site
Excavators
2 45 Days
Already on
-
-
-
-
site
Already on
-
-
-
-
Grading/Emb
Dozers
2 45 Days
site
ankment
Already on
-
-
-
-
Backfill/Pave
Rollers
1 45 Days
Site
ment — 55
Backhoe
Already on
-
-
-
-
Days
y
Loader/Loader
2 45 Day s
Site
Asphalt Paving
1 10 Day s
Already on
-
-
-
-
Machine
Site
Asphalt Paver
Already on
-
-
-
-
Finisher
1 10 Day s
Site
23 1. Proposed Project Description
Activity and
# of Site
Equipment
Distance
Round Trip
Number of
Total VMT
Working
Equipment
Amou
8-Hour Days or
Workers
Origin
from Origin
Distance
Round Trips
nt
Total Round Trips
Days
Already on
-
-
-
-
Generator Sets
2 55 Days
site
Hauling Truck —
Borrow
N/A
96 Round Trips
Site 3

33.5 67
96 6432
(Site 3)
Hauling Truck —
Asphalt Concrete
N/A
48 Round Trips
Site 3

33.5 67
96 6432
(Site 1)
Source: STC Traffic, Inc. 2021
24 2. Regulatory Setting

2. Regulatory Setting
Many statutes, regulations, plans, and policies have been adopted at the federal, state, and local levels to address air quality issues related to transportation and other sources. The proposed project is subject to air quality regulations at each of these levels. This section introduces the pollutants governed by these regulations and describes the regulation and policies that are relevant to the proposed project.

2.1 Pollutant -Specific Overview
Air pollutants are governed by multiple federal and state standards to regulate and mitigate health impacts. At the federal level, there are six criteria pollutants for which National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) have been established: CO, Pb, NO2, 03, PM (PM2.s and PM1o), and S02. The U.S.

EPA has also identified nine priority mobile source air toxics: 1,3-butadiene, acetaldehyde, acrolein, benzene, diesel particulate matter (diesel PM), ethylbenzene, formaldehyde, naphthalene, and polycyclic organic matter
( https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/air quality/air toxics/policy and guidance/msat/). In California, sulfates, visibility reducing particles, hydrogen sulfide, and vinyl chloride are also regulated.

2.1.1 Criteria Pollutants
The CAA requires the U.S. EPA to set NAAQS for six criteria air contaminants: ozone, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, lead, and sulfur dioxide. It also permits states to adopt additional or more protective air quality standards if needed. California has set standards for certain pollutants. Table 8 documents the current air quality standards while Table 9 summarizes the sources and health effects of the six criteria pollutants and pollutants regulated in the state of California. 25 2. Regulatory Setting
Table 8. Table of State and Federal Ambient Air Quality Standards. Accessed February 1, 2021, www.arb.ca.gov/research/aags/aags2.pdf .

Ambient Air Quality Standards
Averaging
California Standards'
National Standards
Pollutant
Concentration 3
Method °
Primary'•$
Secondary a,r'
Method
Time
1 Hour

0.09 ppm (181) pglm3}
Ozone
Ultraviolet
Same as
Ultraviolet
(of
Photometry
Primary5tandsrd
Photarnetry
8 Hour
p.p7p porn (137 pgFm3}
p.p7p ppm (137 pgfm3}
Respirable
24 Hour
513 pgfm3
150 pglm3
Inertial Separation
Particulate
G ravimetdc or
Same as
andGravimetric
Annual
Beta Attenuation
Primary Standard
Analysis
Matter {PM70jg
Arithmetic Mean
2p pgfrn3
—
Fine
Same as
Particulate
24 Hour
—
—
35 pgma
PrimaryStanderd
Inertial Separation
Matter
Annual
3 Gravimetdcor
3 and Gravimetua
Analysis
B
{PM2.5}
Arithmetic Mean
12 pgfrn
Beta Attenuatim

12.n pgtm
15 pgfm-
1 Hour
20 ppm (23 mginn)
35 ppm (40 mgtm 3)
Carbon
Non13ispersive
Non -Dispersive
Monoxide
8 Hour

9.p ppm (1.0 mglm 1)
Infrared Photometry
9 ppm (1p mgtm3l
—
Infrared Photometry
(CCF)
(NDIR)
(NDIR)
S Hour
B ppm (i mghn3}
—
—
{Lake Tahoei
Nitrogen
1 Hour
[I a ppm (33g uglm3}
100 pph (188 palm)
Dioxide
Gas Phase
Gas Phase
Annual
3}
3 Seme as
io
Chemiluminescence
Chemiluminescence
{Nt72}
Arithmetic Mean
0-p3p ppm {57 pglm

0.p53 ppm (1pp pglm }
Primary Standard
1 Hour

0.25 ppm (655 pglm31
75 pph(1PC pgim)
—
Ukraviolet
❑ 5 ppm
Sulfur Dioxide
3 Hour
Utrraviolei
{9300 pglrn3 }
Flourescence;
(S0 11
Fluorescence
Speotrvphotometry
-0.14 ppm
7ll
24 Hour
3 0.04 ppm (1p5 pglm }
,'
—
(Paremsaniline
[for certain areas}
Method)
Annual

13.031) ppm
Arithmetic Mean
{for certain areas;'
3❑ Day Average

1.5 pgdm#
High Volume

1.5 pgrm3
Lead1213'
Calendar Quarter
—
Atomic Absorption
Sampler and Atomic
{for certain areas}
Same as
Absorption
Primary Stand erd
Rolling 3-Month
a
Average
—

0.95 pg+m
Visibility
Beta Attenuation and
Reducing
3 Hour
See footnote 14
Transmittance
No
Particles1d
through Filter Tape
National
Sulfates
24 Hour
25 pgfm3
ton Chromatography
H y d ro Q e Il
1 Hour

17.03 porn (42 pghn3j
Ultraviolet
Sulfide
Fluorescence
Standards
Vinyl
24 Hour
p-101 ppm (20 pghn)
Gas
Chloridel2
Chromatography
See footnotes on next page ...

For moreiuformatiaiplame raM a1RB-PIU at(916)322-2990 California Air Resources Board (5/4116) 26 2. Regulatory Setting

1. California standards for ozone, carbon monoxide (except 8-hour Lake Tahoe), sulfur dioxide (1 and 24 hour), nitrogen dioxide, and particulate matter (PM10, PN12.5r and visibilityreducing particles), are i-Jues that are not to be exceeded. All others are not to be. equaled or exceeded. California ambient air quality standards are listed in the Table of Standards in Section 70200 of Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations.

2. National standards (other than ozone, particulate matter, and those based on annual arithmetic mean) are not to be exceeded more than once a year- The ozone standard is attained when the fourth highest 8-hour concentration measured at each site in a year, averaged over three years, is equal to or less than the standard. For PM10, the 24 hour standard is attained when the expected number of dm-s per calendar year with a 24-hour average concentration ab(n-e 150 4Wm3 is equal to or less than one. For PM2.5, the 24 hour standard is attained when 99 percent ofthe daily concentrations, averaged over three years_ are equal to or less than the standard. Contact the U.S.

EPA for further clarification and current national policies-

3. Concentration expressed fast in units in which it was promulgated. Equivalent units given in parentheses are based upon a reference temperature of 25°C and a reference pressure of 760 torr. Most measurements of air qualih- are to be corrected to a reference temperature of 25'C and a reference pressure of 760 torr; ppm in this table refers to ppm by volume, or micromnoles of pollutant per mole of gas-

4. Any equivalent measurement method which can be. shone to the satisfaction of the '1RE to give equivalent results at or near the level of the air qualil- standard may be used.

