Temecula City Council
January 27, 2026

Quote Number: 1927777
,Abee Opportunity Number: 25179318
Altec (ndusines, Inc. Sourcewell Contract p: 110421-ALT Date: 1112W025
Quoted for: Clty of Temecula
Quoted by: Kade Fulkerson
Altec Account Manager: Troy Dentzer
Sourcewell
REFERENCE ALTEC MODEL Price
AT37G Artitulatins Telesce is Aerial Device Insulated $161.317 1A 1 Qnl Mr'rWFl I r)PTIr)NC r)ri r:r1NTIZAOT rl 1n4%
1 AT37G-US40
40' Boom Height (AT40-G) MUST quote ISO option
$3,264
2 AT37G-ISO
ISO boom - MUST QUOTE for 40' boom height (n/a on base model) $5,746
3 4
IA1 1 Qnl IW MAMI I nPTIr1NC nKi f1.r7NTRAr.T FC.a Fnll 1 FE
POWER EQUIPMENT Power Locks and Power Windows)
$1.381
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 SOURCEWELL OPTIONS TOTAL: $171.708
fR 1 r1CFN iUARlrFT ITFMC rf:iecMm�ar F?anlinclAdY
1 UNIT
$0
2 UNIT & HYDRAULIC ACC
$0
3 BODY
Body MY Price Adjustment
$2,352
4 BODY & CHASSIS ACC
$0
5 ELECTRICAL
$0
6 FINISHING
$0
7 CHASSIS
Ford F550 4x2 MY Price Adjustment
$557
8 OTHER
J.AJtec MY Price Adjustment
-$8.260
OPEN MAKKEI UPIION, I IAL: I
SUB-TOTAL FOR UNIT/BODY/CHASSIS: $166,357.00
Delivery to Customer: $8,393.00
Estimated Taxes (Delivery non-taxable): $14,605.28
CA T&R/Doc/Adminfrire Fees: $560.50
TOTAL FOR UNIT/BODY/CHASSIS: $189,915.78
**Pricing valid for 45 days**
NOTES
PRICING: Altec will make every effort to honor this quotation, subject to the following provisions. Prices for equipment with production start dates 12 months and beyond are considered budgetary due to potential cost inflation, market volatility, and tariff implications. These prices will be reviewed based on market conditions and confirmed closer to the production date. Quotes and orders with chassis model years beyond the current open order bank are estimates only. Altec's turn -key pricing is subject to change based on chassis pricing received from the OEM.

Chassis model year, specifications, and price will be reviewed and confirmed when specific model year information becomes available from the OEM, and any chassis price difference, including adjustments for tariffs, will be passed through to the customer.

PAINT COLOR: White to match chassis, unless otherwise specified WARRANTY: Standard Altec Warranty for Aerials and Derricks - One (1) year parts warranty One (1) year labor warranty Ninety (90) days TO ORDER: To order, please contact the Altec Account Manager listed above.

CHASSIS: Per Altec Commercial Standard
DELIVERY: TBD Based on availability, FOB Customer Location TERMS: Net 30 days
BEST VALUE: Altec boasts the following "Best Value" features: Altec ISO Grip Controls for Extra Protection, Only Lifetime Warranty on Structural Components in Industry, Largest Service Network in Industry (Domestic and Overseas), Altec SENTRY Web/CD Based Training, Dedicated/Direct Gov't Sales Manager, In -Service Training with Every Order.

TRADE-IN: Please ask your Altec Account Manager for more information Sourcewell Quote 1927775 (City of Temecula) AT40G Torsion F550 4x2

Item No. 7

CITY OF TEMECULA

MEMORANDUM
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Ron Moreno, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: January 27, 2026
SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution Approving Agreement with Rain Drop Products, LLC for the Purchase and Installation of the Reservoir and Related Equipment at Eagle Soar Playground
PREPARED BY: Rebecca Kiser, Management Analyst
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve:

1. A resolution entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT
ENTITLED "PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION

AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND RAIN

DROP PRODUCTS, LLC, FOR THE RESERVOIR AND

RELATED EQUIPMENT AT THE EAGLE SOAR

PLAYGROUND SPLASH PAD AT MIKE NAGGAR
COMMUNITY PARK"

2. An additional budget appropriation of $15,000 from Measure S to cover the agreement.

BACKGROUND: Utilizing a cooperative agreement with Sourcewell, a complete proposal was requested from Rain Drop Products, LLC by the Public Works Department. The proposal was for a total amount of $314,408.37. Of this, $53,815 is for the equipment purchase, and $251,940 is the cost of labor and installation. The City received a 10% discount through Sourcewell membership, leaving the total after taxes and shipping fees to $288,513.68 In early June of 2025, the Eagle Soar Splash pad experienced an underground equipment failure in the reservoir tank and water circulation system. The result of the failure required the complete closure of the splash pad until repairs can be made.

Rain Drop Products, LLC is a nationally recognized manufacturer and designer of aquatic play equipment, specializing in splash pads, water play features, and related mechanical systems. The City has worked with Rain Drop Products, LLC in the past and has maintained a successful professional relationship for maintenance care of the Eagle Soar Splash Pad. Therefore, the staff recommends the approval of the Resolution and Agreement with Rain Drop Products, LLC, for the Purchase and Installation for the Reservoir and Related Equipment at Eagle Soar Playground.

FISCAL IMPACT: The Council approved a $300,000 appropriation for this project at their November 18, 2025 CIP Workshop. An additional appropriation of $15,000 from Measure S is needed to cover the full cost of the agreement.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution

2. Agreement

3. CIP Budget Sheet

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN
AGREEMENT ENTITLED "PURCHASE AND

INSTALLATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF

TEMECULA AND RAIN DROP PRODUCTS, LLC, FOR THE

RESERVOIR AND RELATED EQUIPMENT AT THE

EAGLE SOAR PLAYGROUND SPLASH PAD AT MIKE
NAGGAR COMMUNITY PARK"

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

1. Recitals. The City Council does hereby find, determine, and declare that:

A. The Eagle Soar Playground and Splash Pad at Michael "Mike" Naggar Community Park is intended to provide a safe, integrative, and welcoming playground where children of all abilities can come and play together, where they can feel a sense of belonging and acceptance.

B. The splash pad portion of the playground provides various water features for children's water play. The splash pad operates through a sophisticated system of pumps and nozzles, with water release and sprays coordinated through a complex computer program. The water is recycled utilizing a 4,500-gallon reservoir.

C. The following components of the reservoir system have failed and need to be replaced: 1) 4,500-gallon concrete reservoir; 2) basin diverter with sediment trap with 10-inch drain line and 4-inch storm line; 3) basin diverter extension; and 4) handle ("Equipment").

D. The City has received an estimate for the required replacement of the Equipment from Rain Drop Products, LLC, ("Rain Drop") the manufacturer of the Equipment, through a Sourcewell bid in the amount of $288,513.68. Of this amount, $53,815 is for the purchase of the Equipment and $251,940 for its installation, less a 10% discount.

E. Rain Drop, is the only manufacturer of this specialized Equipment that is compatible with the City's splash pad. Given the complexity of the Equipment and the need to integrate it into the City's existing splash pad system, Rain Drop, Inc., Rain Drop will not sell the Equipment to the City unless it installs the equipment and constructs the improvements surrounding the equipment through its own employees and specialty contractors. Rain Drop will not provide a warranty for the equipment unless it installs the equipment and constructs the improvements surrounding the equipment through its own employees and specialty contractors.

F. The City of Temecula further finds and determines that, based upon the findings set forth above, full compliance with the otherwise applicable requirements of the Public Contracts Code would be unavailing, would not produce an advantage for the City, and would thus be undesirable, impractical, and impossible. The City's authority to proceed with the work in this

manner was well established in Graydon v. Pasadena Redevelopment Agency et al. (1980) 104 Cal. App. 2nd 631 and the cases cited therein.

G. The work to be installed pursuant to the Agreement is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to Sections 15061 and 15302 of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR 15061 and 14 CCR 15301). It can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment. The work consists of the replacement or reconstruction of existing structures, equipment, and facilities, the reservoir system, where the new structure will be located on the same site as the structure, equipment, and facilities replaced, and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced.

2. Approval of Agreement with Rain Drop. The City Council hereby approves that certain "Purchase and Installation Agreement between City of Temecula and Rain Drop Products, LLC, for Replacement of the Reservoir and Related Equipment at the Eagle Soar Playground Splash Pad at Mike Naggar Community Park" in the amount of $288,513.68 and authorizes the Mayor to execute the Agreement on behalf of the City in substantially the form presented to the City Council. Further, the City Manager is authorized to increase the total compensation by up to ten percent (10%) of the amount of the Agreement as a contingency.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 27th day of January, 2026.

Jessica Alexander, 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. 2026- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 27th day of January, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

Randi Johl, City Clerk

PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA

AND RAIN DROP PRODUCTS, LLC,

FOR THE RESERVOIR AND RELATED EQUIPMENT AT THE EAGLE SOAR

PLAYGROUND SPLASH PAD AT MIKE NAGGAR COMMUNITY PARK
THIS PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made and entered into effect as of January 27, 2026 ("Effective Date") by and between the City of Temecula, a California municipal corporation ("City"), and Rain Drop Products, LLC ("Contractor").

RECITALS
A. City desires to engage Contractor to provide and install the following reservoir and related equipment at the Eagle Soar Playground Splash Pad at Mike Naggar Community Park as more fully described herein ("Project").

B. Contractor has examined the location of all proposed work, carefully reviewed and evaluated the specifications set forth by the City for the Project, is familiar with all conditions relevant to the performance of services and is committed to perform all work as required by this Agreement.

C. Contractor represents that Contractor is fully qualified, possesses all required licenses and certifications, and has the experience necessary, to perform the work necessary to complete the Project. City selected Contractor for this Project in substantial reliance on such representations by the Contractor.

D. Contractor is a registered dealer of Children's commercial aquatic play equipment and has full access to the equipment and special pricing under the Sourcewell Contract Agreement #010521-RDP ("Cooperative Contract") and all applicable provisions are incorporated herein.

E. The City is a member of Sourcewell (Member No. 24002) and is authorized to use the Cooperative Contract.

F. City and Contractor enter this Agreement in order to set forth terms and conditions governing each party's performance of this Agreement.

AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing Recitals and the mutual promises and covenants herein contained the Parties agree as follows:

1. Scope of Work.

1.1 In consideration of the payment of the purchase price and subject to all the terms and conditions hereof, including applicable provisions of the Cooperative Agreement, Contractor shall provide all tangible items and products, and perform all services, described in the Scope of Services and Fee Schedule attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference ("Products" and "Services", respectively). Contractor covenants that: (i) it will perform all

Services in a manner commensurate with all applicable, professional standards and degree of skill and care; and (ii) all Products will be new and of the highest quality available.

1.2 Contractor shall perform all work set forth in Exhibit A, and shall provide and furnish all the labor, materials, necessary tools, equipment and all utility and transportation services necessary to complete the Project as required herein.

1.3 The Products shall be delivered to the location designated in writing by the City.

Title to and the risk of loss, damage, and destruction of the Products shall remain with the Contractor until inspection and acceptance of the Products by City. Such inspection may include reasonable tests and use of the Products by City. City may, at its option, (i) reject any or all of the Products found to be defective or otherwise not in compliance with the requirements of this Agreement; or, (ii) accept substitute Product(s) satisfactory to the City. Contractor shall be responsible for any and all costs of transportation and replacement of any rejected Products.

1.4 If the total Contract amount exceeds $25,000, then Contractor shall provide a payment bond in an amount equal to 100% of the Contract price. If required by the City prior to commencing work, Contractor shall provide a performance bond in an amount equal to 100% of the Contract price. The bond forms required to be executed are attached hereto as Exhibit B, and Exhibit C and incorporated by reference herein. The performance bond, if required, shall remain in force until written acceptance of the Work and the end of the one (1) year warranty period.

2. Time of Performance. Time is of the essence in the performance of the Services and Contractor shall complete the Project installation, implementation and acceptance testing within the times set forth in Exhibit A. The failure by Contractor to meet this schedule may result in termination of this Agreement by City.

3. Term. Unless earlier terminated in accordance with Section 16 of this Agreement, this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect until satisfactory completion of the Services.

4. Compensation.

4.1 City shall pay Contractor for the Services on a fixed fee, not -to -exceed basis, in accordance with the provisions of this Section and Exhibit A. Contractor's total and complete compensation for all Services satisfactorily performed and Products properly provided, shall not exceed Two Hundred Eighty Eight Thousand Five Hundred Thirteen Dollars and Sixty Eight Cents ($288,513.68), unless otherwise agreed upon in writing. City Manager may increase the total compensation by up to ten percent (10%) as a contingency.

4.2 Contractor shall submit invoices to City describing the Services performed and/or the specific task in the Scope of Services to which it relates, and the date the Services were performed. City shall pay Contractor no later than thirty (30) calendar days after City approval of the invoice.

4.3 City shall reimburse Contractor only for those costs or expenses specifically identified in Exhibit A to this Agreement or specifically approved in writing in advance by City.

4.4 Contractor shall not receive any compensation for Extra Work performed without the prior written authorization of City. As used herein, "Extra Work" means any work that is determined by City to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services and which the parties did not reasonably anticipate would

be necessary when this Agreement was executed. Compensation for any authorized Extra Work shall be paid in accordance with Exhibit A, or otherwise as agreed upon in writing.

4.5 Unless otherwise agreed upon in writing, Contractor shall provide City with a minimum fourteen (14) days' notice of its date(s) of installation to enable the City to ready the installation site(s) for installation the Products in accordance with the instructions of Contractor, if any. The City shall complete any required site preparation prior to the date installation of the Products begins.

5. Project Manager. Contractor shall designate in writing to the City a Project Manager, who shall coordinate all phases of the Project. This Project Manager shall be available to City at all reasonable times during the term of the Agreement. Contractor shall not remove or reassign the Project Manager without the prior written consent of City. City's approval shall not be unreasonably withheld.

6. Administration. This Agreement will be administered by the City Manager or designee, who shall be the Project Administrator and shall have the authority to act for City under this Agreement.

7. Tvne and Installation of Materials/Standard of Care.

7.1 Contractor shall use only the only materials and Products described in Exhibit A in performing the Services. Any deviation from the materials or Products described in Exhibit A shall not be permitted unless approved in advance in writing by the Project Administrator.

7.2 All of the Services shall be performed by Contractor or under Contractor's supervision. Contractor represents that it possesses the personnel required to perform the Services required by this Agreement, and that it will perform all Services in a manner commensurate with industry -wide professional standards. All Services shall be performed by qualified and experienced personnel.

7.3 At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall possess a valid and current Class 53 California Contractor's License to perform the work. Contractor hereby certifies that it holds the required license(s), License No. 1119246.

8. Indemnification.

8.1 Indemnity for Professional Services. In connection with its design professional services, but subject to the limitations of Section 2 of this Agreement, Consultant shall hold harmless and indemnify City, its elected officials, officers, employees, designated volunteers and those City agents serving as independent contractors in the role City officials (collectively "Indemnitees"), with respect to any and all claims, demands, liabilities, losses, costs or expenses, including reimbursement of reasonable attorney fees and costs of defense (collectively "Claims"), including but not limited to Claims relating to death or injury to any person and injury to any property which to the extent arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of Consultant or any of its officers, employee, sub - Contractors, or agents in the performance or its professional services under this Agreement. In no event shall the cost to defend charged to the Consultant exceed the Consultant's proportionate percentage of fault as set forth in California Civil Code 2782.8.

8.2 Other Indemnities. The Consultant 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 claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, including attorney fees and expert witness fees, or liability of any kind or nature which the City of Temecula, Temecula Community Services District, and/or 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 arising out of Consultant'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.

8.3 Contractor shall perform all Project work in a manner to minimize public inconvenience and possible hazard, to restore other work areas to their original condition and former usefulness as soon as possible, and to protect public and private property. Contractor shall perform work as specified in Exhibit A to limit impacts to traffic during the installation period.

Contractor shall be liable for any private or public property damaged during the performance of the Project work.

8.4 The rights and obligations set forth in this Section shall survive the termination of this Agreement.

9. Independent Contractor. City has retained Contractor as an independent contractor and neither Contractor nor its employees, nor any of its subcontractors, are to be considered employees of the City. The manner and means of conducting the work are under the control of Contractor, except to the extent they are limited by statute, rule or regulation and the express terms of this Agreement. No civil service statutes or other right of employment shall accrue to Contractor or its employees.

10. Cooperation. Contractor agrees to work closely and cooperate fully with City's Project Administrator and any other agencies that may have jurisdiction or interest in the work to be performed. City agrees to cooperate with the Contractor on the Project.

11. Insurance.

11.1 Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons and/or damages to property, which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder and the results of work by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, employees, or subcontractors. Additionally, RJR Water Features, Inc., as the authorized subcontractor to Contractor pursuant to Section 13 of this Agreement, shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons and/or damages to property, which may arise from or in connection with the performance of its work hereunder and the results of work by RJR Water Features, Inc., its agents, representatives, employees, or subcontractors. RJR shall submit to the City a Certificate of Insurance as required by Section I I and agree in writing to be bound by the provisions Section

11. 11.2 Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as:

11.2.1 Commercial General Liability (CGL): Insurance Services Office Form CG 00 01 covering CGL on an "occurrence" basis, including products and completed operation, property damage, bodily injury, and personal & advertising with limits no less than two Million ($2,000,000) per occurrence. If a general aggregate limit applies, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location (ISO CG 25 03 05 09 or 25 04 05 09) or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.

11.2.2 Automobile Liability: ISO Form Number CA 00 01 covering any auto (Code 1), or if Concessionaire has no owned autos, covering hired, (Code8) and non -owned autos (Code 9), with limits no less than One Million ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury, including death, of one or more persons, property damage and personal injury.

11.2.3 Workers' Compensation: as required by the State of California, with Statutory Limits, and Employer's Liability Insurance with limit of no less than One million ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury or disease. In accordance with the provisions of Labor Code Section 3700, every contractor will be required to secure the payment of compensation to it's employees. Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1861, Vendor must submit to City the following certification before beginning any work on the Improvements:

I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for worker's compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this contract.

By executing this Agreement, Contractor is submitting the certification required above.

The policy must contain a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City of Temecula, the Temecula Community Services District, the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, their officers, officials, employees or volunteers.

11.2.4 Professional Liability (Errors and Omissions): One million ($1,000,000) per occurrence and in aggregate. Professional Liability Insurance shall be written on a policy form providing professional liability for design work.

11.3 Deductibles and Self -Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self -insured retentions must be declared and approved by the Risk Manager.

11.4 Other Insurance Provisions. The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:

11.4.1 The City of Temecula, the Temecula Community Services District, the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, their officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds on the CGL policy with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of the Contractor's products and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor.

General liability coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to the Consultant Insurance (at least as broad as ISO Form CG 20 10 1185 or if not available, through the addition of both CG 20 10, CG 20 26, CG 20 33, or CG 20 38; and CG 20 37 if a later edition is used).

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.

11.4.2 For any claims related to this project, the Contractor insurance coverage shall be primary and non-contributory and at least as broad as ISO CG 20 0104 13 as respects the City, the Temecula Community Services District, the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, their officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City of Temecula, Temecula Community Services District, and/or the 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. This also applies to any Excess or Umbrella liability policies.

11.4.3 The Contractor may use Umbrella or Excess Policies to provide the limits as required in this agreement. The Umbrella or Excess policies shall be provided on a true "following form" or broader coverage basis, with coverage at least as broad as provided on the underlying Commercial General Liability Insurance.

11.4.4 Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect the indemnification provided to the City of Temecula, the Temecula Community Services District, and/or the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, their officers, officials, employees, or volunteers.

11.4.5 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.

11.4.6 If the Contractor's maintains broader coverage and/or higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City requires and shall be entitled to the broader coverage and/or higher limits maintained by the Contractor.

11.4.7 If insurance coverage is canceled or, reduced in coverage or in limits the Contractor shall within two (2) 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.

11.4.8 Unless otherwise approved by City, if any part of the Services and Tasks is subcontracted, the Minimum Insurance Requirements must be provided by, or on behalf of, all subcontractors even if city has approved lesser insurance requirements for Vendor, and all subcontractors must agree in writing to be bound by the provisions of this section.

11.5 Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance required above, except for workers' compensation insurance, must 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.

11.6 Verification of Coveraize. Contractor shall furnish the City with original certificates and amendatory endorsements, or copies of the applicable policy language affecting coverage required by this clause. All certificates and endorsements and copies of the Declarations & Endorsements pages are to be received and approved by the City before work commences.

However, failure to obtain the required documents prior to the work beginning shall not waive the Consultant obligation to provide them. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements required by these specifications, at any time.

11.7 Special Risks or Circumstances. The City reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances.

12. Prevailing Wages.

12.1 Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contractor from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. Copies may be obtained from the California Department of Industrial Relations Internet website at http://www.dir.ca.gov . Contractor shall provide a copy of prevailing wage rates to any staff or sub -contractor hired, and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. Contractor shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1720, 1725.5, 1771.1(a), 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Contractor shall forfeit to the City, as a penalty, the sum of $200.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this Agreement, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Agreement. This project, work, or service will be subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) pursuant to Labor Code Section 1771.4.

12.2 Registration with the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) is mandatory as a condition for bidding, providing certain services, and working on a public works project as specified in Labor Code Section 1771.1(a). Contractor and any subcontractors must be registered with the Department of Industrial Relations to be qualified to bid, or provide a proposal and/or time and material quote or be listed in a bid, proposal or quote, subject to the requirements of Public Contract Code Section 4104; or engage in the performance of any contract that is subject to Labor Code Section 1720 et seq., unless currently registered and qualified to perform public work pursuant to Labor Code Section 1725.5. Contractor and subcontractors will be required to provide proof of registration with the DIR. For more information regarding registration with the Department of Industrial Relations, refer to http://www.dir.ca.gov/Public- Works/PublicWorks.html

13. Subcontracting. The City hereby consents to RJR Water Features, Inc., to be the Subcontractor to Contractor of installation as described in Exhibit A. As the authorized subcontractor of installation, RJR Water Features, Inc., shall comply with all provisions of this Agreement relating to installation as described in Exhibit A, including, without limitation, the indemnification and insurance provisions of Section 11, insurance. RJR shall submit to the City a Certificate of Insurance as required by Section I I and agree in writing to be bound by the provisions Section 11. Contractor shall be fully responsible to City for all acts and omissions of RJR Water Features, Inc., any other subcontractor authorized in writing by the City. Except as specifically authorized herein, the Services to be provided under this Agreement shall not be otherwise assigned, transferred, contracted or subcontracted out without the prior written approval of City.

14. Conflicts of Interest. Contractor agrees not to accept any employment or representation during the term of this Contract or within twelve (12) months after completion of the work under this Contract wherein Contractor is or may likely become "financially interested," as provided in

Government Code Section 1090 and 87100, in any decisions made by City on any matter in connection with which Contractor has been retained pursuant to this Contract.

15. Notices. All notices, demands, requests or approvals to be given under the terms of this Agreement shall be given in writing, to City by Contractor and conclusively shall be deemed served when delivered personally, or on the third business day after the deposit thereof in the United States mail, postage prepaid, first-class mail, addressed as hereinafter provided. All notices, demands, requests or approvals from Contractor to City shall be addressed as follows:

To the City:

City of Temecula
41000 Main St.

Temecula, CA 92590
Attention: Stacy Fox
To the Contractor:

Rain Drop Products, LLC
2121 Cottage St.

Ashland, Ohio 44805
Attention: Steven Bearden

16. TERMINATION

16.1 Termination With Cause. In the event that either party fails or refuses to perform any of the provisions of this Agreement at the time and in the manner required, that party shall be deemed in default in the performance of this Agreement. If such default is not cured within a period of five (5) calendar days after receipt of written notice of default, specifying the nature of such default and the steps necessary to cure such default, the non -defaulting party may terminate the Agreement forthwith by giving to the defaulting party written notice thereof. In the event that the default cannot be cured within five (5) days, no such failure will be deemed to exist if the defaulting party has given the non -defaulting party adequate assurance of due performance and commenced to cure such default within such period, such cure efforts are prosecuted to completion with reasonable diligence, and in any event are completed with thirty (30) days.

16.2 Termination Without Cause. Notwithstanding the above provisions, City shall have the right, at its sole discretion and without cause, of terminating this Agreement at any time by giving seven (7) calendar days' prior written notice to Contractor. In the event of termination under this Section, City shall pay Contractor for Services satisfactorily performed and costs incurred in the performance of such Services up to the effective date of termination for which Contractor has not previously been paid. In the event of termination under this Section, City shall also pay Contractor for all Products, associated materials, and hardware delivered to City site under this Agreement that City deems usable.

17. Contractor's Knowledge of Conditions. By executing this Agreement, Contractor warrants that Contractor has visited or has been provided the opportunity to visit the Project site(s), and, to the extent readily ascertainable without invasive or exhaustive investigation, has become familiar with the local conditions under which the work is to be performed, and has taken into consideration these factors in submitting its Project proposal and Scope of Services.

This provision does not include subsurface conditions not visible to Contractor and not shown on the contract plans or City -supplied borings.

18. WqgAnty. For all Products provided to the City as part of this Agreement, Contractor warrants as follows: Contractor possesses good title to the Products and the right to transfer ownership of the Products to the City; the product shall be delivered to the City free from any security interest or other lien; the Products meet all specifications contained herein and are fit for their intended purpose(s); and, the Products and the Services shall be free from material defects in materials and workmanship under normal use for a period of not less than one (1) year from the date of delivery and completion of the work. The foregoing warranty is in addition to any and all manufacturers' warranties. All other warranties applicable to the equipment and materials purchased by City pursuant to this Agreement shall be as specified in Exhibit A.

19. Representations. Each party represents as follows: (a) that it has full power and authority to execute, deliver and perform its obligations under this Agreement; (b) that there are no actions, proceedings or investigations, pending or, to the best of each party's knowledge, threatened against such party which may in any manner whatsoever materially affect the enforceability of this Agreement or the rights, duties and obligations of the parties hereunder; and (c) that the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement will not constitute a breach or default under any agreement, law or court order under which such party is a party or may be bound or affected by or which may affect the rights, duties and obligations hereunder.

20. Assignment. Contractor shall not assign or transfer this Agreement without the City's prior, written consent.

21. Force Majeure. Neither party shall be responsible for delays in performance caused by unforeseeable events beyond the control and without the fault or negligence of the parties, including but not limited to acts of God or of the public enemy, unusually severe weather, fires, earthquakes, floods, epidemics, quarantine restrictions, and/or freight embargoes.

Contractor's lack of funding for any reason shall not be a force majeure. If Contractor claims force majeure, City shall ascertain the facts and extent of delay, and extend the time for performing the Services for the period of the enforced delay when and if in the judgment of the City such delay is justified. In no event shall Contractor be entitled to recover damages against City for any delay in performance of this Agreement, however caused, Contractor's sole remedy being extension of the Agreement pursuant to this Section.

22. Miscellaneous Provisions.

22.1 Recitals. City and Contractor acknowledge that the above Recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference into this Agreement.

22.2 Compliance with all Laws. Contractor shall at its sole cost and expense comply with all applicable statutes, ordinances, codes, and regulations throughout the term of this Agreement.

22.3 Waiver. A waiver by either party of any breach, of any term, covenant or condition contained herein shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant or condition contained herein, whether of the same or a different character.

22.4 Integrated Contract. This Agreement represents the full and complete understanding of every kind or nature whatsoever between the parties hereto, and all preliminary negotiations and agreements of whatsoever kind or nature are merged herein. No verbal agreement or implied covenant shall be held to vary the provisions herein.

22.5 Conflicts or Inconsistencies. In the event there are any conflicts or inconsistencies between this Agreement and the Scope of Services or any other attachments or exhibits hereto, the terms of this Agreement shall govern.

22.6 Interpretation. The terms of this Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the meaning of the language used and shall not be construed for or against either party by reason of the authorship of the Agreement or any other rule of construction which might otherwise apply.

22.7 Amendments. This Agreement may be modified or amended only by a written document executed by both Contractor and City and approved as to form by the City Attorney.

22.8 Severability. If any term or portion of this Agreement is held to be invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect.

22.9 Controlling Law and Venue. The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement and all matters relating to it and any action brought relating to this

Agreement shall be adjudicated in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of Riverside, State of California.

22.10 Equal OpportunitMployment. Contractor represents that it is an equal opportunity employer and it shall not discriminate against any subcontractor, employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, handicap, ancestry, sex, age or any other impermissible basis under law.

22.11 Attorneys' Fees. In any litigation or other proceeding by which a party seeks to enforce its rights under this Agreement (whether in contract, tort or both) or seeks a declaration of any rights or obligations under this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all attorneys' fees, experts' fees, and other costs actually incurred in connection with such litigation or other proceeding, in addition to all other relief to which that party may be entitled.

22.12 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two (2) or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which together shall constitute one (1) and the same instrument.
[SIGNATURES BEGIN ON NEXT PAGE]

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed on the date first written above.

CITY OF TEMECULA
Jessica Alexander
Mayor
Attest
Randi Johl, MMC
City Clerk
Approved As to Form:

Peter M. Thorson
City Attorney

RAIN DROP PRODUCTS, LLC
By:

Nam(
Title:

Name: Greg Holt
Title: Project Manager
-12-
11086-0004\3187303v1.doc

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF SERVICES AND FEE SCHEDULE

PROPOSAL
.�I I) � D I,oiD Reference: 1
Pra]ect Name: MARGARIARGARI TA PARR RESERVOIR
Salesperson: Steven Bearden
Date:
11/24/2025
70:

STACY FOX Flrst ShlprnaK Address
Purchaser:

City of Temecula C8y of Temecula
Billing Address: 41000 MAIN STREET 41000 MAIN STREET
Temecula, CA 92590 Temecula, CA 92590
4oentily
Item # Item Description GPM flEaS Unit Prime
Extended Aft
cftft on imm $ to vrewt sheet nrandrauy
1,01)
NRSVR-C4500-13479 4500 GAL CONCRETE RSVR 134T9 $40,685.00 $40,665.00

1.00 R- BASJN DIVERTER WlSEDIMENT $11,035.00
$11,036.00
7RAP-10"" DRAIN LINE & 4"" STORM
LINE

12.00 BASN-❑VTFZ-EXT-IN-001 BASIN DIVERTER EXTENSION BY INCH $150,00 $1.800,00

1.00 ZPID-HND-EXT-c36 HANDLE $295,00
$296.00

INSTALLATION SERVICES

1.00 ;INSTALL-1961711 INSTALLATION FOR 1961711 $251.940.00 $251.940.00

SCOPE OF WORK
1 . Scope of work includes prevailing wage rates. Contractor is non -union.

2. Job Site mobiliration.
$, Demo and remove existing concrete adjacent to the existing rain diverler.

4. Demo and remove existing rain diverter.

5. Fill existing below ground tank with %' gravel and abandon in place.

6. Excavate and set new splash pad lank in location outside of fenced area. Includes gravel bed base and Crane to off load and set lank.
7_ Intercept and re-raute plumbing to new tank location, includes 10" return line from pad, 5" feature suction line and 3' filter suction and return line. All pipes to be schedule 80 PVC.

8. Repeur conixele areas back, limits of pour to be coordinated in the fieJd.

9. Reroute and hock up any electrical and make up water.

PROJECT SPECIFIC EXCLUSIONS:

1. Re -turf of surrounding area not included.

2. Work area fencing not included.
3_ Removal and replacement of existing fencing not included. 4_ Haul offpfexcess sail not included.

5. Permit fees, plan check fees and any other fees associated with public agencies not Included.

6. Dust control, fencing, permit casts, surveying, cost of inspections and swppe are excluded unless noted above

7. Bonds of any kind are excluded
FREIGHT 19 FOR RAIN DIVERTER, EXTENTIONS AND HANDLE

RESERVOIR IS SOURCED LOCALLY BY CONCRETE COMPANY
Sales Tax Is based on the equipment provided by Rain Drop Products and does NOT include tax oil Installation. 1,00
IPERFBOhID-19fi1T11 PERFORMANCE BOND FOR 1961711 $8,653.37 $6,653.37
2121Cottage St. Ashland, Ohio 44805 • Phone 800-343-6063 • Fax 419-49"711 • www.ruin-drop.c❑ m 1 -13-
11086-0004\3187303 v l .doc

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF SERVICES AND FEE SCHEDULE (CONTINUED)

PROPOSAL
I,Reference: 1961711
Prolect Name: MARGARITA PARK RESE=RMR
Salesperson: Steven Bearden
Qwne Duration-60 Days Total Order $ 314,401137
Less discount at a rate of 10.00%-S31,440.84
�"' FrelghttoTemecula,CA $650.00
O � MCP T� j � A Taxes - See General Terms, Condf ions and Wa n-anty y4,l geF 15 Contract #-G10521-RRP Net Order $288,513.68
Inquireabout vur nationwidecovperative purchoWng programs I Payment Terms: Net 30
Estimated Delivery Date upon plecernwt of Order.

See the fallow9ng pages for General Terms, Candltlons and Warranty related to this Proposal 2121 Cottage St. Ashland, Ohio 44805 • Phone 800-343-6063 • Fax 419-49E-07ii - www.rafn-drop.com 7 11086-0004\3187303 v l .doc
-14-

EXHIBIT B

PERFORMANCE BOND

CITY OF TEMECULA, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
WORKS BOND NO.

PERFORMANCE BOND

THE RESERVOIR AND RELATED EQUIPMENT AT THE EAGLE SOAR

PLAYGROUND SPLASH PAD AT MIKE NAGGAR COMMUNITY PARK
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS:

THAT, WHEREAS, the City of Temecula, State of California, entered into a Contract on this day of , 20 , hereinafter called "Contract," with

NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR
(hereinafter called "Principal"), for the work described as follows:
, and
WHEREAS, the said Principal is required under the terms of said Contract to furnish a bond for the faithful performance of said Contract.

NOW, THEREFORE, WE, the Principal, and

NAME AND ADDRESS OF SURETY
are duly authorized to transact business under the laws of the State of California, as Surety (hereinafter called "Surety"), are held and firmly bound unto the City of Temecula in the penal sum of DOLLARS ($ ), lawful money of the United
States, for the payment of which sum we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents.

THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION is such that, if the Principal, its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns, shall in all things stand to, abide by, and well and truly keep and perform the covenants, conditions and agreements in the said Contract, and in any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on its part to be kept and performed, at the time and in the manner therein specified, in all respects according to their true intent and meaning, and shall -15-
11086-0004\3187303 v l .doc

indemnify and save harmless the City of Temecula, its officers and agents, as therein stipulated, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and virtue.

As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified, costs and reasonable expenses and fees shall be included, including reasonable attorneys' fees incurred by the City of Temecula in successfully enforcing this obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment rendered.

The Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Contract, or to the work to be performed thereunder, or to the specifications accompanying the same, shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Contract, or to the work, or to the Specifications.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on , 2025.
(Seal)

PRINCIPAL
By:

Name:

Title:

By:

Name:

Title:

SURETY
By:

Name:

Title:

By:

Name:

Title:
(Seal)
SURETY:

By:
11086-0004\3187303 v l .doc
-16-
PRINCIPAL:

In

(Name)
(Title)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
(Name)
(Title)
By:
(Name)
(Title)
[NOTE: If Parry is a corporation, the corporation must be represented by two individuals who shall execute this Surety Bond on behalf of the corporation as follows: (A) one from the corporation's "Operational Group" (Chair of the Board, President, or a Vice -President) and; (B) one from the corporation's "Financial Group" (Secretary, Assistant Secretary, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer or Assistant Treasurer). See California Corporations Code section 313. A corporate resolution designating an individual officer to execute Surety Bonds on behalf of the corporation will be accepted. If the Parry is a limited liability company, then the managing member shall represent the Party and execute the Surety Bond on behalf of the limited liability company. If the Parry is a partnership, the managing partner shall execute the Surety Bond on behalf of the partnership.]

ATTACH NOTARIAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR BOTH THE SURETY AND

PRINCIPAL SIGNATURES
-17-
11086-0004\3187303 v l .doc

EXHIBIT C

LABOR AND MATERIALS BOND

CITY OF TEMECULA, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
BOND NO.

LABOR AND MATERIALS BOND
FOR

THE RESERVOIR AND RELATED EQUIPMENT AT THE EAGLE SOAR

PLAYGROUND SPLASH PAD AT MIKE NAGGAR COMMUNITY PARK
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENT:

THAT, WHEREAS, the City of Temecula has awarded to
("Contractor") a contract dated
2025 entitled "AGREEMENT FOR
" ("Contract"); and
WHEREAS, said Contractor is required by the provisions of Sections 9550 of the Civil Code to furnish a bond in connection with said Contract, as hereinafter set forth.

NOW, THEREFORE, WE, the undersigned Contractor, as Principal, and

NAME AND ADDRESS OF SURETY
duly authorized to transact business under the laws of the State of California, as Surety, hereinafter called "Surety," are held and firmly bound unto the City of Temecula, California, and all contractors, subcontractors, laborers, materialmen, and other persons employed in the performance of the aforesaid Contract and referred to in Division 4, Part 6, Title 3 of the Civil Code, in the penal sum of One Hundred Twenty Six Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty Dollars and Sixty -One Cents ($126,980.61), lawful money of the United States, said sum being not less than one hundred (100%) of the estimated amount payable by the said City of Temecula under the terms of the Contract, for the payment of which we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents.

THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION is such that, if said Contractor, or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns, or subcontractors, shall fail to pay for any materials, provisions, provender or other supplies, or teams, implements or machinery, used in, upon, for, or about the performance of the work under the Contract to be done, or for any work 11086-0004\3187303 v l .doc

or labor thereon of any kind or for amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Code with respect to such work or labor, as required by the provisions of Title 3 of Part 6 of Division 4 of the Civil Code, Public Work of Improvement, and its successor, and provided that the claimant shall have compiled with the provisions of said Civil Code, the Surety shall pay for the same in an amount not exceeding the sum specified in this bond, otherwise the above obligation shall be void.

As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified, costs and reasonable expenses and fees shall be included, including reasonable attorneys' fees incurred by the City of Temecula in successfully enforcing this obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment rendered.

This bond shall inure to the benefit of any and all persons, companies, and corporations entitled to file claims under Section 9100 of the Civil Code, so as to give a right of action to them or their assigns in any suit brought upon this bond, and shall also cover payment for any amounts required to be deducted, withheld, and paid over to the Employment Development Department from the wages of employees of the Contractor or its subcontractors pursuant to Section 13020 of the Unemployment Insurance Code.

The Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Contract, or to the work to be performed thereunder, or to the specifications accompanying the same, shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond. The Surety hereby waives notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Contract, or to the work to be performed thereunder, or to the specifications accompanying the same.
-19-
11086-0004\3187303 v l .doc

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on , 2025.
(Seal)

PRINCIPAL
By:

Name:

Title:

By:

Name:

Title:
4119 wo
By:

Name:

Title:

By:

Name:

Title:
[NOTE: If Party is a corporation, the corporation must be represented by two individuals who shall execute this Surety Bond on behalf of the corporation as follows: (A) one from the corporation's "Operational Group" (Chair of the Board, President, or a Vice -President) and; (B) one from the corporation's "Financial Group" (Secretary, Assistant Secretary, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer or Assistant Treasurer). See California Corporations Code section 313. A corporate resolution designating an individual officer to execute Surety Bonds on behalf of the corporation will be accepted. If the Party is a limited liability company, then the managing member shall represent the Party and execute the Surety Bond on behalf of the limited liability company. If the Party is a partnership, the managing partner shall execute the Surety Bond on behalf of the partnership.]

ATTACH NOTARIAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR BOTH THE SURETY AND

PRINCIPAL SIGNATURES
-20-
11086-0004\3187303 v l .doc

Aft
R
The Heart of Southern California
Wine Country
Eagle Soar Splash Pad Rehabilitation
Parks/Recreation Project
Project Description: Rehabilitation of existing splash pad components to restore operation, including replacement of failed subsurface fiber glass water tank with new reinforced concrete water tank which would enhance overall durability of the water storage system
Benefit: The Eagle Soar Spash Pad has been unusable since the Spring of 2025 due to failure of the existing underground fiberglass water storage tank. The project will replace this tank with a reinforced concrete tank which would restore operation to the facility.