5. National Primary Standards: The levels of air qualih- necessan-, with an adequate margin of safety to protect the public health.

6. National Secondan- Standards: The levels of air quality necessary to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects of a pollutant.

7. Reference method as described by the U.S. EPA- An "equivalent method" of measurement may be used but must have a "consistent relationship to the reference method" and must be approved by the U.S. EPA.

8. On October 1, 2015, the national 8-hour ozone primary and secondary standards were lowered fiom 0.075 to 0.070 ppm.

9. On December 14, 2012, the notional annual PM2.5 priman- standard vas lowwed from 15 p ; to 12-0 p&r n3- The existing national 24- hour PM2-5 standards (primary and secondary) ;sere retained at 35 ug!m', as was the annual secondary standard of 15 µgbn3. The existing 24-hour Phd 10 standards (primary and secondary) of 150 ugim3 also were retained. The farm of the annual primary and secondary standards is the annual mean, ati�eraged over 3 ,-ears.

10. To attain the 1-hour national standard, the 3-rear arnerage of the annual 98th percentile of the 1-hour daily maximum concentrations at each site must not exceed 100 ppb. Now that the national 1-hour standard is in units of parts per billion (ppb). California standards are in units ofparts per million (ppm)- To direcdy compare the national 1-hour standard to the California standards the units can be converted from ppb to ppm- In this case, the notional standard of 100 ppb is identical to 0.100 ppm- On June 2, 2010, a new 1-hour SO, standard ivas established and the existing 24-1your and annual primar4 standards ivere revoked- To attain the 1-hour national standard the 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of the 1-hour daily maximum ooneantration at each site must not exceed 75 ppb. The 1971 SO; national standards (24-hour and annual) remain in effect until one vear after an area is designated for the 2010 standard, except that in areas designated nonattainment for the 1971 standards, the 1971 standards, remain in effect until implementation plans to attain or maintain the 2010 standards are approved.

Nate that the 1-hour national standard is in units of parts per billion (ppb). California standards are in units ofparts per million (ppm). To directly compare the 1-hour national standard to the California standard the units can be concerted to ppm- In this case, the national standard of 75 ppb is identical to 0.075 ppm.

12. The ARB has identified lead and vinyl chloride as toxic air contaminants' With no threshold level of exposure for adverse health effects determined. These actions allow- for the implementation of contra] measures at levels below- the ambient concentrations specified for these pollutants.

13. The national standard for lead was revised on October 15, 2008 to a rolling 3-month average. The 1919 lead standard (1-5 pgim3 as a quarterh- average) remains in effect until one vear after an area is designated for the 2009 standard, except that in areas designated nonattainment for the 1979 standard, the 1978 standard remains in effect until implementation plans to attain or maintain the 2009 standard are approved-

14. In 1989, the &RR concerted both the general statewide 10-mile visibilih- standard and the Lake Tahoe 30-mile visibility standard to instrumental equivalents, nduch are "extinction of 023 per kilometer" and "extinction of 0.07 per lilometer" for the statewide and Lake Tahoe Air Basin standards, iespectiveh-.

For more informatka please call U3410 at (916) 322-2990 California Air Resources Board (514/16) 27 2. Regulatory Setting
Table 9. State and Federal Criteria Air Pollutant Effects and Sources.

Pollutant
Principal Health and Atmospheric Effects
Typical Sources
Ozone (03)
High concentrations irritate lungs. Long-term
Low -altitude ozone is almost entirely formed from
exposure may cause lung tissue damage and cancer.
reactive organic gases/volatile organic compounds
Long-term exposure damages plant materials and
(ROG or VOC) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) in the
reduces crop productivity. Precursor organic
presence of sunlight and heat. Common precursor
compounds include many known toxic air
emitters include motor vehicles and other internal
contaminants. Biogenic VOC may also contribute.
combustion engines, solvent evaporation, boilers,
furnaces, and industrial processes.

Respirable
Irritates eyes and respiratory tract. Decreases lung
Dust- and fume -producing industrial and agricultural
Particulate
capacity. Associated with increased cancer and
operations; combustion smoke & vehicle exhaust;
Matter (PM,o)
mortality. Contributes to haze and reduced visibility.
atmospheric chemical reactions; construction and
Includes some toxic air contaminants. Many toxic and
other dust -producing activities; unpaved road dust and other aerosol and solid compounds are part of PM,o.
re -entrained paved road dust; natural sources.

Fine
Increases respiratory disease, lung damage, cancer,
Combustion including motor vehicles, other mobile
Particulate
and premature death. Reduces visibility and
sources, and industrial activities; residential and
Matter (PM2.5)
produces surface soiling. Most diesel exhaust
agricultural burning; also formed through atmospheric
particulate matter— a toxic air contaminant — is in the chemical and photochemical reactions involving other
PM25 size range. Many toxic and other aerosol and
pollutants including NOx, sulfur oxides (SOx),
solid compounds are part of PM2.5.
ammonia, and ROG.

Carbon
CO interferes with the transfer of oxygen to the
Combustion sources, especially gasoline -powered
Monoxide
blood and deprives sensitive tissues of oxygen. CO
engines and motor vehicles. CO is the traditional
(CO)
also is a minor precursor for photochemical ozone.
signature pollutant for on -road mobile sources at the
Colorless, odorless.
local and neighborhood scale.

Nitrogen
Irritating to eyes and respiratory tract. Colors
Motor vehicles and other mobile or portable engines,
Dioxide (NO2)
atmosphere reddish -brown. Contributes to acid rain
especially diesel; refineries; industrial operations.
& nitrate contamination of stormwater. Part of the
"NOx" group of ozone precursors.

Sulfur Dioxide
Irritates respiratory tract; injures lung tissue. Can
Fuel combustion (especially coal and high -sulfur oil), (S02)
yellow plant leaves. Destructive to marble, iron, steel. chemical plants, sulfur recovery plants, metal
Contributes to acid rain. Limits visibility.
processing; some natural sources like active volcanoes.

Limited contribution possible from heavy-duty diesel
vehicles if ultra -low sulfur fuel not used.

Lead (Pb)
Disturbs gastrointestinal system. Causes anemia,
Lead -based industrial processes like battery production kidney disease, and neuromuscular and neurological
and smelters. Lead paint, leaded gasoline. Aerially
dysfunction. Also a toxic air contaminant and water
deposited lead from older gasoline use may exist in
pollutant.
soils along major roads.

Visibility-
Reduces visibility. Produces haze.

See particulate matter above.

Reducing
NOTE: not directly related to the Regional Haze
May be related more to aerosols than to solid particles.

Particles (VRP)
program under the Federal CAA, which is oriented
primarily toward visibility issues in National Parks and other "Class I" areas. However, some issues and
measurement methods are similar.

Sulfate
Premature mortality and respiratory effects.

Industrial processes, refineries and oil fields, mines, Contributes to acid rain. Some toxic air contaminants
natural sources like volcanic areas, salt -covered dry
attach to sulfate aerosol particles.
lakes, and large sulfide rock areas.

Hydrogen
Colorless, flammable, poisonous. Respiratory irritant.

Industrial processes such as: refineries and oil fields, Sulfide (HZS)
Neurological damage and premature death.
asphalt plants, livestock operations, sewage treatment
Headache, nausea. Strong odor.
plants, and mines. Some natural sources like volcanic
areas and hot springs.

Vinyl Chloride
Neurological effects, liver damage, cancer.

Industrial processes.