Core Value: Healthy and Livable City
Project Status: New project. Project will begin in December of 2025 Department: - Account No. 210.265.999.5800.NEW
Level: I
Cost
Prior Years I 2024-25
Actuals Adiustec
City of Temecula
Fiscal Years 2026-30
Capital Improvement Program
Revised 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 1 Total Project Cost
5804-Construction 300,000 300,000
Total Expenditures 300,000 300,000
Source of Funds:
4110-Community Reinvestment Program
300,000
300,000
Total Funding
300,000
300,000
Future Operating & Maintenance Costs:

Total Operating Costs

Item No. 8

CITY OF TEMECULA

AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Ron Moreno, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: January 27, 2026
SUBJECT: Approve Initial Study and Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Approve Plans and Specifications for Ynez Road Improvements — Phase I Project, PW23-02
PREPARED BY: Hossein Ajideh, Principal Civil Engineer
Emalee Manning, Assistant Engineer II
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
ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION;

ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING
PROGRAM; AND APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS

IN SUBSTANTIAL FORM, ALL FOR THE YNEZ ROAD
IMPROVEMENTS — PHASE I PROJECT, PW23-02

2. Authorize the Director of Public Works/City Engineer to make minor refinements and revisions as necessary to the Plans and Specifications; and

3. Direct the Director of Public Works/City Engineer to file a Notice of Determination for the Project.

BACKGROUND: The Ynez Road Improvements — Phase I Project, PW23-02, is a circulation project that includes the design, environmental clearance, and construction for widening the east side of Ynez Road from Rancho Vista Road to Tierra Vista Road to two lanes.

The Project consists of full street improvements, including asphalt concrete pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalks, retaining wall, and streetlights. The Project scope also includes completion of all required environmental studies, preparation of the appropriate environmental document, and obtaining all necessary resource agency permits.

This Project supports the City core values in the Quality of Life Master Plan e.g., Transportation, Mobility and Connectivity.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: As required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an IS (Initial Study) was prepared for the Project. The IS identified no impact or less - than -significant impacts for the following environmental areas:
• Aesthetics
• Agriculture and Forestry Resources
• Air Quality
• Energy
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Hydrology and Water Quality
• Land Use and Planning
• Mineral Resources
• Noise
• Population and 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 level with the incorporation of mitigation measures, as summarized below:
• Biological Resources: A pre -construction nesting bird clearance survey is required prior to ground disturbance. In addition, a site survey shall be conducted prior to construction to further reduce potential impacts to a less -than -significant level. Mitigation is required and will be imposed for the 0.22-acre impact to riverine habitat includes management activities, such as the removal of non-native plant species within 0.66 acre of habitat located on a City -owned parcel (APN 961-440-012) along Temecula Creek. • Cultural Resources: A certified archaeologist shall monitor construction activities in coordination with the Pechanga Tribe. Mitigation measures include a pre -grading meeting with contractors, implementing grading monitoring at a frequency approved and coordinated with the Pechanga Tribe, and ensuring cultural resource protection, avoidance, and curation in the event of a resource discovery.
• Geology and Soils: A Paleontological Resource Management Plan (PRMP) is required. • Hazards and Hazardous Materials: A Hazardous Spill Prevention Plan shall be prepared by the Contractor and submitted to the City for approval prior to construction. The plan shall identify measures to minimize the likelihood of a spill, outline response actions if a spill occurs to prevent contamination of surface waters and provide for cleanup procedures.

Additionally, all asphalt materials removed from the project alignment shall be disposed in accordance with applicable regulatory standards.
• Tribal Cultural Resources: A Pechanga Tribal monitor shall be present during grading activities and shall have the authority, in consultation with the project archaeologist and the Pechanga Band of Indians and their designated monitors, to stop or redirect grading activities if tribal cultural resources are encountered. Mitigation also includes pre -grading coordination, construction monitoring, and implementation of protection, avoidance, and curation measures in the event of a discovery.
• Mandatory Finding of Significance: Implement the mitigation measures as described in the IS MND, including BIO-1 through BIO-3, CUL-1 through CUL-7, TCR-1 through TCR-11, GEO-1, HAZ-1, and HAZ-2.

Under Public Resources Code section 21080(c)(2), the IS determined that an MND is the appropriate environmental document for the Project. The MND includes mitigation measures that reduce identified potential impacts to a less -than -significant level, and an MMRP has been prepared pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081.6(a)(1).

The Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was posted on December 10, 2025.

The corresponding public review comment period also commenced on December 10, 2025, and concluded on January 9, 2026. Notification signage was placed on the Project site, and a notice was published in a local newspaper.

The City of Temecula received one written comment letter from the California Department of Transportation during the public review period and responded directly to the commenter to inform them that the City of Temecula Multi -Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update was incorporated and cited on Page 3 of the IS/MND document. No other comments were received regarding the IS/MND or its analysis. The Final IS/MND was provided to the commenting agency.

Staff recommend that the City Council approve the IS and adopt the MND for this Project, and direct Staff to file the NOD.

APPROVAL OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS IN SUBSTANTIAL FORM: Project plans and specifications are largely complete but it is possible that certain technical refinements or notes on plans could change. Accordingly, Staff recommend and request that the City Council approve the plans and specifications in substantial form, as presented here, with direction to and authorization for the Director of Public Works/City Engineer to make minor refinements or revisions as necessary.

FISCAL IMPACT: The Ynez Road Improvements — Phase I Project, PW23-02, is included in the City's Fiscal Years 2026-2030 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Budget and is funded with Development Impact Fees (DIF) — Street Improvements, Developer Contribution, grant funding 2023 RCTC Western Riverside County Regional call for projects using Measure A Regional Arterial (MARA), and grant funding California State Assembly Bill (AB) 102. Sufficient

funds are available in the project account to cover the MND fee of $3,093.75, which includes the $50.00 County filing fee.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration

2. Mitigated Monitoring Reporting Program

3. Notice of Determination

4. Resolution

5. Project Description

6. Project Location

YNEZ ROAD IMPROVEMENTS -PHASE I PROJECT
(BETWEEN RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND TIERRA VISTA ROAD)

DRAFT FINAL INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Lead Agency:

City of Temecula
Community Development Department
41000 Main Street
Temecula, CA 92590
(951) 694-6400
Project Proposed by
City of Temecula Public Works Department
41000 Main Street
Temecula, CA 92590
Prepared by:
0� EL�MT
2201 N. Grand Avenue #10098
Santa Ana, CA 92711-0098
November 2025
January 2026
1/1112026 Revision Note: Minor revisions were made to this Initial Study to accommodate public comments received during the public comment period of December 10, 2025 to January 9, 2026 as well as includes minor administrative technical edits to correct typographical errors. Added text is reflected in underlined shaded text (added text) and deletions are reflected in shaded strikeout text (49W9e494). None of the revisions constituted significant or new information that requires this Initial Study to be recirculated in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5.

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

Final Initial5tudy/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase I, PW23-02
"even"^~ 202SJanuarV2026

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents
1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE...................................................................................................................1

1.1 CONTENT AND FORMAT OF THE INITIAL STUDY.......................................................................... 2

1.2 INITIAL STUDY SUMMARY OF FINDINGS...................................................................................... 2

1.3 DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE.............................................................................3

1.4 CONTACT PERSON........................................................................................................................ 3 2 PROJECT SUMMARY AND ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION......................................................4

2.1 PROJECT SUMMARY.....................................................................................................................4

2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION.................................................................... 6 3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION...............................................................................................................10

3.1 INTRODUCTION AND SETTING.................................................................................................... 10

3.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................................................................... 10 4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS........................................................................................................18

4.1 AESTHETICS.................................................................................................................................18

4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES............................................................................... 22 4.3
AIR QUALITY................................................................................................................................ 25 4.4
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES............................................................................................................ 31 4.5
CULTURAL RESOURCES...............................................................................................................45

4.6 ENERGY.......................................................................................................................................51

4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS.................................................................................................................. 55 4.8
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS...................................................................................................61

4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.................................................................................... 65 4.10
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY............................................................................................ 69 4.11
LAND USE PLANNING..................................................................................................................74

4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES.................................................................................................................75

4.13 NOISE.......................................................................................................................................... 77 4.14
POPULATION AND HOUSING......................................................................................................83

4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES......................................................................................................................... 85 4.16
RECREATION............................................................................................................................... 87 4.17
TRANSPORTATION...................................................................................................................... 88 4.18
TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES...................................................................................................91

4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS...............................................................................................99

4.20 WILDFIRE...................................................................................................................................102

4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE............................................................................... 105
5 LIST OF PREPARERS..................................................................................................................108 6 REFERENCES............................................................................................................................109 Page i

Final Initial5tudy/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase I, PW23-02
N,,vengb . January 2026

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Surrounding Land Use...............................................................

Table 2: Rights -of -Way Acquisition.........................................................

Table 3: Regional Significance — Construction Emissions (Ibs/day) ........

Table 4: Localized Significance — Construction Emissions (Ibs/day) .......

Table 5: Effects of dBA Changes..............................................................

Table 6: Construction Noise Level by Phase (dBA).................................

Table 7: Existing/Existing + Project Scenario — Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)

LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1: Regional Vicinity ..............................................

Exhibit 2: Site Location — Aerial View ..............................

Exhibit 3: Ynez Road Phase 1 Street Improvements.......

Exhibit 4: Signing and Striping Plan .................................

LIST OF APPENDICES
Table of Contents
.................................................. 5
................................................12
................................................ 28
................................................ 29
................................................ 77
................................................ 80
................................................ 81
14 15
16 17
Appendix A Ynez Road Widening Project — Focused Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study, City of Temecula, CA, prepared by MD Acoustics, October 1, 2025 Appendix B-1 - Habitat Assessment and Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Consistency Analysis for the Ynez Road Improvements — Phase 1 Project Located in the City of Temecula, Riverside County, California, prepared by ELMT Consulting, November 2025
Appendix B-2 Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation Report, prepared by ELMT Consulting, November 2025
Appendix B-3 Jurisdictional Delineation for the Proposed Ynez Road Improvements Project —Phase 1 Project Located in the City of Temecula, Riverside County, California, prepared by ELMT Consulting, Updated October 2025
Appendix B-4 Ynez Road Expansion PW23-02 Oak Tree Review and Memorandum Update, Temecula, California, prepared by Dudek, January 31, 2025 Appendix C Cultural Resource Assessment Ynez Road Improvements Project, prepared by BCR Consulting, August 7, 2025
Appendix D Geotechnical Recommendations Report for the Proposed Widening of the East Side of Ynez Road between Station No. 101+99.21 and 117+61.56, Temecula, California, prepared by LGC, October, 16, 2024
Page ii

Final Initial5tudy/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
N,,.,,...gb . &151anuary 2 Table of Contents
Appendix E-1 Hydraulic Study for Ynez Road Improvements, prepared by JLC Engineering, July 2, 2024
Appendix E-2 Technical Memorandum for Water Quality Treatment for Ynez Road Extension, prepared by JLC Engineering, December 12, 2023.

Appendix F Ynez Road Widening Project— Noise Review Letter— Temecula, CA, prepared by MD Acoustics, August 1, 2025
Appendix G Ynez Road Widening Project Transportation Screening Assessment, prepared by Ganddini Group, Inc., July 9, 2025
Appendix H Project Plans
Appendix I Public Comments and Response to Comments
Page iii

Final Initial5tudy/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026

LIST OF ACRONYMS
Acronym Definition
AB 32
Assembly Bill 32
AB 52
Assembly Bill 52
ADA
Americans with Disabilities Act
AFY
Acre Feet Per Year
AQMP
Air Quality Management Plan
APE
Area of Potential Effect
APN
Assessor Parcel Number
List of Acronyms
APZ
Accident Potential Zone
BMPs
Best Management Practices
CARB
California Air Resources Board
CDFW
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA
California Environmental Quality Act
CF
cubic feet
City
City of Temecula
CMP
Congestion Management Program
CNPS
California Native Plant Society
CNEL
Community Noise Equivalent Level
CO
Carbon Monoxide
CRHR
California Register of Historic Places
dBA
A -Weighted Decibels
DIF
Development Impact Fees
DPM
Diesel Particulate Matter
EPA
Environmental Protection Agency
ERRP
Enhanced Recharge and Recovery Program
ESA
Endangered Species Act
FAR
Floor Area Ratio
FEMA
Federal Emergency Management Agency
FMMP
Farmland Mapping Management Program
GHG
Greenhouse Gas
GSP
Groundwater Sustainability Plan
gpd/acre
Gallons per Day per Acre
HAER
Historic American Engineering Record
HCP
Habitat Conservation Plan
ITE
Institute of Transportation Engineers
kBTU
thousand British thermal units
LID
Low Impact Design
LOS
Level of Service
LST
Localized Significance Threshold
MDAQMD
Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District
mgd
Millions of Gallons per Day
MLD
Most Likely Descendent
MMRP
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MRZ
Mineral Resources Zone
Page iv

Final Initial5tudy/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
List of Acronyms
MS4
Municipal Separate Storm Water Sewer System
MTCO2e
Metric Tons Carbon Dioxide Equivalent
NAHC
Native American Heritage Commission
NCCP
Natural Communities Conservation Plan
ND
Negative Declaration
NO2
Nitrogen Dioxide
NOx
Nitrogen Oxides
NPDES
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
PCE
Passenger Car -Equivalent
PM-2.5
Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Microns in Diameter
PM-10
Particulate Matter Less Than 10 Microns in Diameter
PRIMMP
Paleontological Resource Impact Mitigation Monitoring Program RWQCB
Regional Water Quality Control Board
SGMA
the Sustainability Groundwater Management Act
SF
Square Feet
SCAG
Southern California Association of Governments
SLF
Sacred Lands File
SRA
State Responsibility Area
SSC
Species of Special Concern
SWPPP
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
SWRCB
State Water Resources Control Board
TIA
Traffic Impact Analysis
TUMF
Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
Page v

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 1: Purpose and Scope
1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The City of Temecula (City) is proposing to improve 1,763 linear feet of the eastern half of Ynez Road between Tierra Vista Road to Rancho Vista Road in order to match the four -lane configuration and infrastructure that exists along Ynez Road north and south of this segment (proposed Project).

Improvements include widening the road and constructing a sidewalk, curb and gutter, streetlights, a Class II bike lane, relocation of utilities, installation of medians with turn pockets as well as grading outside of the right-of-way, on private property, on the east side to facilitate the construction and maintenance of a retaining wall to provide road stability due to the steep grade that exists on the north side of the alignment.

The City's 2005 General Plan identifies Ynez Road as a six -lane, north -south Principal Arterial in the City of Temecula between Winchester Road (north) and Rancho Vista Road (south). Between Rancho California Road, south of Winchester Road, and Rancho Vista Road, it only accommodates four Lanes with turn lanes. However, in the Project alignment between Tierra Vista (north) and Rancho Vista Road (south), the roadway is only striped for three lanes (one northbound lane and two southbound lanes) and provides for a turn lane at the intersections with Tierra Vista and Rancho Vista Road. In the existing condition, the lane constriction of this three -lane segment creates a "bottleneck" between Tierra Vista Road and Rancho Vista Road due to the lane restriction.

Therefore, the purpose of the Project is to provide for consistent traffic flow between Tierra Vista Road and Rancho Vista Road as identified in the City's General Plan.

To accommodate the expanded roadway and ensure compliance with Caltrans standards, the Project would impact various biological resources requiring mitigation as follows:
• Removal of 10 trees (Coast live oaks and California sycamores), in addition to the pruning of one Coast live oak. Four of the trees designated for removal and the one tree slated for pruning meet the City's definition of "heritage trees" based on trunk diameter and therefore require replacement. As such, the City would plant new live oaks and sycamores in nearby City parks.
• Approximately0.22 acre of permanent impacts to riparian/riverine habitatwould occur atthe intersection of Ynez Road and Rancho Vista Road. Mitigation consists of removing invasive species and placing a conservation easement over 0.66 acre of riparian/riverine habitat located within a City -owed parcel along Temecula Creek.

Permanent right-of-way easements are also required for portions of APN 944-290-17 and 944-290- 16 to facilitate the Project.

The California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), codified in the Public Resources Code (PRC), Section 21000 et seq., and the CEQA Guidelines, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq. of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), was established to require public agencies to consider and disclose the environmental implications of their actions (projects). CEQA was enacted in 1970 by the California Legislature to disclose to decision makers and the public the significant environmental effects of a proposed project and identify possible ways to avoid or minimize significant environmental effects

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 1: Purpose and Scope
of a project by requiring implementation of mitigation measures or recommending feasible alternatives. CEQA applies to all California governmental agencies at all levels.

As provided by PRC Section 21067, the public agency with the principal responsibility for approving a project that may have a significant effect upon the environment is considered the Lead Agency. The City of Temecula ("City"), as Lead Agency for the approval of the proposed Project ("Project"), is responsible for preparing environmental documentation in accordance with CEQA as amended to determine if approval of the discretionary actions requested and subsequent implementation of the proposed Project could have a significant impact on the environment. As defined by Section 15063 of the CEQA Guidelines, an Initial Study ("IS") is prepared primarily to provide the Lead Agency with information to use as the basis for determining whether an Environmental Impact Report ("EIR"), Negative Declaration ("ND"), or Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MND") would be appropriate for providing the necessary environmental documentation and clearance for the proposed Project.

1.1 CONTENT AND FORMAT OF THE INITIAL STUDY
The Initial Study is organized as follows:
• Section 1 - Purpose and Scope. This section introduces the scope of the proposed Project and the City's role in the project, as well as a brief summary of findings. • Section 2- Project Summary and Environmental Determination. This section summarizes the proposed Project and actions to be undertaken by the City. This section also provides the determination of the environmental document to be approved by the City. • Section 3 - Project Description. This section details the proposed Project components and general environmental setting.
• Section 4 - Environmental Impacts. This section contains the Environmental Checklist Form, as suggested in Section 15063(d)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, as amended, and includes a series of questions about the Project for each of the listed environmental topics. The Form evaluates whether or not there would be significant environmental effects associated with the development of the Project and provides mitigation measures, when required, to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. The form requires an analysis in 20 subject categories as well as Mandatory Findings of Significance.
• Section 5- List of Preparers. This section identifies the names and affiliations of the individuals who contributed to the preparation of the environmental evaluation. • Section 6 - References. This section identifies the references used in the preparation of this Initial Study.

1.2 INITIAL STUDY SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Based on the analysis in Section 4, there were no environmental factors that could potentially affect ("Potentially Significant") the environment following the imposition of mitigation measures that were identified to reduce some impacts to Less Than Significant. Therefore, the determination, based on the Initial Study, is that a Mitigated Negative Declaration is appropriate.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026

1.3 DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Section 1: Purpose and Scope
Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15150, an MND may incorporate by reference all or portions of another document which is a matter of public record or is generally available to the public. Where all or part of another document is incorporated by reference, the incorporated Language shall be considered to be set forth in full as part of the MND's text.

The following reports and/or studies are applicable to development of the Project Site and are hereby incorporated by reference:
• City of Temecula, General Plan 2005 (City, 2005). (Available at https://temeculaca.gov/345/General-Plan)
• City of Temecula Municipal Code. Available at: https://temeculaca.gov/260/MunicipalCode • City of Temecula, Multi -use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan, September 2016 (City, 2016). (Available at: https://temecu[ aca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/1971/Multi-use-Trails-and- Bikeways-Master-Plan-PDF?bidld=)
These documents are available for review at the City of Temecula, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590.

1.4 CONTACT PERSON
Any questions about the preparation of the Initial Study, its assumptions or its conclusions should be referred to the following:

The City of Temecula
Public Works Department
C/O Emalee Manning, Assistant Engineer II
41000 Main Street
Temecula, CA 92590
Phone: (951) 506-5171
Email: [email protected]

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
Section 2: Project Summary
2 PROJECT SUMMARY AND ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION

2.1 PROJECT SUMMARY

1. Project Title: Ynez Road Improvements — Phase I Project: PW23-02

2. Lead Agency Name: City of Temecula
Community Development Department
41000 Main Street
Temecula, CA 92590

3. Contact Person: Emalee Manning, Assistant Engineer II Phone: (951) 506-5171
Email: [email protected]

4. Project Location: Ynez Road between Tierra Vista Road and Rancho Vista Road Site Address: None assigned.

Acres: 0.5 new roadway
Topographic Quad (USGS 7.5"): Temecula and Murrieta
Topographic Quad Coordinates: T8S, R3W, Section 12
Latitude: 33129'55.26 N, Longitude: -1170 8'35.44"W

5. Project Sponsor's Name: City of Temecula Public Works Department Address Attn: Emalee Manning, Assistant Engineer II
41000 Main Street
Temecula, CA 92590

6. General Plan Designation: Public Roadway - Principal Arterial (6 Lanes divided)

7. Zoning Designation: Public Roadway

8. Description of Project:

The City of Temecula (City) is proposing to improve and widen 1,763 linear feet of the eastern half of Ynez Road between Tierra Vista Road to Rancho Vista Road in order to match the four -lane configuration and infrastructure that exists along Ynez Road north and south of this segment (proposed Project). Improvements include widening the road and constructing a sidewalk, curb and gutter, streetlights, a Class II bike lane, relocation of utilities, installation of medians with turn pockets as well as grading outside of the right-of-way, on private property, on the east side to facilitate the construction and maintenance of a retaining wall to provide road stability due to the steep grade that exists on the east side of the alignment. Permanent right-of-way easements are required for a portion of APN 944-290-17 and 944-290-16 to facilitate the Project. The Project will also provide mitigation for impacts to a drainage adjacent to the alignment.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026

9. Surrounding Land Uses:

Section 2: Project Summary
Surrounding land uses are identified in Table 1—Surrounding Land Use. The Project Site is currently a three -lane public roadway.

Table 1: Surrounding Land Use
Direction
Land Use Description
General Plan Land Use
Zoning
North
Rancho Highland Road
Public Roadway
Public Roadway
South
Rancho Vista Road
Public Roadway
Public Roadway
Specific Plan SP-2,
Rancho Highlands
Apartments and vacant
(SP-180), PO
East
land
PO (Professional Office)
(Professional
Office), M (Medium
Density Residential)
Greenbelt adjacent to
Specific Plan SP-2,
OS (adjacent), H High
the road, Townhomes
Rancho Highlands
Density Residential
West
and single family
(SP-180) with pocket
beyond) and LM (Low
residences west of the
of High Density
Medium Density beyond)
greenbelt
residential

10. Discretionary Project Approval Actions by City
Approval by City Council of Plans and Specifications, and authorization for the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for the Project.

11. Other Public Agency Permits or Approvals:

The following approvals or permits are required for the Project:

State Agencies:
• California Department of Fish and Wildlife: Streambed Alteration Agreement for 0.22 acre (1,970 linear feet) of impacts to an ephemeral drainage adjacent to the east side of Ynez Road.

12. California Native American Consultation
On July 24, 2025, the City of Temecula notified via email the following tribal entities of the Project and that the 30-day timeframe in which to request consultation would end within 30 days of receipt of the letter, in accordance with AB52. The following summarizes the results of the AB52 consultation.
• Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. Result: The Project is outside of the Tribe's traditional use area; defer to other tribes. Consultation concluded.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 2: Project Summary
• Pechanga Band of Indians. Result: Mitigation measures are incorporated into the Project to avoid/minimize unanticipated impacts to potential tribal resources. Consultation will be concluded prior to MND adoption.
• Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians. Result: No response. Consultation concluded. • Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians. Result: The tribe defers the Project to the Pechanga Band of Indians. Consultation concluded.
• Torres -Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians: Email received August 1, 2025 stating that the Project is not located in the Tribe's traditional area. Consultation concluded.

Mitigation measures to ensure resources to tribal cultural resources are minimized have been incorporated into this Initial Study.

2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code Section 21000-21178.1), this Initial Study has been prepared to analyze the proposed Project to determine any potential significant impacts upon the environment that would result from construction and implementation of the Project. This Initial Study is based on an Environmental Checklist Form (Form), as suggested in Section 15063(d)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, as amended, and includes a series of questions about the Project for each of the listed environmental topics. The Form evaluates whether or not there would be significant environmental effects associated with the development of the Project and provides mitigation measures, when required, to reduce impacts to a less than significant level.

In accordance with California Code of Regulations, Section 15063, this Initial Study is prepared by the Lead Agency in consultation with other jurisdictional agencies, to determine whether a Negative Declaration, Mitigated Negative Declaration, or an Environmental Impact Report is required for the proposed Project. The purpose of this Initial Study is to inform the decision -makers, affected agencies, and the public of potential environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed Project. The conclusion of this Initial Study is that a Mitigated Negative Declaration is appropriate. This document thus includes both the Initial Study and the Mitigated Negative Declaration.

2.2.1 Organization of Environmental Analysis
Section 4 provides a discussion of the potential environmental impacts of the Project. The evaluation of environmental impacts follows the questions provided in the Checklist provided in the CEQA Guidelines.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 2: Project Summary

2.2.2 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to the project (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis).

All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off site as well as on site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.

Once the Lead Agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant.
"Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
"Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." Mitigation measures are identified and explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures may be cross-referenced).

Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the Program EIR or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration. (Section 15063[c] [3][D]. In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier analyses used where they are available for review. b) Which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards and whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) The mitigation measures that were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project for effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated.

References and citations have been incorporated into the checklist references to identify information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
Section 2: Project Summary
Source listings and other sources used, or individuals contacted are cited in the discussion.

The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) The significance criteria or a threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant.

2.2.3 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
Based on the analysis in Section 4, the proposed Project could potentially affect ("Potentially Significant") the environmental factor(s) checked below. The following pages present a more detailed checklist and discussion of each environmental factor and identifies where mitigation measures would be necessary to reduce all impacts to less than significant levels. ❑
Aesthetics
❑
Agriculture and Forestry
❑
Resources
®
Biological Resources
®
Cultural Resources
❑
®
Geology and Soils
❑
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
❑
Hydrology and Water
❑
Land Use and Planning
❑
Quality
❑
Noise
❑
Population and Housing
❑
❑
Recreation
❑
Transportation
❑
Utilities and Service
❑
Wildfire
Systems
Air Quality
Energy
Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
Mineral Resources
Public Services
Tribal Cultural Resources
Mandatory Findings of
Significance

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026

2.2.4 Determination
On the basis of this initial evaluation, the following finding is made:

Section 2: Project Summary
The Proposed Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

Although the Proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the Project have been made X
by or agreed to by the Project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

The Proposed Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

The Proposed Project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed 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.

Although the Proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the Proposed Project, nothing further is required.

Signature
Name
Date
Title

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 3: Project Description
3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

3.1 INTRODUCTION AND SETTING
In general, the proposed Project is located approximately 0.3 mile east of Interstate 15 (1-15) and approximately 857 feet south of Rancho California Road (Exhibit 1: Regional Vicinity and Exhibit 2: Site Location: Aerial View, located at the end of this section).

The proposed Project limits are Ynez Road beginning at Tierra Vista Road at its northern limit, spanning approximately 1,763 feet to Rancho Vista Road at its southern limit.

The site is depicted on both the Murrieta and Temecula quadrangles of the United States Geological Survey's (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic map series in Section 12 of Township 8 South, Range 3 West, at approximately 33129'55.26"N latitude and -117* 8'35.44"W longitude.

Land uses along the Project alignment include single family residential on the west side, and multi- family to vacant on the east side of the road segment.

The City's General Plan identifies Ynez Road as a six -lane, north -south Principal Arterial in the City of Temecula between Winchester Road (north) and Rancho Vista Road (south). Between Rancho California Road, south of Winchester Road, and Rancho Vista Road, Ynez Road accommodates four traffic lanes with turn lanes.

However, in the Project alignment between Tierra Vista, south of Rancho California Road, and Rancho Vista Road, the roadway is only striped for three lanes (one northbound lane and two southbound lanes) and provides for turn lanes at the intersections with Tierra Vista and Rancho Vista Road. While the west side of Ynez Road along the Project alignment is built out with sidewalk, curb and gutter and streetlights, the east side is one lane, with an asphalt curb and a dirt/unimproved raised shoulder.

Beyond the road shoulder, the topography slopes steeply (2:1) to between 15 and 20 feet below the edge of the unimproved raised shoulder. Approximately 40 feet beyond the slope to the east, a drainage parallels the Ynez Road alignment within the vacant parcels 944-290-017 and -016, outletting under Rancho Vista Road. The outlet at Rancho Visa Road is heavily vegetated and includes various oak trees. A cluster of oak trees also exists along the slope of the area of the proposed retaining wall.

3.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The City is proposing to improve 1,763 linear feet of the eastern half of Ynez Road between Tierra Vista Road to Rancho Vista Road in order to match the four -lane configuration and infrastructure that exists along Ynez Road north and south of this segment.

Improvements will include the following and are depicted on Exhibit 3: Ynez Road Phase 1 Street Improvements and Exhibit 4: Signingand Striping Plan. A complete set of Project plans is located in Appendix H —Project Plans.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
Section 3: Project Description
• Remove the existing asphalt curb and earthen shoulder, approximately 28 feet. • Remove existing road striping in all lanes.
• Sawcut and grind existing pavement on the north bound direction of the Ynez Road. • Grading the slope and installation of a retaining wall along the road slope (within APNs 944- 290-017 and 944-290-016). The slope grading would occur along 927 linear feet, varying from 0 feet wide by 68 feet wide, and involve approximately 6,020 cubic yards. • Removal of 10 of the 18 trees and pruning of one tree (Coast live oaks and California sycamores). The trees to be removed and pruned are located along Ynez Road at the location of the proposed slope and retaining wall.
• Install the slope grading, retaining wall, and a maintenance access road at Rancho Vista Road/Ynez Road intersection, which would remove approximately 0.22 acre of riparian/riverine resources.
• Install a guardrail and tubular steel fence along the north side of Ynez Road. • Add pavement section that would vary between 28 feet and 46 feet wide. • Construct a concrete raised median to delineate the turn pocket for Tierra Vista Road, and striped median for the turn pocket at Rancho Vista.
• Stripe the new roadway for four lanes with turn pockets and Class II Bike Lanes on both the east and west sides of the road (refer to Exhibit 4).
• Installing new curbs and gutters and sidewalk along the east side of the road. • Install new streetlights on east side of the roadway. • Relocating utilities that conflict with the planned improvements. • Provide ADA compliant access ramp at the northeast corner of the Ynez Road and Rancho Vista Road Intersection.

3.2.1 Construction Scenario
Construction is anticipated to occur over 12 months beginning in mid 2026. Construction activities include site mobilization; demolition; grading; installation of asphalt, concrete, and retaining wall; relocation of utilities; and traffic striping.

3.2.2 Potential Construction Equipment
Project construction will require the use of heavy equipment. While the final types and numbers of construction equipment will be determined by the construction contractor, examples of types of equipment that will be utilized for this work include but are not limited to:
• Graders
• Rubbert Tired Dozes
• Scrapers
• Crawler Tractor

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 3: Project Description

3.2.3 Rights -of -Way Acquisition
The Project will generally be constructed within the City's rights -of -way (ROW). However, additional permanent easements on private land will be required to grade the slope adjacent to the road, to install a retaining wall, maintenance of the retaining wall, ingress and egress for maintenance, access ramp, 24"-wide concrete ditch along retaining wall for drainage, and erosion control elements, including installation of riprap for stabilization and protection of street improvements and private property on which retaining wall will be installed. The parcels are identified in Table 2:

Rights -of -Way Acquisition.

Table 2: Rights -of -Way Acquisition
APN Approximate Area Type:

Temporary / Permanent

0.78 acre
944-290-017 Permanent Easement
617 LF by 74 wide
944-290-016 0.47 acre Permanent Easement
387 LF by 50 wide

3.2.4 Utility Relocation and Construction
Utilities in the roadway alignment of improvements include communications vaults, a fire hydrant and water/sewer manholes. The respective utilities would be relocated outside of the area of the improvements but within the right-of-way.

New utilities in the roadway include three new streetlights, LS-3 68W LED lamps. New streetlights would include streetlights equipped with light -emitting diode (LED) lamps.

3.2.5 Construction Staging and Access
All equipment will remain on -site throughout the Project. Equipment staging and material storage will most likely occur within the existing right-of-way, and/or permanent easement area or the contractor may rent parking lots or vacant lots within the Project vicinity.

3.2.6 Traffic Control During Construction
Traffic control during Project construction shall occur in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Traffic control would be conducted in accordance with State and federal guidelines which provide for emergency vehicle access through the construction zone when required.

3.2.7 Best Management Practices During Construction
The following best management practices are incorporated into the Project construction specifications to identity how the Project would conform to Federal, State, and Local regulations:

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2 Section 3: Project Description
• Construction Water QualityControl. The Project would disturb approximately 1.7 acres along the roadway and approximately 1.25 acres along the east slope of the road. Construction projects that disturb 1 acre of land or more are required to obtain coverage under the NPDES General Permit for Construction Activities (General Construction Permit), which requires the applicant to file a notice of intent (NOI) to discharge stormwater and to prepare and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP includes an overview of the Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would be implemented to prevent soil erosion and discharge of other construction -related pollutants that could contaminate nearbywater resources. The Project is more than 1-acre, therefore, the contractor is required to provide an SWPPP. The SWPPP will also address post -construction measures for water quality protection.
• Oak Tree Protection. For the oak trees that will not be removed, a protective zone would be established around the tree and a high density polyethylene fence installed to delineate the zone; laminated signs saying "Keep Out, Tree Protection Area" would be installed on the fence.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
Niguel
_�J
y! Saki Clemente
hlurr
Section 3: Project Description
x uc.a iF•�
r
Beaumont Banning
o Valley
' . %
I
r
�►]. _�1 243 f
41 �
� •
�
Hemst l
Sun City -0
' •
ar
r ►' �.
.1iV
r 371
f ,
iIla
Fr _ O — -
Fallbrook �Y
Camp Fendlmon
Marine Corps 0a:
u 7, -
+• r_r
0Ceaiide Vista
Sa\Marc
�Encinita: r ter" Rnmona
0 2.5 5 10
fir, ; LT Miles
Source: World Street Map, Riverside County

YNEZ ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
Regional Vicinity

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase I, PW23-02
November 02_5 JanuorV 2026 Section 3: Project Description N 0 75 150 300 YNEZ ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
IT
I US Feel Proiect Site
Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery; Riverside County Exhibit 2

r
YNEZ ROAD PHASE I STREET hVt-r?CCVLMENTS EXHIBIT
uw wresva•� � �
snaw«r
i
C
i
` �I "�*'o" i wrrrs.sonu � wrvwwsoau
s>t r r
re F' is u' e.. r i �i or• r
/J �u
nsari.
�.rwk
SECTION A SECwN S
..x crs
�o
_ ,wrraw saesr.rwcwenrt
N
ALA. I_ I, M 1 Not to Scale
Source: Proactive Engineering West
a. II

YNEZ ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
Phase 1 Street Improvements
Exhibit 3

P Ili APN 944330-048 �®in�a
® I/ ew�°emmonr APN 944-290-016
_
T �T ■■er■ ior■r, u� au ek vrrol,Po, cux O "poi ,, mPar CO. El" I
- tr ¢w
¢.
,P
,a °�uri°N'e_ wmmr :o or vm w cu „r eP=;oew :� um.� w r�,m um " ©merw. ecrcrms rcre canna ov rw-rscw
® ee-va erc w,e s:�,eivv w�em txre crns msemr
Q ms r se¢o uwr- awl eea a wwrc'o, .gym ns imrzo rat varc Q xa' rrx t' rceus nrzs' aw z' mtsEr mar c�
E — _
G - �6 - — - ...nn5
Underground Service Alert
o
rcu A ] zwrsz wso
®� ,`ee s e R' ayssw,u�r-�sm..mv.s,�cl +vre rum."s sn"xi m sa r _ © auereiz 1 i mZ rFuar ae-aw x'um rya ucraws srwauxo w.w uw '.xcrsmwvur
E - _ ,E� ,aw
�
1-800 422�-3
©p rau t aalasu mays s'rma.m �s.o
® x rvuvrxr wmmmr snv arr ever rm nnae rvrnm
rn: r le r�q 1 >res [ (s' nv,.J �aCNY££NCilNEER1NG
�namrasiurcs:;er,,awe,eu
0w"rut eem urzra-" s,e;o rz�
DETAIL "a eoN5ul rANrSW£Sr,ING
25 LIMIT LINEAND LOOP INSTALLA TIOIJ DETAIL
"
iOF
RECORD
.a
r tea,
E e
nEPrErc nRn M e.
n
oo w HOEo rcl. neno
P ... on
CITY TEMECULA CEPARINENT OF PUBLIC�k:
g rca
C-7
YNEZ ROAD IMPRGI/fMENTS-PHASE I PkGJECT, PW23-02
oPEcmR or Pus"e',wRns
/arc
t l
YNEZ ROAD STA 101,99.21 TG STA 117,0.65
C P
2na/e`
Or N° e ,zavas
cE Iva.
�•;Pr

SIGNING AND STRIPING PLAN
cETBcr 74
WW L LMT A Not -to -Scale
0© cnNa1IT111
Source, Proactive

YNEZ ROAD WIDENING
Signing and Striping Plan
Exhibit 4

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
AJ.PveR"^r 20255JanuarV2026 Section 4.1: Aesthetics
4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

4.1 AESTHETICS

4.1.1 Environmental Setting
The environmental setting is described in Section 3.1 of this document. In general, the proposed Project is located approximately 0.3 mile east of Interstate 15 (1-15) and approximately 857 feet south of Rancho California Road (Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 2).

The proposed Project limits are Ynez Road beginning at Tierra Vista Road at its northern limit, spanning approximately 1,763 feet to Rancho Vista Road at its southern limit. Ynez Road in this segment consists of a paved, three -lane roadway, with the west side being fully improved with sidewalk curb and gutter and street lights, whereas the east side contains an asphalt curb with a dirt shoulder, and a steep (2:1) slope between 15 and 20 feet below the roadway.

Land uses along the Project alignment include single family residential on the west side, and multi- family to vacant on the east side of the road segment. The vacant parcel is bisected by a drainage that is heavily vegetated. Various species of oak trees line the drainage, and several clumps of oak trees are located within the proposed Project alignment.

4.1.2 Impact Analysis
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No Impact or

CEQATHRESHOLDS
Significant
with
Significant
Does Not
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Apply
Incorporated
I. AESTHETICS: Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
X
vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
X
outcroppings, and historic buildingswithin a state
scenic highway?
c) In nonurbanized areas, substantially degrade
the existing visual character or quality of public
views of the site and its surroundings? (Public
views are those that are experienced from a
X
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?

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
Section 4.1: Aesthetics
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
X
views in the area?
Discussion
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less Than Significant Impact. The CEQA Guidelines do not provide a definition of what constitutes a "scenic vista" or "scenic resource" or a reference as to from what vantage point(s) the scenic vista and/or resource, if any, should be observed. Scenic resources are typically landscape patterns and features that are visually or aesthetically pleasing and that contribute affirmativelyto the definition of a distinct community or region, such as trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings.

A scenic vista is generally identified as a public vantage viewpoint that provides expansive views of a highly valued landscape for the benefit of the general public. Common examples may include a public vantage point that provides expansive views of undeveloped hillsides, ridgelines, and open space areas that provide a unifyingvisual backdrop to a developed area.

The Project would encroach upon portions of undeveloped vacant land on the north side of Ynez Road where a drainage, trees and native vegetation exists. The Project would introduce paved surfaces and related improvements and remove some of native vegetation and trees in the vicinity of the alignment and at the Rancho Vista Road intersection. However, residential development surrounds the Project alignment and in the immediate vicinity.

There are no significant viewsheds or scenic vistas that would be impacted by the Project development. The presence of construction equipment would be temporary and would not substantially impact the viewshed. The Project, once constructed, would be consistent with the surrounding development and views of the existing condition and would not be significantly obstructed. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? Less Than Significant Impact. The Project is not located within a designated scenic highway corridor. The Project is located near Interstate 15 (1-15), which is not designated by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) as an Eligible State Scenic Highway; however, or officially designated as a State Scenic Highway in the Project vicinity. There are no scenic highways or local scenic roadways in the Project vicinity. Due to the distance and topography, the Project would not be visible to those traveling on 1-15.

The proposed Project involves the removal of 10 trees, including Coast live oaks and California sycamores, and the pruning of one Coast live oak. Four of the trees designated for removal and the one tree slated for pruning meet the City's definition of "heritage trees" based on trunk diameter and therefore require replacement. Consistent with the City's

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
Section 4.1: Aesthetics
Municipal Code, Article II "Cutting, Removal, Relocation, or Encroachment Upon Protected Trees," the Project is not required to obtain a permit but does include the planting of new live oaks and sycamores in a nearby City park.

For the oak trees that will not be removed, a protective zone will be established around the tree during construction with a high -density polyethylene fence installed to delineate the zone. Laminated signs saying "Keep Out, Tree Protection Area" will be installed on the fence. These measures aim to avoid an environmental impact of the Project and ensure compliance with relevant regulations.