Also considered a toxic air contaminant.
28 2. Regulatory Setting

2.1.2 Mobile Source Air Toxics
Controlling air toxic emissions became a national priority with the passage of the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990, whereby Congress mandated that the U.S. EPA regulate 188 air toxics, also known as hazardous air pollutants. The U.S. EPA has assessed this expansive list in its rule on the Control of Hazardous Air Pollutants from Mobile Sources (Federal Register, Vol. 72, No. 37, page 8430, February 26, 2007), and identified a group of 93 compounds emitted from mobile sources that are part of U.S. EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) ( https://www.epa.gov/iris) . In addition, the U.S. EPA identified nine compounds with significant contributions from mobile sources that are among the national and regional -scale cancer risk drivers or contributors and non -hazard contributors from the 2011 National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA) ( https://www.epa.ciov/national- air-toxics-assessment). These are 1,3-butadiene, acetaldehyde, acrolein, benzene, diesel particulate matter (diesel PM), ethylbenzene, formaldehyde, naphthalene, and polycyclic organic matter. While the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) considers these the priority mobile source air toxics, the list is subject to change and may be adjusted in consideration of future U.S. EPA rules.

The 2007 U.S. EPA rule mentioned above requires controls that will dramatically decrease Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSAT) emissions through cleaner fuels and cleaner engines. According to an FHWA analysis using U.S. EPA's MOVES2014a model, even if vehicle activity (vehicle -miles traveled, VMT) increases by 45 percent from 2010 to 2050 as forecast, a combined reduction of 91 percent in the total annual emission rate for the priority MSATs is projected for the same time period, as shown in Figure 3.
29 2. Regulatory Setting
0 E
LU
.y
— — — V IVIT
G 6 40 Diesel PM Butadiene Acetaidehyde
Benzene GEms- �N,phthalene — Ethylbenzene
a Fauna Idchyde D--9—ElAcrolein Polycytlics
0,16

0.15 0.14
0,13
0112

0.11 0a 10

0.09 0.08

0.07 0.06

0.05 0.04

0.03 0.02

0.01 0,00

0.0035

0.003
0,002

0.00 0.001
0,0010

0.000
0,0000
7 6
s
4 0
2 �
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Year
o
Figure 3. Projected National MSAT Trends, 2010-2050 (Source:
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/air quality/air toxics/policy and guidance/msat/). 30 2. Regulatory Setting

2.1.3 Greenhouse Gases
The term greenhouse gas (GHG) is used to describe atmospheric gases that absorb solar radiation and subsequently emit radiation in the thermal infrared region of the energy spectrum, trapping heat in the Earth's atmosphere. These gases include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and water vapor, among others. A growing body of research attributes long-term changes in temperature, precipitation, and other elements of Earth's climate to large increases in GHG emissions since the mid -nineteenth century, particularly from human activity related to fossil fuel combustion.

Anthropogenic GHG emissions of particular interest include CO2, CH4, N2O, and fluorinated gases.

GHGs differ in how much heat each traps in the atmosphere (global warming potential, or GWP). CO2 is the most important GHG, so amounts of other gases are expressed relative to CO2, using a metric called "carbon dioxide equivalent" (CO2e). The global warming potential of CO2 is assigned a value of 1, and the warming potential of other gases is assessed as multiples of CO2. For example, the 2007 International Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment Report calculates the GWP of CH4 as 25 and the GWP of N2O as 298, over a 100-year time horizon.' Generally, estimates of all GHGs are summed to obtain total emissions for a project or given time period, usually expressed in metric tons (MTCO2e), or million metric tons (MMTCO2e).2
As evidence has mounted for the relationship of climate changes to rising GHGs, federal and state governments have established numerous policies and goals targeted to improving energy efficiency and fuel economy, and reducing GHG emissions. Nationally, electricity generation is the largest source of GHG emissions, followed by transportation. In California, however, transportation is the largest contributor to GHGs.

At the federal level, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 United States Code [USC] Part 4332) requires federal agencies to assess the environmental effects of their proposed actions prior to making a decision on the action or project.

To date, no national standards have been established for nationwide mobile -source GHG reduction targets, nor have any regulations or legislation been enacted specifically to address climate change and GHG emissions reduction at the project level. However, the U.S. EPA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issued the first corporate fuel economy (CAFE) standards in 2010, requiring cars and light -duty vehicles to achieve certain fuel economy targets by 2016, with the intention of gradually increasing the targets and the range of vehicles to which they would apply.

California has enacted aggressive GHG reduction targets, starting with Assembly Bill (AB) 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 is California's signature climate change legislation. It set the goal of reducing statewide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, and required the California Air Resources Board (ARB) to develop a Scoping Plan that describes the approach See Table 2.14 in IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007 (AR4): The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z.

Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, and New York, NY, USA. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-chapter2.pdf . z See http://www.airguaIity.orci/Businesses/CEQA-Land-Use-Planning/CEQA-Guidance-Tools . 31 2. Regulatory Setting
California will take to achieve that goal and to update it every 5 years. In 2015, Governor Jerry Brown enhanced the overall adaptation planning effort with Executive Order (EO) B-30-15, establishing an interim GHG reduction goal of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, and requiring state agencies to factor climate change into all planning and investment decisions.

Senate Bill (SB) 375, the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008, furthered state climate action goals by mandating coordinated transportation and land use planning through preparation of SCS. The ARB sets GHG emissions reduction targets for passenger vehicles for each region. Each regional MPO must include in its regional transportation plan an SCS proposing actions toward achieving the regional emissions reduction targets.' With these and other State Senate and Assembly bills and executive orders, California advances an innovative and proactive approach to dealing with GHG emissions and climate change.

2.1.4 Asbestos
Asbestos is a term used for several types of naturally occurring fibrous minerals that are a human health hazard when airborne. The most common type of asbestos is chrysotile, but other types such as tremolite and actinolite are also found in California. Asbestos is classified as a known human carcinogen by state, federal, and international agencies and was identified as a toxic air contaminant by the ARB in 1986. All types of asbestos are hazardous and may cause lung disease and cancer.

Asbestos can be released from serpentine and ultramafic rocks when the rock is broken or crushed.

At the point of release, the asbestos fibers may become airborne, causing air quality and human health hazards. These rocks have been commonly used for unpaved gravel roads, landscaping, fill projects, and other improvement projects in some localities. Asbestos may be released to the atmosphere due to vehicular traffic on unpaved roads, during grading for development projects, and at quarry operations. All of these activities may have the effect of releasing potentially harmful asbestos into the air. Natural weathering and erosion processes can act on asbestos -bearing rock and make it easier for asbestos fibers to become airborne if such rock is disturbed.

Serpentine may contain chrysotile asbestos, especially near fault zones. Ultramafic rock, a rock closely related to serpentinite, may also contain asbestos minerals. Asbestos can also be associated with other rock types in California, though much less frequently than serpentinite and/or ultramafic rock. Serpentinite and/or ultramafic rock are known to be present in 44 of California's 58 counties.

These rocks are particularly abundant in counties of the Sierra Nevada foothills, the Klamath Mountains, and Coast Ranges. The California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology has developed a map showing the general location of ultramafic rock in the state ( www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/minerals/hazardous minerals/asbestos/Pages/index.aspx). 3 https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/sb375.htm
32 2. Regulatory Setting

2.2 Regulations

2.2.1 Federal and California Clean Air Act
The Federal CAA, as amended, is the primary federal law that governs air quality while the CCAA is its companion state law. These laws and related regulations by the U.S. EPA and the ARB set standards for the concentration of pollutants in the air. At the federal level, these standards are called NAAQS.