Therefore, while the Project would remove oak trees in the Project alignment, the City Project includes compliance with the City municipal code to replace the trees. Additionally, the Project alignment of Ynez Road is not a scenic highway, local scenic roadway, norwould the Project be visible from any scenic highways in the vicinity. The impacts would be less than significant.
c) In non urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? Less than Significant Impact. The proposed Project is located in a primarily urbanized area.

During construction, the Project would result in a temporary change of appearance along the alignment. The Project is consistentwith existing zoning and does not propose to change the zoning, thus, the Project will not create a significant impact to the visual character of the area. Therefore, impacts after construction would be less than significant. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Less than Significant Impact. During construction, Project construction lighting would be directed to the work site to avoid unnecessary spill and would provide a level of lighting that is appropriate for work and safety for workers. Construction lighting would be shielded and/or directed away from sensitive receptors to minimize lighting impacts during construction.

The proposed roadway expansion includes the installation of new streetlights on the east side of the roadway. These new streetlights will be equipped with light -emitting diode (LED) Lamps. along the north side of Ynez Road, which could generate additional light and glare in the area. However, the lighting would be directed downward to confine potential glare.

Project design would conform to the City's Municipal Code and County of Riverside Palomar Light Pollution Ordinance No. 655. Therefore, impacts from lighting and glare would be less than significant.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
AJ.PveR"^ '^'r January 2026

4.1.3 Mitigation Measures:

Section 4.1: Aesthetics
The proposed Project involves the removal of 10 trees, including Coast live oaks and California sycamores, and the pruning of one Coast live oak. Four of the trees designated for removal and the one tree slated for pruning meetthe City's definition of "heritage trees" based on trunkdiameter and therefore require replacement. As part of the Project, the City is complying with its ordinance to replace trees in City parks. Because the Project includes compliance with a City ordinance that addresses potential impacts, no mitigation for aesthetic impacts is required.

4.1.4 Conclusion
As the proposed Project is designed in accordance with City ordinances, including incorporating mitigation requirements for tree removal as part of the Project, impacts to Aesthetics would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
AJ.PveR"^r 20255knuarV2026 Section 4.2: Agriculture and Forestry

4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES

4.2.1 Impact Analysis
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No Impact or

CEQATHRESHOLDS
Significant
with
Significant
Does Not
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Apply
Incorporated
II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES:

In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regardingthe state's inventory of forest land, includingthe Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board.

Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland),
as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
X
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural
use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use
X
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
X
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
X
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
X
non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land
to non -forest use?

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.2: Agriculture and Forestry Discussion
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use? No Impact. According to the California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP), the Project site is identified as Urban and Built -Up Land. Therefore, there would be no potential impacts associated with conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use, and no mitigation would be required.
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impacts. The Project site is not subject to any Williamson Act contracts. No impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required.
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))?
No Impact. No part of the Project site or its surroundings are designated as timberland. No impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required.
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? No Impact. There is no designated forest land on the Project site, and the proposed Project would therefore not affect forests during construction or operations. No impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required.
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use or the conversion of forest land to non -forest use?
No Impact. According to the California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP), the Project site is identified as Urban and Built -Up Land. The California Dept of Conservation defines Urban and Built -Up Land as land that is occupied by structures with a building density of at least 1 unit to 1.4.5 acres, or approximately 6 structures to a 10-acre parcel. Common examples include residential, industrial, commercial, institutional facilities, cemeteries, airports, golf courses, sanitary landfills,

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
AJ.PveR"^r 20255knuarV2026 Section 4.2: Agriculture and Forestry sewage treatment, and water control structures. The proposed Project is also consistent with its current zoning, which is Public Roadway. As discussed under Thresholds 11.2 (b) through 11.2(d), the proposed Project would not involve other changes in the existing environment that would result in conversion of forest land to non -forest land. Therefore, there are no impacts associated with changes in the environment which could result in conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use, and no mitigation would be required.

4.2.2 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures associated with impacts to Agriculture and Forestry Resources apply to the proposed Project.

4.2.3 Conclusion
There are no potential impacts of the proposed Project associated with Agriculture and Forestry Services, and no mitigation would be required.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.3: Air Quality

4.3 AIR QUALITY
Information for this section is derived from an air quality analysis prepared for the proposed Project to evaluate the potential impacts to air quality (Appendix A — Ynez Road Widening Project — Focused Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study, City of Temecula, CA, prepared by MD Acoustics, October 1, 2025).

4.3.1 Regulatory Setting
Air pollutants are regulated at the national, state, and air basin level; each agency has a different level of regulatory responsibility. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates at the national level under the Clean Air Act of 1970. The California Air Resources Board (ARB) regulates at the state level. The State is currently divided into 15 air basins, and each air basin is regulated on a regional level.

There are six common air pollutants, called criteria pollutants, which were identified from the provisions of the Clean Air Act of 1970.
• Ozone
• Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)
• Lead
• Particulate Matter (PM10 and PM2.5)
• Carbon Monoxide (CO)
• Sulfur Dioxide (S02)
The US environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) designate air basins where ambient air quality standards are exceeded as "nonattainment" areas. If standards are met, the area is designated as an "attainment" area. If there is inadequate or inconclusive data to make a definitive attainment designation, they are considered "unclassified." National nonattainment areas are further designated as marginal, moderate, serious, severe, or extreme as a function of deviation from standards.

The Project is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which includes Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Riverside, and Orange counties. Air quality in the SCAB is regulated by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). As a regional agency, the SCAQMD works directly with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), County transportation commissions, and local governments, as well as cooperates actively with all federal and state government agencies.

4.3.2 Environmental Setting
The SCAB is characterized by a semi -arid climate with warm summers, mild winters, and moderate humidity. The SCAB is surrounded by mountains (San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and Santa Ana Mountains), which act as barriers to the east, inhibiting the eastward transport of pollutants and

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
Section 4.3: Air Quality
contributing to their buildup. The air quality is heavily influenced by both natural factors, like wind patterns and temperature inversions, and human -caused emissions from dense populations, traffic, and industry. The topography and meteorology of the SCAB, particularlythe presence of marine and radiation inversions, contribute to the accumulation and trapping of pollutants, leading to potential air quality issues.

The SCAB has a semi -arid climate with warm summers and mild winters. Rainfall is infrequent, and the region experiences moderate onshore breezes during the day and moderate humidity.

Based on temperature and precipitation patterns for Temecula, July is typicallythe warmest month, and December is typically the coolest month. Rainfall in the Project area varies considerably in both time and space. Almost all the annual rainfall comes from the fringes of mid -latitude storms from Late November to early April, with summers being almost completely dry. The average rainfall for Temecula is approximately 14 inches annually.

4.3.3 Impact Analysis
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Impact or

CEQATHRESHOLDS
Significant
with
Significant
Does
s Not Apply
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
III. AIR QUALITY:

Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.

Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
X
applicable air quality plan?
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase
of any criteria pollutant for which the project region
X
is non -attainment under an applicable federal or
state ambient air quality standard?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
X
pollutant concentrations?
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leadingto
odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of
X
people?
Discussion
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less than Significant Impact. The SCAQMD is directly responsible for reducing emissions from stationary (area and point), mobile, and indirect sources. It has responded to this

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
Section 4.3: Air Quality
requirement by preparing a sequence of Air Quality Management Plans (AQMPs). An AQMP establishes a program of rules and regulations directed at attaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards and California Ambient Air Quality Standards. The regional plan applicable to the proposed Project is the 2022 SCAQMD AQMP.

SCAG is the regional planning agency for Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Imperial Counties, and addresses regional issues relating to transportation, economy, community development, and environment. Regarding air quality planning, SCAG has prepared the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), a long-range transportation plan that uses growth forecasts to project trends over a 20-year period to identify regional transportation strategies to address mobility needs.

These growth forecasts form the basis for the land use and transportation control portions of the AQMP. These documents are utilized in the preparation of the air quality forecasts and consistency analysis included in the AQMP. Both the RTP/SCS and AQMP are based, in part, on projections originating with County and City General Plans.

The two principal criteria for conformance to the AQMP are:
(1) whether a project would result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations, cause or contribute to new violations, or delay timely attainment of air quality standards; and
(2) whether a project would exceed the assumptions in the AQMP.

With respect to the first criterion, the analyses described under response III.b, below, demonstrate that the Project would not generate short-term or long-term emissions that could potentially cause an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations; cause or contribute to new violations; or delay timely attainment of air quality standards.

With respect to the second criterion, the proposed Project is improving and widening a roadway and would not result in population or employment increases and, therefore, would not exceed the growth projections assumptions in the AQMP. In addition, the proposed Project would be consistent with the City General Plan Circulation Element roadway design guidelines. The Project would support the City General Plan Policy 3.3 by providing a Class II bicycle lane along the Project alignment.

Because the Project is consistent with the City's General Plan and the growth assumptions used in developing the AQMP, pursuant to SCAQMD guidelines, the proposed Project is considered consistent with the region's AQMP. As such, proposed Project -related emissions are accounted for in the AQMP, which is crafted to bring the basin into attainment for all criteria pollutants. Accordingly, the proposed Project would be consistent with the emissions projections in the AQMP, thus resulting in a less than significant impact. 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?

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
Section 4.3: Air Quality
Less than Significant Impact. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3), the SCAQMD's approach for assessing cumulative impacts is based on the AQMP forecasts of attainment of ambient air quality standards in accordance with the requirements of the federal and State Clean Air Acts. If a project is not consistent with the AQMP, which is intended to bring the SCAB into attainment for all criteria pollutants, that project can be considered cumulatively considerable. Additionally, if the mass regional emissions calculated for a project exceed the applicable SCAQMD daily significance thresholds that are designed to assist the region in attaining the applicable state and national ambient air quality standards, that project can be considered cumulatively considerable.

Construction Impacts
The air quality analysis in Appendix A estimated construction emissions, as shown in Table 3: Regional Significance - Construction Emissions (lbs/day).

Table 3: Regional Significance - Construction Emissions (lbs/day) Activity
Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
vOC
NOx
CO
S02
PM10
PM2.5
Grubbing & Land Clearing
On -Site'

0.46 4.04

4.49 0.01

0.42 0.22
Off-Site3

0.03 0.03

0.41 0.00

0.10 0.02
Total

0.49 4.07

4.90 0.01

0.52 0.24
Grading & Excavation
On -Site'

3.50 29.90

36.60 0.07

2.76 1.36
Off-Site3

0.16 0.18

2.70 0.00

0.50 0.11
Total

3.66 30.08

39.30 0.07

3.26 1.47
Drainage, Utilities, & Sub -Grade
On -Site'

1.79 16.00

19.70 0.04

1.24 0.64
Off-Site3

0.11 0.10

1.80 0.00

0.33 0.08
Total

1.90 16.10

21.50 0.04

1.57 0.72
Paving
On -Site'

0.81 7.53

11.70 0.02

0.30 0.28
Off-Site3

0.08 0.39

1.36 0.00

0.32 0.08
Total
1 0.89

7.92 1 13.06
1 0.02
1 0.62
1 0.36
SCAQMD Thresholds
75 100
550
150
150
55 Exceeds Thresholds
No
No
No
No
No
No
Notes:

Source: CalEEMod Version 2022.1.1.29
On -site emissions from equipment operated on -site that is not operated on public roads. a Off -site emissions from equipment operated on public roads. °Architectural coatings and paving phases may overlap.

Emissions were calculated utilizing the SCAQMD "Fact Sheet for Applying CalEEMod to Localized Significance Thresholds." As shown in Table 3, construction impacts would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds, and therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
Operational Impacts
Section 4.3: Air Quality
The Project proposes widening and improving 1,763 linear feet of the eastern half of Ynez Road between Tierra Vista Road to Rancho Vista Road in order to match the four -lane configuration and infrastructure that exists along Ynez Road north and south of this segment.

In the existing condition, the lane constriction of this three -lane segment creates a "bottleneck" between Tierra Vista Road and Rancho Vista Road due to the lane restriction.

Therefore, the purpose of the Project is to provide for consistent traffic flow between Tierra Vista Road and Rancho Vista Road as envisioned by the City's General Plan. As such, because the Project would serve the existing traffic flow between two intersections, it would not increase or promote the increase of additional traffic within the additional lanes beyond the existing traffic experienced on Ynez Road. Therefore, the Project would not contribute 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.
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less Than Significant Impact. A sensitive receptor is defined by SCAQMD as any residence including private homes, condominiums, apartments, and living quarters, schools, preschools, daycare centers and health facilities such as hospitals or retirement and nursing homes. Also included are long term care hospitals, hospices, prisons, and dormitories or similar live-in housing.

The Project would widen the eastern lanes of Ynez Road. Single family residential exists on the west side of Ynez Road. The air quality assessment in Appendix A evaluated construction emissions, as shown in Table 4: Localized Significance — Construction Emissions (lbs/day).

Table 4: Localized Significance — Construction Emissions (lbs/day) Phase
On -Site Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)'
NOx
CO
PM10
PM2.5
Grubbing & Land Clearing

4.04 4.49

0.42 0.22
Grading & Excavation

29.90 36.60

2.76 1.36
Drainage, Utilities, & Sub -Grade

16.00 19.70

1.24 0.64
Paving

7.53 11.70

0.30 0.28
SCAQMD Threshold for 25 meters (82 feet) or less'
234
1,100
7 4
Exceeds Threshold?
No
No
No
No
Notes:
'Source: Calculated from CalEEMod and SCAQMD's Mass Rate Look -up Tables for two acres in the Temecula Valley Source Receptor Area (SRA 26). Project will disturb a maximum of 4.0 acres per day (see Table 7).
'The nearest sensitive receptor is located 20 meters southwest; therefore, the 25-meter threshold has been used.

The evaluation in Table 4 identified that none of the criteria pollutants would exceed the localized significance threshold emission at the nearest sensitive receptors along the western Project alignment.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
Section 4.3: Air Quality
Because the Project would add lanes to alleviate a bottleneck between two intersections, the Project is not anticipated to add newtraffic to the area. Therefore, operational emissions are anticipated to remain similarto existing conditions. Additionally, the Project mayactually improve emissions along the roadway because the additional lanes would decrease idling times of cars and trucks due to the addition of through lanes.

Thus, a less than significant impact to sensitive receptors during operational activity is expected.
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project could produce odors during proposed construction activities, resulting from heavy diesel equipment exhaust and application of asphalt; however, standard construction practices would minimize the odor emissions and their associated impacts. The increase of construction odors would be minimal, as vehicle exhaust is already prevalent in the area due to its proximity to 1-15. Furthermore, any odors emitted during construction would be temporary, short-term, and intermittent in nature and would cease upon the completion of the respective phase of construction. Therefore, odor impacts from the construction of the Project would be less than significant due to the duration of exposure. The Project proposes widening and improving an existing roadway.

Odors generated by traffic on the improved portion of Ynez Road would be similar to existing odors from traffic on streets and highways in the area. Therefore, long-term operation of the Project would not result in a change to existing odors in the Project vicinity, and there would be no impact.

4.3.4 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures associated with impacts to Air Quality apply to the proposed Project.

4.3.5 Conclusion
There are less than significant impacts of the proposed Project associated with Air Quality, and no mitigation would be required.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.4: Biological Resources

4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Several biological surveys were completed to determine potential impacts to biological resources associated with the development of the proposed Project and are provided as follows:
• Appendix B-1 - Habitat Assessment and Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Consistency Analysis for the Ynez Road Improvements - Phase 1 Project Located in the City of Temecula, Riverside County, California, prepared by ELMT Consulting, November 2025
• Appendix B-2 - Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation Report, prepared by ELMT Consulting, November 2025
• Appendix B-3 - Jurisdictional Delineation for the Proposed Ynez Road Improvements Project -Phase 1 Project Located in the City of Temecula, Riverside County, California, prepared by ELMT Consulting, updated October 2025
• Appendix B-4 - Ynez Road Expansion PW23-02 Oak Tree Review and Memorandum Update, Temecula, California, prepared by Dudek, January 31, 2025

4.4.1 Regulatory Setting
Given the local environment, regulations governing biological resources for this Project include the following:

Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918 (16 U.S.0 703-711) provides protection for nesting birds that are both residents and migrants regardless of whether they are considered sensitive by resource agencies. The MBTA makes it unlawfulto take, possess, buy, sell, purchase, or barter any migratory bird listed under 50 CFR 10, including feathers or other parts, nests, eggs, or products, except as allowed by implementing regulations (50 CFR 21). The direct injury or death of a migratory bird, due to construction activities or other construction -related disturbance that causes nest abandonment, nestling abandonment, or forced fledging would be considered a take under federal law. The USFWS, in coordination with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) administers the MBTA. CDFW's authoritative nexus to MBTA is provided in California Fish and Game Code (FGC) Section 3503.5 which protects all birds of prey and their nests and FGC Section 3800 which protects all non -game birds that occur naturally in the State.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.4: Biological Resources
Endangered Species Act - Federal
The United States Endangered Species Act that was established in 1973 provides protections for fish, wildlife, and plants that are listed as threatened or endangered; provides for adding species to and removing them from the list of threatened and endangered species, and for preparing and implementing plans for their recovery; provides for interagency cooperation to avoid take of listed species and for issuing permits for otherwise prohibited activities; provides for cooperation with States, including authorization of financial assistance; and implements the provisions of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna. The USFWS administers the federal Endangered Species Act.

California Endangered Species Act
The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) is a California environmental law that conserves and protects plant and animal species at risk of extinction. Originally enacted in 1970, CESA was repealed and replaced by an updated version in 1984 and amended in 1997. Plant and animal species may be designated threatened or endangered under CESA after a formal listing process by the California Fish and Game Commission. Approximately 250 species are currently listed under CESA. A CESA-listed species, or any part or product of the plant or animal, may not be imported into the State, exported out of the State, "taken" (i.e., killed), possessed, purchased, or sold without proper authorization. Implementation of CESA has reduced and avoided impacts to California's most imperiled plants and animals, has protected hundreds of thousands of acres of vital habitat, and has led to a greater scientific understanding of California's incredible biodiversity.

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) works with agencies, organizations, and other interested persons to study, protect, and preserve CESA-listed species and their habitats. CDFW also conducts scientific reviews of species petitioned for listing under CESA, administers regulatory permitting programs to authorize take of listed species, maintains an extensive database of listed species occurrences, and conducts periodic reviews of listed species to determine if the conditions that led to original listing are still present.

Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan The Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) is a comprehensive, multi -jurisdictional Habitat Conservation Plan focusing on conservation of species and their associated habitats in Western Riverside County. The MSHCP Plan Area encompasses approximately 1.26 million acres (1,966 square miles); it includes all unincorporated Riverside County land west of the crest of the San Jacinto Mountains to the Orange County line, as well as the jurisdictional areas of the Cities of Temecula, Murrieta, Lake Elsinore, Canyon Lake, Norco, Corona, Riverside, Moreno Valley, Banning, Beaumont, Calimesa, Perris, Hemet, and San Jacinto. The City of Temecula is a signatory to the MSHCP.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.4: Biological Resources

4.4.2 Environmental Setting
The proposed Project alignment is within the both the Murrieta and Temecula quadrangles of the United States Geological Survey's (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic map series in Section 12 of Township 8 South, Range 3 West at an elevation ranging from 1,052 feet to 1,132 above mean sea Level. The topography of the site is relatively flat with the site sloping slopes generally from southeast to northwest. A retaining wall is required on a portion of the eastern side of the roadway to stabilize the road improvements.

The proposed Project is located within Ynez Road and along and adjacent to the northeastern shoulder, with vacant land beyond to the northeast, residential development to the southeast and southwest, and commercial development to the northwest of the northern terminus of the Project alignment. The road alignment terrain is composed of paved asphalt and compacted and graded soil which gives way to grassland and buckwheat scrub plant communities and a large unnamed drainage.

One (1) unnamed drainage occurs within the vicinity of the proposed Project alignment. This drainage is fed by a culvert leading from under Rancho Vista Road to a storm drain within a residential community to the southeast of the Project Site. The stormwaters conveyed by this drainage flow northwest through the Project site and are directed to a box culvert in the northwest portion of the site leading under Tierra Vista Road. In general, this drainage only conveys surface flow in direct response to precipitation or urban runoff.

4.4.3 Impact Analysis

CEQATHRESHOLDS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact or
Does Not
Apply
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES:

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,
X
policies, or regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.4: Biological Resources
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No Impact or

CEQATHRESHOLDS
Significant
with
Significant
Does Not
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Apply
Incorporated
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans,
X
policies, 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.)
X
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
X
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
X
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
X
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
Discussion
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modification, 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 Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated.