NAAQS and state ambient air quality standards have been established for six transportation -related criteria pollutants that have been linked to potential health concerns: carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), ozone (03), particulate matter (PM), which is broken down for regulatory purposes into particles of 10 micrometers or smaller (PM1o) and particles of 2.5 micrometers and smaller (PM2.5), and sulfur dioxide (SO2). In addition, national and state standards exist for lead (Pb), and state standards exist for visibility reducing particles, sulfates, hydrogen sulfide (H2S), and vinyl chloride. The NAAQS and state standards are set at levels that protect public health with a margin of safety, and are subject to periodic review and revision. Both state and federal regulatory schemes also cover toxic air contaminants (air toxics); some criteria pollutants are also air toxics or may include certain air toxics in their general definition.

2.2.2 Transportation Conformity
The conformity requirement is based on Federal CAA Section 176(c), which prohibits the U.S.

Department of Transportation (USDOT) and other federal agencies from funding, authorizing, or approving plans, programs, or projects that do not conform to State Implementation Plan (SIP) for attaining the NAAQS. "Transportation Conformity" applies to highway and transit projects and takes place on two levels: the regional —or, planning and programming level —and the project level. The proposed project must conform at both levels to be approved.

Conformity requirements apply only in nonattainment and "maintenance" (former nonattainment) areas for the NAAQS, and only for the specific NAAQS that are or were violated. The U.S. EPA regulations at 40 CFR 93 govern the conformity process. Conformity requirements do not apply in unclassifiable/attainment areas for NAAQS and do not apply at all for state standards regardless of the status of the area.

Regional conformity is concerned with how well the regional transportation system supports plans for attaining the NAAQS for carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), ozone (03), particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), and in some areas (although not in California), sulfur dioxide (SO2).

California has attainment or maintenance areas for all of these transportation -related "criteria pollutants" except S02, and also has a nonattainment area for lead (Pb); however, lead is not currently required by the FCAA to be covered in transportation conformity analysis. Regional conformity is based on emission analysis of RTPs and FTIPs that include all transportation projects planned for a region over a period of at least 20 years (for the RTP), and 4 years (for the FTIP). RTP and FTIP conformity uses travel demand and emission models to determine whether or not the implementation of those projects would conform to emission budgets or other tests at various 33 2. Regulatory Setting
analysis years showing that requirements of the CAA and the SIP are met. If the conformity analysis is successful, the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), FHWA, and Federal Transit Administration (FTA), make the determinations that the RTP and FTIP are in conformity with the SIP for achieving the goals of the CAA. Otherwise, the projects in the RTP and/or FTIP must be modified until conformity is attained. If the design concept, scope, and "open -to -traffic" schedule of a proposed transportation project are the same as described in the RTP and the TIP, then the proposed project meets regional conformity requirements for purposes of project -level analysis.

Project -level conformity is achieved by demonstrating that the project comes from a conforming RTP and TIP and the project has a design concept and scope' that has not changed significantly from those in the RTP and TIP. If the design concept and scope have changed substantially from that used in the RTP Conformity analysis, RTP and TIP amendments may be needed. Project -level conformity also needs to demonstrate that project analyses have used the latest planning assumptions and U.S.

EPA -approved emissions models; the project complies with any control measures in the SIP in PM areas. Furthermore, additional analyses (known as hot -spot analyses) may be required for projects located in CO and PM nonattainment or maintenance areas to examine localized air quality impacts.

2.2.3 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
NEPA requires that policies and regulations administered by the federal government are consistent with its environmental protection goals. NEPA also requires that federal agencies use an interdisciplinary approach to planning and decision -making for any actions that could impact the environment. It requires environmental review of federal actions including the creation of Environmental Documents (EDs) that describe the environmental effects of a proposed project and its alternatives (including a section on air quality impacts).

2.2.4 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
CEQAS is a statute that requires state and local agencies to identify the significant environmental impacts of their actions and to avoid or mitigate those impacts, if feasible. CEQA documents address CCAA requirements for transportation projects. While state standards are often more strict than federal standards, the state has no conformity process.

2.2.5 Local
The U.S. EPA has delegated responsibility to air districts to establish local rules to protect air quality.

Caltrans' Standard Specification 14-9.02 (Caltrans, 2015) requires compliance with all applicable air quality laws and regulations including local and air district ordinances and rules. ' "Design concept' means the type of facility that is proposed, such as a freeway or arterial highway. "Design scope" refers to those aspects of the project that would clearly affect capacity and thus any regional emissions analysis, such as the number of lanes and the length of the project.
s For general information about CEQA, see: http://resources.ca.gov/cega/more/fag.html . 34 2. Regulatory Setting
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) rules and regulations are extensive and most do not apply to the project. The rule most applicable to the proposed project is Rule 403, Fugitive Dust, which the project is required to comply with, and conformance will be incorporated into project specifications and procedures. Contractor compliance with Rule 403 requirements will be mandated in the contractor's specifications and shall include the measures listed below. ■ Land disturbance shall be minimized to the extent feasible. Grading activities shall be limited to the disturbance of no more than five acres in the course of one day. ■ Haul trucks shall be covered when loaded with fill.
■ Paved streets shall be swept at least once per day where there is evidence of dirt that has been carried onto the roadway.
■ Watering trucks shall be used to minimize dust. Watering should be sufficient to confine dust plumes to the project work areas. Active, disturbed areas shall have water applied to them three times daily.
■ For disturbed surfaces that will not be revegetated and that will be left inactive for four or more days, a chemical stabilizer shall be applied pursuant to the manufacturer's instruction. ■ For unpaved roads, chemical stabilizers shall be applied or the roads shall be watered once per hour during active operation.
■ Vehicle speed on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour. ■ For open storage piles that will remain on site for two or more days, water shall be applied once per hour, or coverings shall be installed.
■ For paved road trackout, all haul vehicles shall be covered or shall comply with the vehicle freeboard requirements of Section 23114 of the California Vehicle Code for both public and private roads. During high wind conditions (i.e., wind speeds in excess of 25 miles per hour), all earth -moving activities shall cease or water shall
35 3. Affected Environment

3. Affected Environment
The topography of a region can substantially impact air flow and resulting pollutant concentrations.

California is divided into 15 air basins with similar topography and meteorology to better manage air quality throughout the state. Each air basin has a local air district that is responsible for identifying and implementing air quality strategies to comply with ambient air quality standards.

The project is located in the city of Temecula, within Riverside County. The SCAQMD is the local air district responsible for the administration of federal and state air quality laws, regulations, and policies. Included in the SCAQMD's tasks are monitoring of air pollution, preparation of the SIP for all of Orange County; and the non -desert of Los Angeles County, San Bernardino County, and Riverside County including the Coachella Valley and promulgation of Rules and Regulations. The population in the city of Temecula was 110,300 in 2016, and forecasted to be 138,400 in 2045 (SCAG 2020).

3.1 Climate, Meteorology, and Topography
Meteorology (weather) and terrain can influence air quality. Certain weather parameters are highly correlated to air quality, including temperature, the amount of sunlight, and the type of winds at the surface and above the surface. Winds can transport ozone and ozone precursors from one region to another, contributing to air quality problems downwind of source regions. Furthermore, mountains can act as a barrier that prevents ozone from dispersing.

The Temecula and Lake Elsinore air quality and climatological monitoring stations, maintained by the SCAQMD, are located near the project area and is representative of meteorological conditions near the project. Figure 4 shows a wind rose illustrating the predominant wind patterns near the project.