Vegetation and Land Cover
The Project alignment, outside of the road right-of-way, supports buckwheat scrub, non- native grassland, and riparian plant communities (Appendix B-1).

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.4: Biological Resources
Special Status Plants
According to the habitat assessment in Appendix B-1, 45 special -status plant species have been recorded in the Temecula and Murrieta quadrangles. No special -status plants were observed within the Project alignment site during the field investigation. Based on habitat requirements for specific species and the availability and quality of on -site habitats, it was determined that the project site has a low potentialto support smooth tarplant (Centromadia pungens ssp. laevis) and paniculate tarplant (Deinandra paniculate). It was further determined that the Project alignment does not have potential to support any of the other special -status plant species known to occur in the vicinity of the site and all are presumed absent.

The proposed Project will primarily be confined to existing developed and heavily disturbed areas that have been subject to anthropogenic disturbances and development, and the site is isolated from known occupied areas. As such, if smooth tarplant and/or paniculate tarplant were to be observed onsite, their small populations are not expected to make a meaningful contribution to the conservation of the species. No additional surveys were recommended according to Appendix B. Therefore, no impacts to any special -status plant species would occurfrom implementation of the proposed Project, and mitigation would not be required.

Special Status Plant Communities
The habitat assessment in Appendix B-1 lists four special -status habitats as being identified within the Temecula and Murrieta quadrangles: Southern Coast Live Oak Riparian Forest, Southern Interior Basalt Flow Vernal Pool, Southern Sycamore Alder Riparian Woodland, and Valley Needlegrass Grassland. No CDFW special -status plant communities occur within the boundaries of the project site.

Special Status Wildlife
Accordingto the habitat assessment in Appendix B-1, 45 special -status wildlife species have been reported in the Temecula and Murietta quadrangles. No special -status wildlife species were observed within the Project alignment during the field investigation. Based on habitat requirements for specific species and the availability and quality of on -site habitats, it was determined that the Project alignment has a moderate potential to support Cooper's hawk (Accipitercooperii), sharp -shinned hawk (Accipiterstriatus), Costa's hummingbird (Calypte costae); and a low potential to support Lawrence's goldfinch (Spinus lawrencei). It was further determined that the Project alignment does not have potential to support any of the other special -status wildlife species known to occur in the vicinity of the site and all are presumed absent.

None of the aforementioned special -status wildlife species are state or federally listed as threatened or endangered. In order to ensure impacts to these avian species do not occur from implementation of the proposed Project, Mitigation Measure BIO-1 to conduct a pre - construction nesting bird clearance survey prior to ground disturbance, is required. With

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.4: Biological Resources
implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1, impacts to special -status avian species would be less than significant.

Burrowing Owl
The burrowing owl was granted candidate status under the California Endangered Species Act on October 10, 2024. It is a grassland specialist distributed throughout western North America where it occupies open areas with short vegetation and bare ground within shrub, desert, and grassland environments. Burrowing owls use a wide variety of arid and semi -arid environments with well -drained, level to gently -sloping areas characterized by sparse vegetation and bare ground. They are dependent upon the presence of burrowing mammals (such as ground squirrels) for roosting and nesting habitat.

Portions of the Project Site are unvegetated and/or vegetated with a variety of low -growing plant species that allow for line -of -sight observation favored by burrowing owl. No burrowing owls or recent sign (i.e., pellets, feathers, castings, or whitewash) were observed during the field investigation. In addition, the proposed Project does not provide suitable burrows/sites, including rock piles and non -natural substrates that could be used as burrow surrogates.

Additionally, the Project alignment is surrounded bytalltrees and poles that provide perching opportunities for large raptors (i.e., red-tailed hawk) that can prey on burrowing owls. Based on this information, and as a result of current and historic on -site disturbances, and surrounding development, it was determined that burrowing owls do not have potential to occur within the Project alignment.

However, to ensure burrowing owls have not moved into the site prior to construction, Mitigation Measure 1310-2 to provide a site survey priorto construction is required to reduce potential impacts to less than significant. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2, impacts would be less than significant.

Critical Habitat
Under the federal Endangered Species Act, "Critical Habitat" is designated at the time of listing of a species or within one year of listing. Critical Habitat refers to specific areas within the geographical range of a species at the time it is listed that include the physical or biological features that are essential to the survival and eventual recovery of that species.

Maintenance of these physical and biological features requires special management considerations or protection, regardless of whether individuals or the species are present or not. All federal agencies are required to consult with the USFWS regarding activities they authorize, fund, or permit which may affect a federally listed species or its designated Critical Habitat. The purpose of the consultation is to ensure that projects will notjeopardize the continued existence of the listed species or adversely modify or destroy its designated Critical Habitat. The designation of Critical Habitat does not affect private landowners, unless a projectthey are proposing is on federal lands, uses federalfunds, or requires federal authorization or permits (e.g., funding from the Federal Highways Administration or a Clean Water Act Permit from the United States Army Corps of Engineers). If a there is a federal

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.4: Biological Resources
nexus, then the federal agency that is responsible for providing the funding or permit would consult with the USFWS.

The Project alignment is not located with federally designated Critical Habitat. The nearest designated Critical Habitat is located approximately 0.73 mile southwest of the site for San Diego ambrosia (Ambrosia pumila) and 2 miles south of the site for coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica). Therefore, the loss or adverse modification of Critical Habitat will not occur as a result of implementation of the proposed Project and consultation with the USFWS will not be required. Therefore, no impacts to federally designated Critical Habitat would occur from implementation of the proposed Project. b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. The Project occurs in the City of Temecula, which is a signatory to the MSHCP. The proposed Project would expand Ynez Road, extending from the existing northeastern shoulder of the road in the City of Temecula, Riverside County, California. Approximately 1.62 acres (1,970 linear feet) of riparian/riverine habitat was mapped within Drainage 1 in proximity to the Project Site. The Project was designed to avoid impacts to Drainage 1 to the greatest extent possible, with impacts only occurring to vegetation on the periphery of the drainage feature outside the bottom or low flow channel of Drainage 1. Based on the proposed site plan, approximately 0.22-acre of permanent impacts to riparian/riverine habitat would occur from Project implementation.

Since the side slopes will be graded rather than restored to existing site conditions (manufactured slope), all Project -related impacts are considered permanent. No temporary or offsite impacts are proposed.

This drainage is fed by a culvert leadingfrom under Rancho Vista Road to a storm drain within a residential community to the southeast of the Project alignment. The stormwaters conveyed by this drainage flow northwest through the Project alignment and are directed to a box culvert in the northwest portion of the alignment leading under Tierra Vista Road. In general, this drainage only conveys surface flow in direct response to precipitation or urban runoff.

In compliance with the requirements of the MSHCP for impacts to riparian/riverine resources, a Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP) analysis was prepared and is included in Appendix B-2.

The DBESP identifies that the City would mitigate impacts to 0.22 acre of riverine habitat through the management (removal of non-native plant species) of 0.66 acre of habitat within a City owned parcel along Temecula Creek. The 0.66 acre of offsite mitigation area was established using a 3:1 mitigation ratio for permanent impacts to riparian/riverine habitat along the bank of Drainage 1. The offsite mitigation site is located immediately adjacent to Temecula Creek in the City of Temecula to the southeast of the Project Site within Assessor

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.4: Biological Resources
Parcel Number (APN) 961-440-012. The 0.66 acre of riverine/riparian habitat offsite currently supports invasive plant species (i.e., tacolote mustard, prickly lettuce, etc.) that will be removed to enhance the riparian/riverine habitat. A conservation easement would be placed over the 0.66 acre of offsite riparian/riverine habitat in favor of a qualified habitat maintenance organization (an approved third party that both CDFW and the USFWS will get to review and approve),The overall habitat functions and values provided by existing habitat areas within the offsite conservation area in Temecula Creek would be enhanced by removing invasive, non-native plant species. Additionally, the manufacture slopes will either be hydroseeded or seeded by hand broadcasting of native seeds to stabilize the slopes above Drainage 1. Pursuant to the MSHCP, the DBESP, including the impacts and proposed mitigation must be reviewed and approved by the CDFW and the USFWS. The offsite mitigation area can accommodate additional mitigation acreage should any be required as part of the DBESP process. Therefore, no additional impacts will occur based on the final mitigation acreage that is identified, and all mitigation will be accommodated at the offsite location. Pursuant to the MSHCP, the City would not begin Project construction until the CDFW and the USFWS have approved the DBESP and mitigation. Mitigation for the impacts to the drainage is reflected in Mitigation Measure 131O-3.

Disturbance of the creek will also require jurisdictional waters permits from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife as part of State law. While compliance with State law is not mitigation, the permits may include additional mitigation and conditions to protect the drainage.
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?
No Impact. The Project Site and off -site improvement area do not contain any federally protected wetlands, marsh, vernal pool, or coastal wetlands, or drainage features. The one unnamed drainage that occurs within the boundaries of the proposed Project Site is fed by a culvert leading from under Rancho Vista Road to a storm drain within a residential community to the southeast of the project site. The stormwaters conveyed by this drainage flow northwest through the Project Site and are directed to a box culvert in the northwest portion of the site leading under Tierra Vista Road. In general, this drainage only conveys surface flow in direct response to precipitation or urban runoff. The jurisdictional delineation in Appendix B-3 identifies that the habitat associated with Drainage 1 within the project footprint is heavily degraded and primarily supports non-native grasses. The drainage does not support state or federally protected wetlands (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.). Therefore, there would be no impact. 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?

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.4: Biological Resources
Less Than Significant Impact. A wildlife corridor is defined as a linear landscape element which serves as a linkage between historically connected habitats/natural areas and is meant to facilitate movement between these natural areas.

The Project alignment has not been identified as occurring in a wildlife corridor or linkage by the MSHCP. However, Murietta Creek, which occurs approximately 0.5-mile to the west of the Project alignment, provides local wildlife movement opportunities through the area. The Project alignment is separated from Murrieta Creek by existing residential and commercial developments and Interstate 15. The Project will primarily be confined to existing areas that have been heavily disturbed and/or developed and is not expected to impact wildlife movement opportunities. Therefore, the Project would not 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 because none exist in the Project alignment. The impact is less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
Less Than Significant. The Project requires the removal of 10 trees (Coast live oaks and California sycamores) in addition to the pruning of one Coast live oak. The remaining seven trees, including four heritage trees, will be preserved in place. Based on Section 8.48.210 of the City ordinance, a permit will not be required due to the project type being a public benefit project. However, the City would plant new live oaks and sycamores in nearby City parks to replace the trees removed. Therefore, there would be a less than significant impact, and no mitigation would be required.
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? Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. The Project alignment is within the City of Temecula, a signatory to the Riverside MSHCP. Appendix B-1 includes a consistency analysis with the MSCHP as follows:
• Riverine/Riparian Resources. The policies for the protection of species associated with Riparian/Riverine areas and vernal pools as set forth in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP. Based on the proposed site plan, approximately 0.22-acre of permanent impacts to riparian/riverine habitat would occur from Project implementation. The DBESP identifies that the City would mitigate impacts to 0.22 acre of riverine habitat through the management (removal of non-native plant species) of 0.66 acre of habitat within a City owned parcel along Temecula Creek. Pursuant to the MSHCP, the DBESP, including the impacts and proposed mitigation has been submitted for review and approval by the CDFW and the USFWS. The offsite mitigation area can accommodate additional mitigation acreage should any be required as part of the DBESP process. Therefore, no additional impacts will occur based on the final

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.4: Biological Resources
mitigation acreage that is identified, and all mitigation will be accommodated at the offsite location. Pursuant to the MSHCP, the City would not begin Project construction until the CDFW and the USFWS have approved the DBESP and mitigation. Mitigation for Project impacts to the drainage is reflected in Mitigation Measure 131O-3.
• Narrow Endemic Plants. The policies for the protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species as set forth in Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP. Through the field investigation, it was determined that the Project alignment provides marginal habitat for the following Narrow Endemic Plant Species listed under Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP:

San Diego ambrosia, smooth tarplant, and California Orcutt grass. However, none of these species were observed within the limits of disturbance for the proposed Project. Therefore, no additional surveys or analysis are required. • Urban/Wildlands Interface. This intended to address indirect effects associated with locating Development in proximity to the MSHCP Conservation Area as detailed in Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP. Portions of the project site are located within Criteria Cell 7079. As a result, the Urban/Wildlife Interface Guidelines will be incorporated into the Project to ensure that indirect Project -related impacts, including drainage, toxics, lighting, noise, invasive plant species, barriers, and grading/land development, are avoided or minimized. These include the following:
• Drainage: During project construction, the project's stormwater should be directed away from the unnamed drainage which transverses the project site from the southeast to the northwest and lies to the northeast of Ynez Road. These measures will ensure that the project stormwater discharges are no greater in volume and velocity than current undeveloped conditions and that the water leaving the site complies with all applicable water quality standards. No drainage/runoff from the site shall flow into this drainage.
• Toxics: According to the MSHCP, measures shall be incorporated to ensure that application of chemicals does not result in discharge to the MSHCP Conservation Area. During the construction of the Project, construction activities have the potential to cause release of toxins that could impact areas downstream of the unnamed drainage located onsite. To address these potential short-term impacts, the project is required to stage construction operations as far away from mapped drainages to the maximum extent feasible.
• Li htin :The proposed Project is not anticipated to significantly increase lighting and glare. However, if light sources are installed, they should be designed with internal baffles to direct the lighting towards the ground and the developed areas and have a zero -side angle cut off to the horizon.
• Noise: Under the MSHCP, wildlife within the MSHCP Conservation Area should not be subject to noise that would exceed residential noise standards. According to the City of Temecula's noise compatibility matrix (Table N-2 of the City's General Plan),

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.4: Biological Resources
an exterior noise level of up to 60 dBA CNEL is normally acceptable for residential uses and an exterior noise level of up to 70 dBA CNEL is conditionally acceptable for residential uses. The existing noise generated by Ynez Road was determined to be between 64 dBA and 65 dBA. The Project is anticipated to generate 0.1 dBAto 1.5 dBA (refer to Section 4.13 of this document), which is not perceptible. As the Project alignment is located in a highly -trafficked area and is located within a broader area that contains a mix of residential and commercial development including Interstate 15, increases in noise levels as a result of Project implementation are not likely to impact wildlife within an MSHCP conservation area.
• Invasive Plant Species: No landscaping is proposed as part of the Project, therefore, this does not apply.
• Barriers: Barriers would restrict direct access to the adjacent undeveloped open space from the project site by unauthorized public access. Under the MSHCP, suitable barriers include native landscaping, rocks/boulders, fencing, walls, signage, and/or other appropriate mechanisms. No barriers are anticipated to be needed. • Grading/Land Development: No manufactured slopes are anticipated to be constructed within the MSHCP Conservation Area. Should manufactured slopes be necessary, they will be kept within the boundaries of the development footprint and not encroach into the drainage.
• Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP, Additional Survey Needs and Procedures. Additional surveys may be needed for certain species in order to achieve coverage for these species. The query of the RCA MSHCP Information Map and review of the MSHCP determined that the Project site is located within the designated survey area for burrowing owl as depicted in Figure 6-4 within Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP. The Project site is not located within any other MSHCP designated species survey areas.

Since burrowing owl are known to occurwithin the surrounding area, a burrowing owl suitability assessment was conducted. Although not found on site, Mitigation Measure BIO-2 requires a pre -construction survey for burrowing owl to ensure protection of the species.

Section 6.1.1 of the MSHCP for the Project location in a Criteria Cell. A Habitat Evaluation Acquisition Negotiation Strategy (HANS) is required as the proposed Project is within a Criteria Cell is subject to review under the Habitat Evaluation and Acquisition Negotiation Strategy (HANS) process under Section 6.1.1 of the MSHCP.

Project applicants whose sites fall within Criteria Areas are required to file a habitat assessment of their project site to determine if all or part of the property is necessary for inclusion in any MSHCP Conservation Areas. If it is determined by the Western Riverside County RCA and/or the Joint Project Review, the County, Cities, or various State and Federal Agencies that all or part of the property is needed for inclusion in the MSHCP Conservation Area, the property owner will enter into negotiations with such agencies to determine the extent of development allowed within the Project site that will not significantly impact the function of the conservation areas in question. A

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.4: Biological Resources
portion of the northern portion of the Project site is located within the Southwest Area Plan of the MSHCP and is partially located within Criteria Cell 7079 that contributes to the assembly of Proposed Constrained Linkage 13. Conservation within this Cell will range from 5 percent to 15 percent of the Cell focusing on the southwestern portion of the Cell. Conservation within this Cell will contribute to assembly of Proposed Constrained Linkage 13; conservation within this Cellwillfocus on riparian scrub, woodland and forest habitat along Murrieta Creekwest of the project site, and west of Interstate 15. The proposed Project alignment is located on the northeast corner of Criteria Cell 7079 outside of the area targeted for conservation. Section

6.1.1 of the MSHCP requires that Project applicants whose projects fall within Criteria Areas are required to undergo a Habitat Acquisition and Negotiation Strategy (HANS) with the Riverside Conservation Authority (RCA) and wildlife agencies for a final review (JPR) to determine if all or part of the Project's property is necessary for inclusion in any MSHCP Conservation Areas. The City has submitted the HANS application to the RCA that identifies the Project implementation would not conflict with the conservation goals for Criteria Cell 7079 or the assembly of Proposed Constrained Linkage 13. The City would not begin construction until the HANS process has been completed.

The Project was found consistent with the MSHCP, with Mitigation Measures with the mitigation proposed in Mitigation Measure 131O-1, 131O-2 and BIO-3. Therefore, impacts to any Local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans are not expected to occur from development of the proposed Project, and mitigation is not required.

4.4.4 Mitigation Measures
131O-1: Nesting Birds. To the extent possible, construction activities (i.e., earthwork, clearing, and grubbing) shall occur outside of the general bird nesting season for migratory birds, which is March 15 through August 31 for songbirds and January 15 to August 31 for raptors.

If construction activities (i.e., earthwork, clearing, and grubbing) must occur during the general bird nesting season for migratory birds (March 15 to August 31) and raptors (January 15 to August 31), a qualified biologist shall be retained to perform a pre -construction survey of potential nesting habitat to confirm the absence of active nests belonging to migratory birds and raptors afforded protection under the MBTA and CFG Code. The preconstruction survey shall be performed no more than seven days prior to the commencement of construction activities. The results of the pre - construction survey shall be documented by a qualified biologist. If construction is inactive for more than seven days, an additional survey shall be conducted.

If the qualified biologist determines that no active migratory bird or raptor nests occur, the activities shall be allowed to proceed without any further

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.4: Biological Resources
requirements. If the qualified biologist determines that an active migratory bird or raptor nest is present, no impactswithin 300 feet (500 feet for raptors) of the active nest shall occur until the young have fledged the nest, and the nest is confirmed to no longer be active, or as determined by the qualified biologist. The biological monitor may modify the buffer as applicable for the specific bird species and type of work, or propose other recommendations to avoid indirect impacts to nesting birds.
1310-2 Burrowing Owl: In compliance with the MSHCP, a pre -construction survey shall be conducted on the study area within 30 days prior to ground disturbance to determine presence of burrowing owls. If the pre - construction survey is negative and burrowing owl is confirmed absent, then ground -disturbing activities (i.e., earthwork, clearing, and grubbing) shall be allowed to commence and no further mitigation would be required. If BUOW is observed during the pre -construction survey, active burrows shall be avoided by the project in accordance with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife's (CDFW) Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (2012) or CDFW's most recent guidelines. The Project Proponent shall immediately inform the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) of BUOW observations. A BUOW Protection and Relocation Plan (plan) shall be prepared by a qualified biologist, which must be sent for approval by RCA prior to initiating ground disturbance. The RCA will coordinate directly with CDFW as needed to ensure that the plan is consistent with the MSHCP and CDFW guidelines. The plan shall detail avoidance measures that shall be implemented during construction and passive or active relocation methodology. Relocation shall only occur outside of the nesting season (September 1 through January 31). The RCA may require translocation sites to be created within the MSHCP Conservation Area for the establishment of new colonies. If required, the translocation sites must take into consideration unoccupied habitat areas, presence of burrowing mammals, existing colonies, and effects to other MSHCP Covered Species in order to successfully create suitable habitat for BUOW. The translocation sites must be developed in consultation with RCA. If required, translocation sites would also be described in the agency -approved plan.
1310-3: The MSHCP requires that any impacts to riverine/riparian habitat be approved by the CDFW and USFWS through approval of the DBESP, which the City has prepared (Appendix B-2). The DBESP identifies that the City would mitigate impacts to 0.22 acre of riverine habitat through the management (removal of non-native plant species) of 0.66 acre of habitat within a City owned parcel along Temecula Creek. The 0.66 acre of offsite mitigation area was established using a 3:1 mitigation ratio for permanent impacts to riparian/riverine habitat along the bank of Drainage 1. Therefore, no additional impacts will occur based on the final mitigation acreage that is identified, and all mitigation will be accommodated at the offsite location.