The climate of the project area is generally Mediterranean in character, with cool winters (averaging a high of 65.4 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) and an average low of 36.4 °F in January) and warm, dry summers (averaging a high 98.1°F and an average low of 59.4 °F in July) (Western Region Climatic Center [WRCC] 2020). Temperature inversions are common, affecting localized pollutant concentrations in the winter and enhancing ozone formation in the summer. Mountains ranging from 2,500 to 3,000 feet in altitude tend to trap pollutants in the region by limiting air flow. Annual average rainfall is 12 inches (at the Lake Elsinore climate monitoring station COOP Id), mainly falling during the winter months.
36 3. Affected Environment

WIND SPEED
(Knats)
a=21.58
- 17.11-21.5a
. 11.08- 17.11
- 7.00 - 11.08
FI 4.08 . 7.M

0.97 - 4.08
Calms: 21.15%
Figure 4. Predominant Wind Patterns Near the Project.

3.2 Existing Air Quality
This section summarizes existing air quality conditions near the proposed project area. It includes attainment statuses for criteria pollutants, describes local ambient concentrations of criteria pollutants for the three years, and discusses MSAT and GHG emissions. Figure 5 contains a map showing the locations of air monitoring sites relative to the proposed project site. 37 3. Affected Environment
G Ifb /A r ... .

G33
Project Location -
Air Quality Monitoring -+ i
- Station Locations
0 1.25 2.5 N
�, AMiles
Imagery provided by ESM, Microsoft Bing and its licensors 0 2021.

Figure 5. Map of Air Quality Monitoring Stations Located Near the Project. 38 3. Affected Environment

3.2.1 Criteria Pollutants and Attainment Status
Riverside County currently meets the federal standards for all criteria pollutants except 03 and PMz.s.

Riverside County was designated as an extreme non -attainment area for the 2015 8-hour 03 standard and serious nonattainment area for PM2.5. Riverside County is also a maintenance area for CO and PM1o.

Riverside County meets the California standards for all criteria pollutants, except ozone, PM1o, and PMz.s. Therefore, Riverside County has been designated as a state non -attainment area for ozone and PM1o. The state has not yet issued a formal status for PMz.s. Table 10 lists the state and federal attainment status for all regulated pollutants. Ambient air pollutant concentrations in Riverside County are measured at eleven air quality monitoring stations operated by the SCAQMD. The SCAQMD air quality monitoring stations that represents the project area, climate, and topography in the Basin are the Temecula and Lake Elsinore monitoring stations. The Temecula monitoring station is located at 33700 Borel Road, in Winchester, approximately 6.5 miles northeast of the project area. The station monitors 03 and PMz.s. Because this monitoring station is new and does not monitor PM1o, data was supplemented from the Lake Elsinore Station, located on West Flint Street; this station is located approximately 14.5 miles northwest of the project area. Table 11 provides a summary of measurements collected at these monitoring stations for the years 2019 through 2021.

Table 10. State and Federal Attainment Status.

Pollutant
State Attainment Status
Federal Attainment Status
Ozone (03)
Nonattainment
Nonattainment (Extreme).

Respirable
Particulate
Nonattainment
Attainment (Maintenance Area)
Matter (PM1o)
Fine Particulate
Nonattainment
Nonattainment (Serious)
Matter (PM2.5)
Carbon
Attainment
Attainment (Maintenance Area)
Monoxide (CO)
Nitrogen Dioxide
Attainment
Unclassified
(NO2)
Sulfur Dioxide
Attainment
Attainment/Unclassifiable
(SOZ)
Lead (Pb)
Attainment
Unclassifiable/Attainment
Visibility -
Reducing
Attainment
N/A
Particles
Sulfates
Attainment
N/A
Hydrogen Sulfide
Attainment
N/A
Vinyl Chloride
Attainment
N/A
39 3. Affected Environment
Table 11. Air Quality Concentrations for the Past Three Years Pollutant
Standard
2019
2020
2021
Ozone (33700 Borel Road Station in Temecula)
Max 1-hr concentration

0.091

0.108

0.095
No. days exceeded:

0.09 ppm
0 5
1 State
Max 8-hr concentration

0.079

0.091

0.083
No. days exceeded:

State

0.070 ppm
6 37
10 0.070 ppm
Federal
Carbon Monoxide (33700 Borel Road Station in Temecula)
Max 1-hr concentration
No. days exceeded:

State
20 ppm
*
*
*
35 ppm
Federal
Max 8-hr concentration
No. days exceeded:

State

9.0 ppm
*
*
*
9 ppm
Federal
PMIO (West Flint Street Station in Lake Elsinore)
Max 24-hr concentration
193.8
1092.4

90.0 No. days exceeded:
50 µg/m3
State
Federal
150 µg/m3
0 1
0 Max annual concentration

19.7 23.7

22.4 No. days exceeded:
3 20 µg/m
State
PMZ.S (West Flint Street Station in Lake Elsinore)
Max 24-hr concentration

17.6 41.6

28.8 No. days exceeded:
3 35 µg/m
Federal
Max annual concentration

7.2 6.9
No. days exceeded:

State
12 µg/m3

12.0 µg/m3
Federal
40 3. Affected Environment
Pollutant
Standard
2019
2020
2021
Nitrogen Dioxide (West Flint Street Station in Lake Elsinore) Max 1-hr concentration

38.0 43.6

43.7 No. days exceeded:

0.18 ppm
0 0
0 State
Federal
100 ppb
0 0
0 Max annual concentration
6 7
7 No. days exceeded:

0.030 ppm
State
0 0
0 Federal
53 ppb
Notes: * = No Data Available
Source: ARB 2023

3.2.2 Mobile Source Air Toxics
In addition to the criteria air pollutants for which there are NAAQS, the EPA also regulates air toxics.

Most air toxics originate from human -made sources, including on -road mobile sources, non -road mobile sources (e.g., airplanes), area sources (e.g., dry cleaners), and stationary sources (e.g., factories and refineries).

Controlling air toxic emissions became a national priority with the passage of the CAA Amendments of 1990, whereby Congress mandated the EPA regulate 188 air toxics, also known as hazardous air pollutants. The EPA has assessed this expansive list in its latest rule on the Control of Hazardous Air Pollutants from Mobile Sources (Federal Register, Volume 73, No. 201, page 61,358; October 16, 2008) and identified a group of 93 compounds emitted from mobile sources that are listed in its Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). In addition, the EPA identified nine compounds with significant contributions from mobile sources that are among the national and regional -scale cancer risk drivers from its 2011 National Air Toxics Assessment. These are acrolein, benzene, 1,3-butadiene, acetaldehyde, diesel PM, ethylbenzene, formaldehyde, naphthalene, and polycyclic organic matter.

While the FHWA considers these the priority MSAT, the list is subject to change and may be adjusted in consideration of future EPA rules. Table 12 lists the ambient concentrations of the MSATs at the nearest station that monitors MSATs to the project site, the Riverside-Rubidoux station located at 5888 Mission Boulevard in Riverside, approximately 37 miles to the north. 41 3. Affected Environment
Table 12. Mobile Source Air Toxic Measured Concentrations in the Project Vicinity.

MSAT
Unit
2016
2017
2018
Acrolein
ppb

1.3 0.6

2.1 Benzene
ppb

0.82 1.1

1.2 1,3-Butadiene
ppb

0.17 0.17

0.16 Acetaldehyde
ppb

2.7 2.8
Ethylbenzene
ppb

0.9 0.5

0.5 Formaldehyde
ppb

7.7 7.4
Source: ARB 2021
MSAT = Mobile Source Air Toxic
ppb = parts per billion
* = No measurements available

3.2.3 Greenhouse Gas and Climate Change
CO2, as part of the carbon cycle, is an important compound for plant and animal life, but also accounted for 84% of California's total GHG emissions in 2015. Transportation, primarily on -road travel, is the single largest source of CO2 emissions in the state.

The proposed project is located in Temecula, Riverside County, and is included in SCAG's 2020-2045 RTP/SCS (Amendment #3, approved June 9, 2023). The Western Riverside Council of Governments' (WRCOG) Subregional Climate Action Plan includes Temecula as a participating city and provides GHG emission inventories for the region and City (WRCOG 2014). Total emissions in 2010 for the WRCOG subregion were 5,834,400 MT CO2e. Emissions for Temecula in 2010 were approximately 600,000 MT CO2e, which was the second largest for participating cities behind Riverside. Emissions for the WRCOG subregion were estimated to be 9,113,087 MT CO2e in 2035; emissions for Temecula were estimated to be approximately 1,000,000 MT CO2e in 2035. The majority of emissions under the baseline and future scenarios are from the transportation sector.

3.3 Sensitive Receptors
Sensitive populations are more susceptible to the effects of air pollution than the general population.

Sensitive populations (sensitive receptors) that are in proximity to localized sources of toxics and CO are of particular concern. Land uses considered to be sensitive receptors include residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, athletic facilities, long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, and retirement homes. On the basis of research showing that the zone of greatest concern near roadways is within 500 feet (or 150 meters), sensitive receptors within 500 feet (or 150 meters) have been identified and are documented in Table 13. Only the Calvary Chapel of Temecula Valley, located to the north of the project alignment, is within 500 feet; the Virgin Mary Arabic Church is located slightly outside of 500 feet, at 525 feet, to the south of the project alignment.
42 3. Affected Environment
Table 13. Sensitive Receptors Located Within 500 feet of the Project Site.

Receptor
Description
Distance Between
Receptor and Project (ft)
Place of Worship
Calvary Chapel of Temecula Valley
350

3.4 Conformity Status
The Transportation Conformity Rule is based on CAA Section 176(c), which prohibits the U.S.

Department of Transportation (USDOT) and other federal agencies from funding, authorizing, or approving plans, programs, or projects that do not conform to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for attaining the NAAQS. Conformity applies to highway and transit projects and takes place on two levels: the regional (or planning and programming) level and the project level. The proposed project must conform at both levels to be approved.

Conformity requirements apply only in nonattainment and maintenance (former nonattainment) areas for the NAAQS, and only for the specific NAAQS that are or were violated. EPA regulations at 40 CFR 93 govern the conformity process. Conformity requirements do not apply in unclassifiable/attainment areas for the NAAQS and do not apply at all for State standards regardless of the status of the area.

3.4.1 Regional Conformity
Section 176(c) of the federal CAA requires the following:

No department, agency, or instrumentality of the Federal Government shall engage in, support in any way or provide financial assistance for, license or permit, or approve, any activity which does not conform to an implementation plan after it has been approved ...

Conformity to an implementation plan means:
(A) conformity to an implementation plan's purpose of eliminating or reducing the severity and number of violations of the NAAQS and achieving expeditious attainment of such standards; and
(B) that such activities will not
(i) cause or contribute to any new violation of any standard in any area; (ii) increase the frequency or severity of any existing violation of any standard in any area; or (iii) delay timely attainment of any standard or any required interim emission reductions or other milestones in any area.

The determination of conformity shall be based on the most recent estimates of emissions, and such estimates shall be determined from the most recent population, employment, travel and congestion estimates as determined by the MPO or other agency authorized to make such estimates. 43 3. Affected Environment
In November 1993, the FHWA and U.S. EPA developed guidance for determining conformity of transportation plans, programs, and projects. This guidance is denoted as the Transportation Conformity Rule (40 CFR Section 51.390 and 40 CFR Sections 93.100-129).

The CAA requires a demonstration that federal actions conform to the SIP and similar approved plans in areas that are designated as non -attainment or have maintenance plans for criteria pollutants. Transportation measures, such as the project, are analyzed for conformity with the SIP as part of the RTP and RTIP. If the design concept and scope of a proposed transportation project are consistent with the project description in the applicable RTP and RTIP, and the assumptions in the regional emissions analysis for the RTP and RTIP, then the project would conform to the SIP, and no adverse regional air quality impact would occur as a result of the project.

As discussed, the project is included in the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS (Amendment #3, approved June 9, 2023; RTP ID 991203) and the conforming 2023 FTIP (Amendment 23-03, approved June 9, 2023; FTIP ID 991203A). The project is described in the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS (Amendment #3, approved June 9, 2023) as "in western Riv Co in the City of Temecula: phase 1: extend overland drive (4 lanes) from commerce center drive to Avenida Alvarado/Diaz Rd intersection. See 991203a for phase 2 bridge project." The project is described in the 2023 FTIP (Amendment 23-03, approved June 9, 2023) as "in western Riv Co in the City of Temecula: Phase 2: replace 2-lane low water crossing with 4-lane bridge (BR#OOL0087) over Murrieta Creek at Avenida Alvarado. See 991203 for Phase 1." The project was discussed among stakeholders at a Transportation Conformity Working Group (TCWG) meeting on July 28, 2020, pursuant to the interagency consultation requirement of 40 CFR

93.105(c)(1)(i). The members of the TCWG confirmed that the project, RTP Project ID 991203, would not be considered a project of air quality concern. The TCWG determination is included as Appendix D. A follow-up letter from SCAG on September 26, 2022 confirmed to the City of Temecula that this July 28, 2020 TCWG finding also applied to FTIP Project ID 991203A (included in Appendix D). SCAG cannot pass regional conformity using EMFAC2017. SCAG's 2020-2045 RTP/SCS (and Amendment #3, approved June 9, 2023) used EMFAC2014 for their regional conformity analysis. EMFAC2017 was not used.

While the project has not been part of any amendments, the FHWA made a finding of conformity on the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS through Amendment #3 on June 9, 2023, included as Appendix B. In addition, the FHWA approved the 2023 FTIP Consistency Amendment #23-03 and concurred that the associated conformity determination conformed to the applicable SIP in accordance with the provisions of 40 CFR Parts 51 and 93 on June 9, 2023, also included as Appendix B. Therefore, the project is assumed to conform to the SIP and no adverse regional or local air quality impact would occur as a result of the project. Furthermore, implementation of the project would ensure that the City would be consistent with the 2020 SCAG RTP/SCS (Amendment #3, approved June 9, 2023) and 2023 FTIP (Amendment 23-03, approved June 9, 2023). Conformity status information is summarized in Table 14. In addition, the Transportation Air Quality Conformity Findings Checklist is included as Appendix C.
44 3. Affected Environment
Table 14. Status of Plans Related to Regional Conformity.

Date of
Date of
Date of Approval
MPO
Plan/TIP
adoption by
Approval by
Last Amendment
by FHWA of Last
MPO
FHWA
Amendment
Regional
September 3,
June 5, 2020
#3
06/09/2023
Transportation
2020
SCAG
Plan/Sustainable
Communities
Strategy
Transportation
October 6,
November 16,
23-03
06/09/2023
Improvement
2022
2022
SCAG
Program (FSTIP
approval)
FHWA = Federal Highway Administration
FSTIP = Federal Statewide Transportation Improvement Program MPO = Metropolitan Planning Organization
SCAG = Southern California Association of Governments
TIP = Transportation Improvement Program

3.4.2 Project -Level Conformity
The proposed project is located in an attainment/maintenance area for federal CO and federal PM10 standards, and a nonattainment area for federal PM2.5 standards, thus a project -level hot -spot analysis is required under 40 CFR 93.109 for the pollutants. See Appendix D for the Interagency Consultation Documentation showing PM determinations. The proposed project does not cause or contribute to any new localized CO, PM2.5, and/or PMlo violations, or delay timely attainment of any NAAQS or any required interim emission reductions or other milestones during the timeframe of the transportation plan (or regional emissions analysis).