The offsite mitigation site is located immediately adjacent to Temecula

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.4: Biological Resources
Creek in the City of Temecula to the southeast of the Project Site within Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 961-440-012. The 0.66 acre of riverine/riparian habitat offsite currently supports invasive plant species (i.e., tacolote mustard, prickly lettuce, etc.) that will be removed to enhance the riparian/riverine habitat. A conservation easement would be placed over the 0.66 acre of offsite riparian/riverine habitat in favor of a qualified habitat maintenance organization (an approved third party that both CDFW and the USFWS must review and approve). The overall habitat functions and values provided by existing habitat areas within the offsite conservation area in Temecula Creek would be enhanced by removing invasive, non-native plant species. Additionally, the manufacture slopes will either be hydroseeded or seeded by hand broadcasting of native seeds to stabilize the slopes above Drainage 1. Pursuant to the MSHCP, the DBESP, including the impacts and proposed mitigation must be reviewed and approved by the CDFW and the USFWS. The mitigation that the City has proposed may be increased, decreased or the strategy revised during the CDFW and USFWS review process. However, pursuant to the MSHCP, the Citywould not begin Project construction until the CDFW and the USFWS have approved the DBESP and mitigation strategy.

4.4.5 Conclusion
Implementation of Mitigation Measures B1O-1, B1O-2, and B1O-3, would reduce potential impacts of the proposed Project associated with Biological Resources to less than significant.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
Q2_5January 2026 Section 4.5: Cultural Resources

4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
A Cultural Resources Assessment for the proposed Project was performed to determine potential impacts to historic and archaeological resources (Appendix C — Cultural Resource Assessment Ynez Road Improvements Project, prepared by BCR Consulting, August 7, 2025).

4.5.1 Impact Analysis
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No Impact or

CEQATHRESHOLDS
Significant
with
Significant
Does Not
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Apply
Incorporated
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES:

Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
X
15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
X
pursuant to 15064.5?
c) Disturb any human remains, including those
X
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Discussion
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5?
Less Than Significant Impact. Public Resources Code Section 15064.5(a) defines historical resources, which includes: A resource listed in, or determined to be eligible by the State Historical Resources Commission, for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (Pub. Res. Code §5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 14 CCR, Section 4850 et seq.).

The study in Appendix C included a records search through the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC), intensive -level pedestrian field survey, paleontological resources overview, and Sacred Lands File Search with the Native American Heritage Commission. The records search revealed that 71 cultural resource studies have taken place resulting in the recording of 35 cultural resources within a one -mile radius of the Project site.

However, no cultural resources were identified within the Project alignment.

The field survey also produced negative results for potential cultural resources. The Project Site was closely inspected for any evidence of human activities dating to the prehistoric or historic period, but none was found.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255January 2026 Section 4.5: Cultural Resources
The report in Appendix C determined that there are no "historical resources" as defined by CEQA that exist within or adjacent to the Project site. Therefore, potential impacts associated with an adverse change to a historical resource would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required.
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. Archaeological and cultural sites represent the material remains of human occupation and activity either prior to European settlement (prehistoric sites) or after the arrival of Europeans (historical sites). No other potential markers of prehistoric human activities were found on the Project site.

An inquiryto the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) was submitted as part of the investigation in Appendix C to ascertain the presence of known sacred sites, Native American cultural resources, and/or Native American human remains within the boundaries of the proposed Project. Findings were positive during the Sacred Lands File search with the NAHC. The NAHC recommended contacting the Pechanga Band of Indians for more information. The City initiated Assembly Bill (AB) 52 Native American Consultation for the Project, the results of which are provided in this report.

As it always possible that intact archaeological deposits could be present at subsurface levels, the Project site should be treated as potentially sensitive for archaeological and cultural resources. Implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1 through CUL-6, located at the end of this section, are required to manage unanticipated discoveries of archaeological and Native American resources. Implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1 through CUL-6 would reduce potential impacts to unanticipated discoveries of archaeological resources.
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Less than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. Based on an analysis of records and surveys of the property, it has been determined that the Project site does not include a formal cemetery or any archaeological and cultural resources that might contain interred human remains. No human remains are known to exist within the Project area.

However, although unlikely, it is possible that ground disturbance associated with the proposed Project may encounter and damage or destroy previously undiscovered human remains.

Therefore, impacts are assessed as potentially significant, however, implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-7, located at the end of this section, would manage unanticipated discoveries of human remains.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255January 2026 Section 4.5: Cultural Resources

4.5.2 Mitigation Measures
Implementation of mitigation measures CUL-1 through CUL-7 would reduce potentially significant impacts to archaeological and cultural resources to a less -than -significant level:

CUL-1 At least 30 days prior to the start any ground -disturbing activities, the City shall contact the Pechanga Tribe to develop an Agreement ("Agreement"). This Agreement will address the treatment and disposition of cultural resources, the designation, responsibilities, and participation of professional Pechanga 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 onsite. The Tribal Monitor(s) shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect, or halt the ground -disturbance activities to allow recovery of cultural resources, in coordination with the Project Archaeologist.

Pechanga Tribal Monitors shall be allowed to monitor all grading, excavation and groundbreaking activities.

CUL-2 Prior to beginning project construction, the City of Temecula shall hire an archaeologist to monitor all ground disturbing activities in an effort to identify any unknown archaeological resources. Any newly discovered cultural resource deposits shall be subject to a cultural resource evaluation. The archaeological monitor shall have the authority to stop and redirect grading in consultation with the Pechanga Band of Indians in order to evaluate the significance of any potential resources discovered on the property. The archaeological monitors shall be allowed to monitor all grading, excavation and groundbreaking activities.

CUL-3 A qualified archaeologist and Pechanga tribal monitor shall attend a pre -construction meeting with City staff, the contractor, and appropriate subcontractors to discuss the monitoring program, including protocols to be followed in the event that cultural material is encountered.

CUL-4 If during ground disturbance activities, unique cultural resources are discovered that were not assessed by the archaeological report(s) and/or environmental assessment conducted prior to Project approval, the following procedures shall be followed. Unique cultural resources are defined, for this Mitigation only, as being multiple artifacts in close association with each other, but may include fewer artifacts if the area of the find is determined to be of significance due to its sacred or cultural importance as determined in consultation with the Pechanga Band of Indians. Tribal cultural resources are excluded from the definition of unique cultural resources as those resources are defined by the tribal values ascribed to the them by their affiliated communities. 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. i. All ground disturbance activities within 50 feet of the discovered cultural resources shall be halted until a meeting is convened between the City, the Project Archaeologist, the Pechanga Band of Indians, and the Planning Director to discuss the significance of the find.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
Q2_5January 2026 Section 4.5: Cultural Resources
ii. Further ground disturbance, including but not limited to grading, trenching, vegetation clearing, 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 and archaeological Monitors if needed. iii. 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 Planning Director, as to the appropriate mitigation (documentation, avoidance, recovery, etc.) for the cultural resources.
iv. Treatment and avoidance of the newly discovered resources shall be consistent with the Monitoring Agreement entered into with the Pechanga Band of Indians. 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 of the resources on the Project property so they are not subject to further disturbance in perpetuity as identified in CUL-4
v. 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 Pechanga Band of Indians cannot agree on the significance or the mitigation for the cultural resources, these issues will be presented to the Planning Director for decision. The Planning Director shall make the determination based on the provisions of the California Environmental QualityActwith respectto Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources, recommendations of the Project archeologist and shall consider the cultural and religious principles and practices of the Pechanga Band of Indians. Notwithstanding any other rights available under the law, the decision of the Planning Director shall be appealable to the City Planning Commission and/or City Council.
vi. If the find is determined to be significant and avoidance of the site feasibly cannot be achieved, a Mitigation recovery plan shall be prepared by the Project Archeologist, in consultation with the Pechanga Band of Indians, and shall be submitted to the City for their review and approval prior to implementation of the said plan. vii. Evidence of compliance with this mitigation measure, if a significant Cultural or Tribal Cultural Resource is found, shall be provided to City of Temecula upon the completion of a treatment plan and include a final report detailing the significance and treatment finding.

CUL-5 In the event that Tribal Cultural Resources are discovered during the course of grading, 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 in consultation with the Pechanga Band of Indians.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255January 2026 Section 4.5: Cultural Resources
i. 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. ii. Reburial of the resources on the Project property. The measures for reburial shall include, at least, the following: 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.
iii. If preservation in place and/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 required.

There shall be no destructive or invasive testing on sacred items, burial goods, and Native American human remains. Results concerningfinds 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 the City of Temecula upon the completion of a treatment plan and final report detailing the significance and treatment finding.

CUL-6 The City shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including sacred items, burial goods, and all archaeological artifacts that are found within the Project area, for proper treatment and disposition pursuant to the Agreement required in mitigation measure CUL- 1 through CUL-5.

CUL-7 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 the treatment and disposition has been made. If the Riverside County Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the NAHC must be contacted within 24 hours. The NAHC must then immediately identify the most likely descendant(s) for purposes of receiving notification of discovery. The most likely descendant(s) shall then make recommendations within 48 hours of being granted access to the site and engage in

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
Q2_5January 2026 Section 4.5: Cultural Resources
consultation concerning the treatment of the remains as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 and the agreement described in mitigation measure CUL-1.

4.5.3 Conclusion
Implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1, CUL-2, CUL-3, CUL-4, CUL-5, CUL-6, and CUL-7 would reduce potential impacts of the proposed Project associated with Cultural Resources to less than significant.

Final Initial5tudy/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255January2026 Section 4.6: Energy

4.6 ENERGY
This section describes the potential energy usage effects from implementation of the proposed Project for both construction activities as well as long-term operations and is based on information provided in Appendix A.

4.6.1 Environmental Setting
California is one of the lowest per capita energy users in the United States, ranked 48th in the nation, due to its energy efficiency programs and mild climate (United States Energy Information Administration [EIA] 2018). California consumed 292,039 gigawatt-hours (GWh) of electricity and 2,110,829 million cubic feet of natural gas in 2017 (California Energy Commission [CEC] 2019; EIA 2018). In addition, Californians consume approximately 18.9 billion gallons of motor vehicle fuels per year (Federal Highway Administration 2019). The single largest end -use sector for energy consumption in California is transportation (39.8 percent), followed by industry (23.7 percent), commercial (18.9 percent), and residential (17.7 percent) (EIA 2018).

Most of California's electricity is generated in -state with approximately 30 percent imported from the Northwest (Alberta, British Columbia, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, South Dakota, Washington, and Wyoming) and Southwest (Arizona, Baja California, Colorado, Mexico, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, and Utah) in 2017. In addition, approximately 30 percent of California's electricity supply comes from renewable energy sources such as wind, solar photovoltaic, geothermal, and biomass (CEC 2018). Adopted on September 10, 2018, SB 100 accelerates the State's Renewables Portfolio Standards Program by requiring electricity providers to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 33 percent of total retail sales by 2020, 60 percent by 2030, and 100 percent by 2045.

To reduce statewide vehicle emissions, California requires that all motorists use California Reformulated Gasoline, which is sourced almost exclusively from refineries located in California.

Gasoline is the most used transportation fuel in California with 15.5 billion gallons sold in 2017 and is used by light -duty cars, pickup trucks, and sport utilityvehicles (California Department of Tax and Fee Administration 2018). Diesel is the second most used fuel in California with 4.2 billion gallons sold in 2015 and is used primarily by heavy duty -trucks, delivery vehicles, buses, trains, ships, boats and barges, farm equipment, and heavy-duty construction and military vehicles (CEC 2016). Both gasoline and diesel are primarily petroleum -based, and their consumption releases greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, including CO2 and NOx. The transportation sector is the single largest source of GHG emissions in California, accounting for 41 percent of all inventoried emissions in 2016 (California Air Resources Board [CARB] 2018).

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026

4.6.2 Impact Analysis
Section 4.6: Energy
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No Impact or

CEQATHRESHOLDS
Significant
with
Significant
Does Not
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Apply
Incorporated
VI. ENERGY:

Would the project:
a) Result in a potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of
X
energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan
X
for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Discussion
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? Less Than Significant Impact. Energy use during Project construction would be primarily in the form of fuel consumption to operate heavy equipment, light -duty vehicles, machinery and employee trips. Construction of the Project is estimated to last approximately 12 months during which time diesel and gasoline fuel is anticipated to be the primary energy consumed.

It is not anticipated that the Project would require significant use of natural gas or electricity (from the electrical grid) during construction. As a result, natural gas and electricity use during construction would be temporary and a negligible portion of the total construction energy. Diesel and gasoline fuel consumption would be associated with heavy-duty equipment, haul trucks involved in the transport of soil and construction materials, and workers commuting to and from the site.

The analysis in Appendix A estimated the Project's energy demand using CalEEMod 2022.1.1.26. The CalEEMod outputs detail Project related construction equipment, transportation energy demands, and facility energy demands. Electricity used for the Project during construction and operations would be provided by Southern California Edison, which serves more than 15 million customers. SCE derives electricityfrom varied energy resources including: fossil fuels, hydroelectric generators, nuclear power plants, geothermal power plants, solar power generation, and wind farms. Project -related vehicle trip energy consumption will be predominantly gasoline and diesel fuel. Gasoline (and other vehicle fuels) are commercially provided commodities and would be available to the Project patrons and employees via commercial outlets.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
Construction Energy
Section 4.6: Energy
The Project's estimated energy consumption during construction is provided in Appendix A (refer to Tables 8-11). In summary, the usage was estimated as follows:
• Table 8: Construction Equipment Fuel Consumption Estimates: 48,438 gallons of diesel fuel.
• Table 9: Construction Worker Fuel Consumption Estimates: 2,986 gallons. • Table 10: Construction Vendor Fuel Consumption Estimates (Medium Heavy Duty Trucks): 389 gallons.
• Table 11: Construction Hauling Fuel Consumption Estimates (Heavy Heavy Duty Trucks): 70 gallons.

Construction of the proposed Project would require the typical use of energy resources.

There are no unusual Project characteristics or construction processes that would require the use of equipment that would be more energy intensive than is used for comparable activities; or equipment that would not conform to current emissions standards (and related fuel efficiencies). Project construction is required to comply with applicable California Air Resources Board (CARB) regulations regarding retrofitting, repowering, or replacement of diesel off -road construction equipment. Additionally, CARB has adopted the Airborne Toxic Control Measure to limit heavy-duty diesel motor vehicle idling in order to reduce public exposure to diesel particulate matter and other Toxic Air Contaminants. Compliance with these measures would result in a more efficient use of construction- related energy and would minimize or eliminate wasteful or unnecessary consumption of energy. Idling restrictions and the use of newer engines and equipment would result in less fuel combustion and energy consumption.

Additionally, as required by California Code of Regulations Title 13, Motor Vehicles, Section 2449(d)(3) Idling, limits idling times of construction vehicles to no more than five minutes, thereby minimizing or eliminating unnecessary and wasteful consumption of fuel due to unproductive idling of construction equipment. Enforcement of idling limitations is realized through periodic site inspections conducted by City building officials, and/or in response to citizen complaints.

Therefore, Project compliance with State regulations will reduce impacts to less than significant and no mitigation is required.

Operations
Energy consumption in support of or related to Project operations would include transportation energy demands (energy consumed by employee and patron vehicles accessing the Project site) and facilities energy demands (energy consumed by building operations and site maintenance activities).

The Project therefore would not cause or result in the need for additional energy producing or transmission facilities. The Project would not engage in wasteful or inefficient uses of

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
Section 4.6: Energy
energy and aims to achieve energy conservations goals within the State of California particularly because the Project has been designed in compliance with California's Energy Efficiency Standards, such as streetlights that would be LED which would use less energy.

Therefore, there is a less than significant impact, and no mitigation is required. b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Less Than Significant Impact. There are no state or local plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency directly applicable to the construction energy consumption from a roadway improvement project. However, a project's energy consumption is closely related to a project's GHG emissions. As described in the GHG analysis in Appendix A, the Project's amortized GHG construction emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD threshold, and the Project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs, including the City's CAP. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency, and the impact would be less than significant.

Given the above, the proposed Project would have a less than significant potential to conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.

4.6.3 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures associated with impacts to Energy apply to the proposed Project.

4.6.4 Conclusion
There would be less than significant of the proposed Project associated with Energy resources, and no mitigation would be required.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026

4.7 GEOLOGYANDSOILS

4.7.1 Environmental Setting
Section 4.7: Geology and Soils
A geotechnical investigation was prepared for the proposed Project (Appendix D - Geotechnical Recommendations Report for the Proposed Widening of the East Side of Ynez Road between Station No. 101+99.21 and 117+61.56, Temecula, California, prepared by LGC, October, 16, 2024) to assess the potential for geological conditions that would impact site design. The potential for paleontological resources were assessed in Appendix C.

4.7.2 Impact Analysis
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No Impact or

CEQATHRESHOLDS
Significant
with
Significant
Does Not
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Apply
Incorporated
VII. GEOLOGYANDSOILS:

Would the project:
a) 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
X
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer
to Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
• Strong seismic ground shaking?
X
• Seismic -related ground failure, including
X
Liquefaction?
• Landslides?
X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
X
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 -
site or off -site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
X

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
Section 4.7: Geology and Soils
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No Impact or

CEQATHRESHOLDS
Significant
with
Significant
Does Not
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Apply
Incorporated
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),
X
creating substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
X
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
X
geologic feature?
Discussion
a) Expose people or structures to 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? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.

Less than Significant Impact. The City, like the rest of southern California, is located within a seismically active region as a result of being located near the active margin between the North American and Pacific tectonic plates. Regional active faults that occur within the southern California area include the on -shore and offshore Rose Canyon -Newport Inglewood fault zone to the southwest, the Elsinore fault zone within a portion of the site, and the San Jacinto and San Andreas faults to the northeast. The closest known active fault to the site is the Wildomar fault (part of the Elsinore Fault Zone, Temecula Section) and is Located just to the west of Ynez Road (Within 100 feet of the roadway).

The Project is mapped within an Alquist-Priolo Zone according to the City's General Plan. The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act was signed into California law on December 22, 1972, to mitigate the hazard of surface faulting to structures for human occupancy. The proposed Project consists of a roadway lane expansion that is not designed for human occupancy. Therefore, the impacts are less than significant. • Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Elsinore fault, Wildomar Strand, is located on the west side of Ynez Road beneath the east -facing slope along the roadway. While the fault crosses

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
Section 4.7: Geology and Soils
Ynez Road (where the fault steps over from the west strand south of the Duck Pond to the west strand north of the Duck Pond) the location in Ynez Road is north of the proposed Ynez Road widening project. The location of the active fault strand south of the intersection of Ynez Road and Tierra Vista Road is shown on the attached Fault Setback Zone Figure from the Leighton and Associates report for Tract No. 23339 (Rancho Highlands II). As a result, it appears that there is little probability of surface rupture due to active faulting along the Ynez Road widening project beneath the site (Appendix D). Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
• Seismic related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less Than Significant Impact. Liquefaction is a seismic phenomenon in which loose, saturated, fine-grained granular soils behave similarly to a fluid when subjected to high - intensity ground shaking. Liquefaction occurs when these ground conditions exist: 1) Shallow groundwater; 2) Low density, fine, clean sandy soils; and 3) High intensity ground motion. Effects of liquefaction can include sand boils, settlement, and bearing capacity failures below foundations.

The geotechnical investigation in Appendix D, groundwater was only encountered near the bottom of the young alluvial soils present in the lower portion of the drainage ravine alongthe east side of Ynez Road. The geotechnical report identified that the Project soils likely consist of fill soils and the Pauba Formation (bedrock). The depth of the groundwater encountered during the preliminary geotechnical investigation was in the lower approximately 5 to 6 feet of the ravine and no groundwater was encountered in the Pauba Formation along the west side of the ravine. Additionally, the investigation found the alluvial soils to be potentially liquefiable between 16 to 17.5 feet and 20 to 22.5 feet below the existing ground surface with subsequent total seismically induced settlements of 0.5 inches and differential settlements of 0.25 inches in 30 feet. The geotechnical report in Appendix D anticipates similar settlements along the Ynez Road widening alignment if saturated young alluvial soils are present along the roadway. However, the geotechnical report in Appendix D identifies that the young alluvial soils will be removed to bedrock below the proposed retaining wall and roadwayfill slope and replaced with compacted fill, eliminating the potential for liquefaction beneath the proposed fill slope. Therefore, the impacts are less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
• Landslides?
Less Than Significant. The Project alignment is flat. An engineered slope occurs on the west side of Ynez Road, and the Project would reconstruct the slope on the east side of Ynez Road.