3.4.3 Interagency Consultation
The project would not be a project of air quality concern for PM10 or PM2.5 emissions because the project would not result in increases in the number of diesel vehicles utilizing the project area; does not involve intersections that are operating at LOS D, E, or F with a significant number of diesel vehicles; does not involve a new or expanded bus or rail terminal; and would not affect a location or category of site which are identified in the PM10 implementation plan as sites of violation or possible violation. The project was discussed among stakeholders at a Transportation Conformity Working Group (TCWG) meeting on July 28, 2020, pursuant to the interagency consultation requirement of 40 CFR 93.105(c)(1)(i). The members of the TCWG confirmed that the project would not be considered a project of air quality concern. The TCWG determination in included as Appendix D. A follow-up letter from SCAG on September 26, 2022 confirmed to the City of Temecula that this July 28, 2020 TCWG finding also applied to FTIP Project ID 991203A (included in Appendix D). 45 3. Affected Environment

3.5 NEPA Analysis/Requirement
NEPA applies to all projects that receive federal funding or involve a federal action. NEPA requires that all reasonable alternatives for the proposed project are rigorously explored and objectively evaluated. As described above, the proposed project is listed in a conforming RTP and FTIP. Project construction will last less than 3 years and will not substantially impact traffic due to detours, road closures, and temporary terminations. Therefore, impacts of the resulting traffic flow changes do not need to be analyzed.

3.6 CEQA Analysis/Requirement
CEQA applies to most California transportation projects (certain projects are statutorily exempt).

CEQA requires that a range of reasonable alternatives to the project that would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project are explored. For CEQA, the air quality study should address pollutants for which California has established air quality standards (ozone, PM10, PM2.5, carbon monoxide, NOz, SOz, lead, visibility -reducing particles, sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, and vinyl chloride), as well as GHGs, MSATs, and asbestos. Similar to NEPA, analysis/documentation requirements for CEQA vary by pollutant (see the table in Section 4.1); ranging from a narrative describing that the pollutant is typically not a transportation issue to an emissions analysis. If construction will last more than three years and/or will substantially impact traffic due to detours, road closures, and temporary terminations, then impacts of the resulting traffic flow changes may need to be analyzed. As described above, the proposed project is listed in a conforming RTP and FTIP. Project construction will last less than three years and will not substantially impact traffic due to detours, road closures, and temporary terminations. Therefore, impacts of the resulting traffic flow changes do not need to be analyzed.
46 4. Environmental Consequences

4. Environmental Consequences
This section describes the methods, impact criteria, and results of air quality analyses of the proposed project. Analyses in this report were conducted using methodology and assumptions that are consistent with the requirements of NEPA, CEQA, the CAAAs of 1990, and the CCAA of 1988. The analyses also use guidelines and procedures provided in applicable air quality analysis protocols, such as the Transportation Project -Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol (CO Protocol) (Garza et al., 1997), Transportation Conformity Guidance for Quantitative Hot -Spot Analyses in PM10 and PM2.5 Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas (U.S. EPA, 2015), and the FHWA Updated Interim Guidance on Air Toxics Analysis in NEPA Documents (FHWA, 2016c).

4.1 Impact Criteria
Project -related emissions will have an adverse environmental impact if they result in pollutant emissions levels that either create or worsen a violation of an ambient air quality standard (identified in Table 6) or contribute to an existing air quality violation.

4.2 Short -Term Effects (Construction Emissions)

4.2.1 Construction Equipment, Traffic Congestion, and Fugitive Dust
Regional Emissions
The principal criteria pollutants emitted during construction would be PM10 and PMz.s. The source of the pollutants would be fugitive dust created during clearing, grubbing, excavation, and grading; demolition of structures and pavement; vehicle travel on paved and unpaved roads; and material blown from unprotected graded areas, stockpiles, and haul trucks. Generally, the distance that particles drift from their source depends on their size, emission height, and wind speed.

The potential settling distance of dust particles is governed by the initial injection height of the particle, the terminal settling velocity of the particle, and the degree of atmospheric turbulence. For a typical mean wind speed of 10 miles per hour, particles larger than PM 100 microns in diameter or smaller are likely to settle out within 20 to 30 feet from the edge of the point of emission (U.S. EPA 2009). Smaller particles (PM 30 microns in diameter or smaller to PM 100 microns) are likely to settle, depending upon the extent of atmospheric turbulence, within a few hundred feet from the point of 6 "Fugitive" is a term used in air quality analysis to denote emission sources that are not confined to stacks, vents, or similar paths. 47 4. Environmental Consequences
emission. Finer particles, particularly PM1o, which includes PM2.5, settle much slower due to atmospheric turbulence and can travel hundreds of miles (U.S. EPA, 2009).

A secondary source of pollutants during construction would be the engine exhaust from construction equipment during all construction activities. The principal pollutants of concern would be NOx and ROG emissions that would contribute to the formation of 03, which is a regional non -attainment pollutant.

Federal conformity regulations require analysis of construction impacts for projects when construction activities will last for more than 5 years. Project construction would begin in 2024, and construction activities would last approximately 17 months. Therefore, no quantitative estimate of regional construction emissions is required. However, for informational purposes, construction emissions were quantified. Additionally, specific measures to control dust and particulates related to SCAQMD rules are assumed to be part of project specifications. These measures are identified in Chapter 5.0.

Construction emissions were estimated using the latest Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District's (SMAMQD's) Road Construction Emissions Model (RCEM) ( http://www.airquality.org/cega/ , Version 9.0.0). While the model was developed for Sacramento conditions in terms of fleet emission factors, silt loading, and other model assumptions, it is considered adequate for estimating road construction emissions by the SCAQMD (in its CEQA guidance) and is used for that purpose in this project analysis. The model only allows inputs under four phases: grubbing/land clearing, grading/excavation, drainage/utilities/sub-grade, and paving.

Therefore, the project phases and equipment shown in Table 5 and Table 6Error! Reference source n of found. have been combined under the listed RCEM phases as shown in Table 15. In addition, all equipment under each phase was conservatively assumed to operate for that entire phase; e.g., under Site Preparation, the equipment under Traffic Control And Demolition and Clearing and Grubbing were assumed to operate at the same time, even though they would be scheduled sequentially. The longest round trip distances identified in Table 7 were also used for each phase.

Table 15. Construction Activities and Schedule for RCEM Input.

Construction Phase
Applicable RCEM Phase
Advertisement and Award
N/A
Advertisement and Award
Site Preparation
Traffic Control and Demolition
Grubbing/Land Clearing
Clearing and Grubbing
Channel Grading
Grading/Excavation
Grading Channel Slopes
48 4. Environmental Consequences
Construction Phase
Applicable RCEM Phase
Stage I Construction
Bridge Construction - Foundation
Bridge Construction - Substructure
Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade
Bridge Construction - Superstructure
Grading/Embankment Backfill/Pavement
Stage II Construction
Traffic Control and Demolition
Paving
Grading/Embankment Backfill/Pavement
Project Closure
N/A
Demobilization/Project Closure
Construction -related emissions for the project are presented in Table 16. The results of the construction emission calculations are included in Appendix E. The emissions presented are based on the best information available at the time of calculations. The emissions represent the peak daily construction emissions that would be generated by the project. As shown in the table, the emissions would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds.

Table 16. Project Construction Emissions for Roadways.

ROG
PM10
PM2.5
CO
Sox
NO.
(Ibs/day)
(Ibs/day)
(Ibs/day)
(Ibs/day)
(Ibs/day)
(Ibs/day)
Grubbing/Land

1.30 15.19

3.27 30.60

0.05 3.92
Clearing
Grading/Excavation

2.28 15.35

3.37 44.14

0.08 5.15
Drainage/Utilities/Sub-

4.74 15.68

3.68 106.23

0.17 12.31
Grade
Paving

3.46 0.44

0.36 71.72

0.12 8.82
Maximum Daily or

4.74 15.68

3.68 106.23

0.17 12.31
Average Daily
SCAQMD Significance
75 150
55 550
150
100
Threshold
Significant Impact?
No
No
No
No
No
No
Project Total (Tons)

0.76 2.39

0.56 16.79

0.03 1.97
Implementation of the following measures, some of which may also be required for other purposes such as storm water pollution control, will reduce air quality impacts resulting from construction activities. Please note that although these measures are anticipated to reduce construction -related emissions, these reductions cannot be quantified at this time. 49 4. Environmental Consequences
• The construction contractor must comply with the Caltrans' Standard Specifications in Section 14-9 (2018).
- Section 14-9-02 specifically requires compliance by the contractor with all applicable laws and regulations related to air quality, including air pollution control district and air quality management district regulations and local ordinances. • Water or a dust palliative will be applied to the site and equipment as often as necessary to control fugitive dust emissions.
• Soil binder will be spread on any unpaved roads used for construction purposes, and on all project construction parking areas.
• Trucks will be washed as they leave the right-of-way as necessary to control fugitive dust emissions.
• Construction equipment and vehicles will be properly tuned and maintained. All construction equipment will use low sulfur fuel as required by CA Code of Regulations Title 17, Section 93114.
• A dust control plan will be developed documenting sprinkling, temporary paving, speed limits, and timely re -vegetation of disturbed slopes as needed to minimize construction impacts to existing communities.
• Equipment and materials storage sites will be located as far away from residential and park uses as practicable. Construction areas will be kept clean and orderly. • Environmentally sensitive areas will be established near sensitive air receptors. Within these areas, construction activities involving the extended idling of diesel equipment or vehicles will be prohibited, to the extent feasible.
• Track -out reduction measures, such as gravel pads at project access points to minimize dust and mud deposits on roads affected by construction traffic, will be used. • All transported loads of soils and wet materials will be covered before transport, or adequate freeboard (space from the top of the material to the top of the truck) will be provided to minimize emission of dust during transportation.
• Dust and mud that are deposited on paved, public roads due to construction activity and traffic will be promptly and regularly removed to reduce PM emissions. • To the extent feasible, construction traffic will be scheduled and routed to reduce congestion and related air quality impacts caused by idling vehicles along local roads during peak travel times.
• Mulch will be installed or vegetation planted as soon as practical after grading to reduce windblown PM in the area.

4.2.2 Asbestos
According to the report A General Location Guide for Ultramafic Rocks in California -Area Likely to Contain Naturally Occurring Asbestos (CDC 2000), within Riverside County naturally occurring 50 4. Environmental Consequences
asbestos are not typically found in the geological formations present on the project site (CDC 2000).

Thus, hazardous exposure to asbestos -containing serpentine materials would not be a concern with the project.

4.2.3 Lead
Lead is normally not an air quality issue for transportation projects unless the project involves disturbance of soils containing high levels of aerially deposited lead or painting or modification of structures with lead -based coatings. There are no known soils containing high levels of aerially deposited lead, nor does the proposed project include painting or modification of structures with lead -based coatings. Thus, there is no requirement for an analysis of lead emissions.

4.3 Long -Term Effects (Operational Emissions)
The CAA requires a demonstration that federal actions conform to the SIP and similar approved plans in areas that are designated as non -attainment or have maintenance plans for criteria pollutants. Transportation measures, such as the project, are analyzed for conformity with the SIP as part of the RTP and RTIP. If the design concept and scope of a proposed transportation project are consistent with the project description in the applicable RTP and RTIP, and the assumptions in the regional emissions analysis for the RTP and RTIP, then the project would conform to the SIP, and no adverse regional air quality impact would occur as a result of the project.

SCAG, as the area's MPO, and the FHWA must make a determination that the applicable RTP and RTIP conform to the applicable SIP. Conformity to the SIP means that transportation activities will not create new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay the attainment of the NAAQS.

Federal regulations also require SCAG to conduct an air quality conformity analysis of all regionally significant projects that increase the transportation system capacity. All regionally significant capacity -increasing transportation projects, regardless of funding sources, must be included in the RTIP.

As discussed, the project is included in the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS (Amendment #3, approved June 9, 2023;RTP ID 991203) and the conforming 2023 FTIP (Amendment 23-03, approved June 9, 2023; FTIP ID 991203A). The project is described in the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS (Amendment #3, approved June 9, 2023) as "in western Riv Co in the City of Temecula: phase 1: extend overland drive (4 lanes) from commerce center drive to Avenida Alvarado/Diaz Rd intersection. See 991203a for phase 2 bridge project." The project is described in the 2023 FTIP (Amendment 23-03, approved June 9, 2023) as "in western Riv Co in the City of Temecula: Phase 2: replace 2-lane low water crossing with 4-lane bridge (BR#OOL0087) over Murrieta Creek at Avenida Alvarado. See 991203 for Phase 1." The project was discussed among stakeholders at a Transportation Conformity Working Group (TCWG) meeting on July 28, 2020, pursuant to the interagency consultation requirement of 40 CFR

93.105(c)(1)(i). The members of the TCWG confirmed that the project, RTP Project ID 991203, would not be considered a project of air quality concern. The TCWG determination is included as Appendix 51 4. Environmental Consequences
D. A follow-up letter from SCAG on September 26, 2022 confirmed to the City of Temecula that this July 28, 2020 TCWG finding also applied to FTIP Project ID 991203A (included in Appendix D). SCAG cannot pass regional conformity using EMFAC2017. SCAG's 2020-2045 RTP/SCS (and Amendment #3, approved June 9, 2023) used EMFAC2014 for their regional conformity analysis. EMFAC2017 was not used.

In addition, while the project's VMT Analysis Technical Memorandum (STC Traffic, Inc., 2021) showed that project study area VMT will be 2,618 VMT per day under the Opening Year (2025) scenario and 2,922 VMT per day in the Horizon Year (2045), project study area VMT is only shown to be increasing because the project study area VMT analysis does not consider redistribution of traffic and potential VMT reductions on routes outside of the study area (e.g., Rancho California). The project study area was determined by the City for traffic flow purposes and not for VMT purposes. In reality, the proposed project does not increase capacity, and would reduce VMT for current trips on the network as the new roadway segment lowers VMT forjourneys from Overland Drive to Diaz Road and Avenida Alvarado. The distance from the Overland Drive/Enterprise Circle intersection to the Diaz Road/ Avenida Alvarado intersection is currently 0.7 miles. The distance between the two intersections across the creek is approximately 825 feet. This is an approximate reduction of 2,870 feet traveled per vehicle trip. With a reduction in overall trip distance for the area, the project would result in emissions reductions compared to the No Build Alternative.

4.3.1 CO Analysis
The Transportation Conformity Rule requires a statement that: federal projects must not cause or contribute to any new localized CO violations or increase the frequency or severity of any existing CO violations in CO nonattainment and maintenance areas.

The CO portion of the Rule applies to the proposed project because the Basin is classified as a federal CO maintenance area. The air quality analyses of the RTP and RTIP do not include the analyses of local CO impacts; these must be addressed on a project level.

The determination of project -level CO impacts was carried out in accordance with the Project -Level Conformity Process flowchart, adopted by Caltrans in May 2022. The procedures of the Project -Level Conformity Process flowchart are provided below for the proposed project to determine the level of analysis (if any):
52 4. Environmental Consequences

Page 1 ends

Temecula City CouncilMarch 12, 2024

Temecula City Council
March 12, 2024