Overall, the Project alignment is not located in an area mapped by the City's General Plan as being within an area of landslide risk. Therefore, the impact is less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
Section 4.7: Geology and Soils
Based on the above, the Project will have a less than significant impact regarding exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects of earthquakes, ground shaking, liquefaction, and landslides, and no mitigation is required. b) Result insubstantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less than Significant Impact. During Project construction, when soils are exposed, temporary soil erosion may occur, which could be exacerbated by rainfall. The Project would disturb approximately 1.7 acres along the roadway and approximately 1.25 along the east slope of the road. Construction projects that disturb 1 acre of land or more are required to obtain coverage under the NPDES General Permit for Construction Activities (General Construction Permit), which requires the applicant to file a notice of intent (NOI) to discharge stormwater and to prepare and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP includes an overview of the Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would be implemented to prevent soil erosion and discharge of other construction -related pollutants that could contaminate nearby water resources. The Project is more than 1-acre, therefore, the contractor is required to provide an SWPPP. The SWPPP will also address post -construction measures for water quality protection. With the implementation of the SWPPP, impacts would be less than significant. 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?
Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to the above discussion regarding hazards associated with liquefaction and landslide hazards. As noted, there is no potentialfor landslide and low potential for liquefaction. Therefore, because the Project alignment is not 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, potential impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? Less Than Significant Impact. Expansive soil is a soil/clay (such as montmorillonite or bentonite) that is prone to expansion or shrinkage due directly to variation in water volume.

Expansive soils swell when exposed to large amounts of water and shrink when the water evaporates. This continuous cycle of wet to dry soil keeps the soil in perpetual motion causing structures built on this soil to sink or rise unevenly, often requiring foundation repair. Expansive soils are comprised primarily of minerals (incredibly fine particles) with little to no organic material and are thus incredibly viscous, proving difficult to drain.

Development would occur within soils with some potential for expansion. The geotechnical investigation identified that the older fill along Ynez Road is related to the grading and

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
Section 4.7: Geology and Soils
construction of the existing portion of Ynez Road along the east side of the roadway and consists mainly of silty sands. Potentially compressible deposits of young alluvium were encountered along the entire east side of Ynez Road. As observed, these deposits primarily consist of medium to dark brown and gray to red -orange brown, silty to clayey very fine to medium sands that are Low to highly expansive, porous, and contain scattered organics. The upper portion of the young alluvium is considered potentially compressible in the present state.

The geotechnical report identifies guidelines for excavation and fill for the roadway and components to reduce the potential of damage caused by expansive soils. The Project does not include housing where the presence of expansive soil would cause a substantial direct or indirect risk to life and property. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. 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? No Impact. The Project does not propose to install septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. No impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required. f) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. The cultural resources report in Appendix C identifies that the geologic units underlying the Project area are mapped as the Pleistocene sandstone member of the Pauba Formation. Pleistocene units such as the Pauba Formation are considered to be fossiliferous and highly paleontologically sensitive.

A records review from the Western Science Center did not identify anyfossil localities within the Project area or a 1-mile radius, however, there is a fossil -bearing locality less than one-half a mile outside the radius and also in the Pauba Formation. Pleistocene units throughout Southern California have produced large quantities of fossils, such as the extensive collection from Diamond Valley Lake housed at Western Science Center. Any fossil specimens recovered from the Project would be scientifically significant.

In order to reduce potential impacts from unanticipated paleontological resources that may be within the Project alignment, implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1 to prepare a Paleontological Resource Management Plan (PRMP) is required. With the implementation of GEO-1, impacts would be less than significant.

4.7.3 Mitigation Measures
GEO-1 Paleontological Resource Management Plan. Prior to the start of construction, a Paleontological Resources Management Plan (PRMP) shall be prepared by a qualified Paleontologist and include the following procedures:

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
Section 4.7: Geology and Soils
• Any undocumented fill, desiccated documented older fill soils, and the upper 5 feet of the young alluvial deposits are considered unsuitable in their present state and will require removal and recompaction in areas of proposed street improvements and design fills.
• Monitoring of mass grading and excavation activities in areas identified as likely to contain paleontological resources shall be performed by a qualified paleontologist or paleontological monitor. Starting at the surface, monitoring will be conducted full-time in areas of grading or excavation in undisturbed alluvial deposits.
• Development of an inadvertent discovery plan to expediently address treatment of paleontological resources should any be encountered during development associated with the Project. If these resources are inadvertently discovered during ground -disturbing activities, work must be halted within 50 feet of the find until it can be evaluated by a qualified paleontologist.

Construction activities could continue in other areas. If the discovery proves to be significant, additional work, such as fossil collection and curation, may be warranted and would be discussed in consultation with the appropriate regulatory agency(ies).

4.7.4 Conclusion
Implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would reduce potential impacts of the proposed Project associated with Geology and Soils to less than significant.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.8: Greenhouse Gas

4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
A Greenhouse Gas Analysis was prepared for the Project as part of the Air Quality Assessment (Appendix A).

4.8.1 Regulatory Setting
Since 1988, many countries around the world have made an effort to reduce GHG emissions since climate change is a global issue. Over the past 30 years, the United States, and the State of California, have enacted a myriad of regulations that have evolved overtime aimed at reducing GHG emissions in transportation, building and manufacturing.

The Project site is located in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) in the Temecula Valley Source Receptor (SRA26). The nearest air monitoring station to the Project site is the Pechanga Reservation Monitoring Station. Historical air quality data for the vicinity can be found both at CARB and SCAQMD's websites. Temperature and historical precipitation data can be found at the WRCC.

4.8.2 Environmental Setting
Constituent gases of the Earth's atmosphere, called atmospheric greenhouse gases (GHG), play a critical role in the Earth's radiation amount by trapping infrared radiation emitted from the Earth's surface, which otherwise would have escaped to space. Prominent greenhouse gases contributing to this process include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), ozone, water vapor, nitrous oxide (N20), and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). This phenomenon, known as the Greenhouse Effect, is responsible for maintaining a habitable climate. Anthropogenic (caused or produced by humans) emissions of these greenhouse gases in excess of natural ambient concentrations are responsible for the enhancement of the Greenhouse Effect and have led to a trend of unnatural warming of the Earth's natural climate, known as globalwarming or climate change. Emissions of gases that induce global warming are attributable to human activities associated with industrial/manufacturing, agriculture, utilities, transportation, and residential land uses. Transportation is responsible for 41 percent of the State's greenhouse gas emissions, followed by electricity generation. Emissions of CO2 and nitrous oxide (NO2) are byproducts of fossil fuel combustion. Methane, a potent greenhouse gas, results from off -gassing associated with agricultural practices and landfills. Sinks of CO2, where CO2 is stored outside of the atmosphere, include uptake by vegetation and dissolution into the ocean. Appendix A provides a description of each of the greenhouse gases and their global warming potential.

For the purposes of Greenhouse Gas Analysis (Appendix A), the focus was on emissions of CO2, CH4, and N20 because these gases are the primary contributors to Global Climate Change (GCC) from development projects. Although there are other substances such as fluorinated gases that also contribute to GCC, these fluorinated gases were not evaluated as their sources are not well-defined and do not contain accepted emissions factors or methodology to accurately calculate these gases.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026

4.8.3 Impact Analysis
Section 4.8: Greenhouse Gas
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No Impact or

CEQATHRESHOLDS
Significant
with
Significant
Does Not
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Apply
Incorporated
VIII.GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS:

Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly
or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the X
environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
X
greenhouse gases?
Discussion
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less Than Significant Impact. There are no established federal, state, or local quantitative thresholds for this Project to determine the quantity of GHG emissions that may significantly affect the environment. However, the California Air Resources Board (CARB), the SCAQMD, and various cities and agencies have proposed or adopted interim thresholds of significance that require GHG emission reduction measures.

SCAQMD has established recommended significance thresholds for greenhouse gases for local lead agency consideration. SCAQMD has published a five -tiered draft GHG threshold which includes a 10,000 metric ton of CO2e per year for stationary/industrial sources and 3,000 metric tons of CO2e per year significance threshold for residential/commercial projects. Tier 3 is anticipated to be the primary tier by which the SCAQMD will determine significance for projects. The Tier 3 screening level for stationary sources is based on an emission capture rate of 90 percent for all new or modified projects. A 90-precent emission capture rate means that 90 percent of total emissions from all new or modified stationary source projects would be subject to CEQA analysis. The 90-percent capture rate GHG significance screening level in Tier 3 for stationary sources was derived using the SCAQMD's annual Emissions Reporting Program.

For the proposed Project, the most appropriate screening threshold for determining GHG emissions is the SCAQMD proposed Tier 3 screening threshold. This is because the Project's construction period and equipment are similar to those of a commercial or residential project to which Tier 3 applies. Therefore, a significant impact would occur if the proposed project exceeds the SCAQMD proposed Tier 3 screening threshold of 3,000 metric tons (MT) of CO2e per year.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
Section 4.8: Greenhouse Gas
The analysis in Appendix A determined that the Project's potential construction GHG emissions are an estimated 444.36 Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (MTCO2e), which is well below the SCAQMD's draft screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e for all land uses. Therefore, the impact is less than significant.
b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less Than Significant Impact. The analysis in Appendix A evaluated the Project's consistency with the following plans:
• City of Temecula General Plan: The Project involves widening and improving an existing roadway to accommodate existing and future projected traffic volumes, and would not generate new vehicle trips itself. The proposed Project would not result in an increase in population or employment and would therefore be consistent with the growth projections in the GHG emissions inventory projections. Therefore, the Project is consistent with the General Plan.
• Executive Orders S-03-05 and B-30-15: These executive orders call for developing more efficient land -use patterns to match population increases, workforce, and socioeconomic needs for the full spectrum of the population. Given the reasonably anticipated decline in Project emissions once fully constructed and operational, the Project is consistent with the Executive Order's horizon -year goal. Therefore, the Project is consistent with Executive Orders S-3-05 and B-30-15. • AB32 Scoping Plan: The Scoping Plan outlines the State's strategy to achieve the 2020 greenhouse gas emissions limit. As the latest, 2022 Scoping Plan builds upon previous versions, Project consistency with applicable strategies are assessed in Appendix A. The Project was evaluated against the recommended actions from the Scoping Plan. The Project was found to be consistent with the recommended actions.
• SCAG's 2020-2045 RTP/SCS. At the regional level, the 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), as published by the Southern California Council of Governments (SCAG), represent the region's Climate Action Plan that defines strategies for reducing GHGs. Appendix A evaluated the Project against various actions and strategies in the RTP/SCS, and found that the Project would be consistent with the GHG reduction related actions and strategies contained in the 2024-2050 RTP/SCS.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. Therefore, impacts are considered to be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026

4.8.4 Mitigation Measures
Section 4.8: Greenhouse Gas
No mitigation measures associated with impacts to Greenhouse Gas Emissions apply to the proposed Project.

4.8.5 Conclusion
Potential impacts of the proposed Project associated with Greenhouse Gas Emissions would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.9: Hazards and Hazardous Materials

4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

4.9.1 Impact Analysis
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No Impact or

CEQATHRESHOLDS
Significant
with
Significant
Does Not
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Apply
Incorporated
IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS:

Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
X
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
X
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
X
waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
X
result, would it create a significant hazard or
excessive noise to the public or the environment?
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
X
airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
X
emergency evacuation plan?
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly to a significant risk of loss, injury or death X
involving wildland fires?
Discussion
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.9: Hazards and Hazardous Materials Less than Significant Impact. Project construction would require the use of materials that are typically associated with construction activities, such as diesel fuels, hydraulic liquids, oils, solvents, and paint. Hazardous materials used during project construction would be transported, used, and stored in accordance with state and federal regulations regarding hazardous materials. The use of these materials would be temporary, and impacts during construction would be less than significant. With regard to long-term operation, the project would not increase the use or disposal of hazardous materials in the area once constructed and operational. The Project would better accommodate traffic capacity along the affected segment of Ynez Road and would not substantially increase the number or frequency of trucks or othervehicles transporting hazardous materials through the Project area such that it would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Therefore, operational impacts in this regard would be less than significant.
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?
Less than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. Project construction would involve the use of heavy equipment, which would contain fuels, oils, lubricants, solvents, and various other possible contaminants. During the temporary, short-term construction period, there is the possibility of accidental release of hazardous substances such as spilling of hydraulic fluid or diesel fuel associated with construction equipment maintenance. The level of risk associated with the accidental release of these hazardous substances is not considered significant due to the small volume and low concentration of hazardous materials. The construction contractor would be required to use standard construction controls and safety procedures to avoid or minimize the potential for accidental release of such substances into the environment. However, because a major watercourse is located within 70 feet of the Project alignment and within the intersection improvements at Ynez Road and Rancho Vista Road, Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, located at the end of this section, is required to reduce the potential for contamination of surface waters.

The proposed Project would involve the removal of existing asphalt roadway and historical asphalt road sections. Asphalt is not currently regulated as a hazardous material, but potential contaminants in the asphalt binder and aerial deposited lead from vehicular traffic require off -site disposal restrictions imposed by the State of California Integrated Waste Management Board. The asphalt removed may be ground on -site and reused in the road base material. Or, the asphalt may be hauled for disposal. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-2, located at the end of this section, would ensure that all asphalt removed from the proposed Project would be disposed of in accordance with current regulations at a permitted facility.

Therefore, the Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.9: Hazards and Hazardous Materials c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No Impact. The school nearest to the Project alignment is Peppertree Montessori - Temecula, located at 29373 Rancho California Rd, approximately 0.38 mile to the north east of the Project alignment. Hazardous materials such as fuel and oil would be used for construction, but the use of these materials would be temporary and in accordance with applicable standards and regulations. As there is no school within one -quarter mile of the Project alignment, impacts related to the handling of hazardous materials within one -quarter mile of a school would not occur.
d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
No Impact. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 (Cortese List) requirements, the SWRCB GeoTracker database (SWRCB 2020) and the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) EnviroStor database (DTSC 2020) were searched for hazardous materials sites within the Project area. According to these databases, there are no listed hazardous materials sites within or adjacent to the Project alignment.

Envirostore Database. There are no sites listed in the Envirostore Database within 1,000 feet of the Project site.

Geotracker Database. Geotracker is the SWRCB's database that manages potential hazardous sites to groundwater. There are no sites listed in the Geotracker Database within 1,000 feet of the Project site.

Based on the result of the database review the Project site is not located on any site that has been identified in accordance with Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.

Therefore, there are no impacts because the Project Site is not located on any site that has been identified in accordance with Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. No mitigation would be required.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan had not been adopted, within 2 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? No Impact. The French Valley Airport is located approximately 5 miles north of the Project alignment. The Project alignment is not located within the Airport Influence Area (Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission 2004). Furthermore, the Project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, no impacts would occur. f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.9: Hazards and Hazardous Materials Less than Significant Impact. During construction, parts of the roadway may be closed to vehicular traffic; however, a Traffic Control Plan would be implemented to identify traffic control measures through the duration of Project construction activities. The Traffic Control Plan would maintain adequate access and the Project would therefore not interfere with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Upon completion of construction, the improved roadway would include more lanes and would therefore allow for improved access to the surrounding areas. As such, impacts would be less than significant. g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
No Impact. The Project alignment is not located within or near an area designated as a state responsibility area (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection [CAL FIRE] 2007, 2011) nor is it classified as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) or located near a VHFHSZ (CAL FIRE 2007, 2011). The Project alignment is not mapped as a VHFHSZ per the CAL FIRE Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps prepared underthe Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP). According to the VHFHSZ Maps prepared by the City in collaboration with CAL FIRE, the nearest VHFHSZ is located approximately one mile west of the Project near the City's western boundary. Furthermore, the proposed roadway improvements would not house people and would not be at risk from wildlife. Therefore, no impacts would occur.

4.9.2 Mitigation Measures
HAZ-1 A hazardous spill prevention plan shall be prepared by the Contractor and submitted to the City for approval prior to construction to minimize the likelihood of a spill. The plan shall state the actions that would be required if a spill occurs to prevent contamination of surface waters and provide for cleanup of the spill. The plan shall follow Federal, state, and local safety guidelines and standards to avoid increased exposure to these pollutants.

HAZ-2 All asphalt requiring removal from the Project alignment shall be disposed of in accordance with current regulatory standards.

4.9.3 Conclusion
Implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 and HAZ-2 would reduce potential impacts of the proposed Project associated with Hazards and Hazardous Materials to less than significant.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.10: Hydrology and Water Quality

4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Hydrology and drainage of the Project alignment and Project components (Appendix E-1—Hydraulic Study for Ynez Road Improvements, prepared by JLC Engineering, July 2, 2024, and Appendix E- 2, Technical Memorandum for Water Quality Treatment for Ynez Road Extension, prepared by JLC Engineering, December 12, 2023).

4.10.1 Impact Analysis
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No Impact or

CEQATHRESHOLDS
Significant
with
Significant
Does Not
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Apply
Incorporated
X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY:

Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
X
degrade surface or ground water quality?
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the project may impede sustainable
X
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:
• result in substantial erosion or siltation
onsite or offsite;
X
• substantially increase the rate or amount
of surface water runoff in a manner which
X
would result in flooding on or offsite;
• create or contribute to runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
X
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
• impede or redirect flood flows?
X
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
X
release of pollutants due to project inundation?

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.10: Hydrology and Water Quality Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No Impact or

CEQATHRESHOLDS
Significant
with
Significant
Does Not
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Apply
Incorporated
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a
water quality control plan or sustainable
X
groundwater management plan?
Discussion
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
Less than Significant Impact.

Construction:

Construction -related runoff pollutants are typically generated from waste and hazardous materials handling or storage areas, outdoor work areas, material storage areas, and general maintenance areas (e.g., vehicle or equipment fueling and maintenance, including washing).

Construction projects that disturb 1 acre or more of soil, including the proposed Project, are regulated under the construction general permit (CGP, Order No. 2009-009-DWQ) and its subsequent revisions (Order No. 2012-0006-DWQ) issued by the SWRCB. Projects obtain coverage under the CGP by developing and implementing a SWPPP, estimating sediment risk from construction activities to receiving waters, and specifying best management practices that would be implemented as a part of the Project's construction phase to minimize pollution of stormwater prior to and during grading and construction.

The Project would disturb approximately 1.7 acres alongthe roadway and approximately 1.25 acres along the east slope of the road, and will add 0.5 acre of new impervious surface.

Construction projects that disturb 1 acre of land or more are required to obtain coverage under the NPDES General Permit for Construction Activities (General Construction Permit), which requires the applicant to file a notice of intent (NOI) to discharge stormwater and to prepare and implement a SWPPP. The SWPPP includes an overview of the Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would be implemented to prevent soil erosion and discharge of other construction -related pollutants that could contaminate nearbywater resources. The Project is more than 1-acre, therefore, the contractor is required to provide a SWPPP. The SWPPP will also address post -construction measures for water quality protection.

Therefore, with implementation of the SWPPP, water quality or waste -discharge impacts from Project -related grading and construction activities would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
Q2_5 January 2026 Section 4.10: Hydrology and Water Quality Operations:

The Project design includes catch basins and storm drains in compliance with City design standards. Appendix E-1 evaluated the proposed volume of water that would be treated by inserts in the catch basins that were installed as part of the Rancho Highlands project at the intersection of Ynez Road and Tierra Vista Road. Based on the study in Appendix E-1, approximately 1,546.9 cubic (CF) feet that must be treated, or off -set by Water Quality Credits. For this Project, the City of Temecula will apply the 1,546.9 CF toward credits that exist in the City's Alternative Compliance Program for water quality. Therefore, there would be a 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?
Less than Significant Impact. Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in the use of groundwater. While the proposed Project would result in additional impervious surfaces on the site, the Project size would have a minimal effect on the existing groundwater infiltration. Therefore, the proposed Project would not substantially interfere with groundwater recharge or the adjacent creek such that the Project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin and impacts would be less than significant. 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:
• result in substantial erosion or siltation onsite or offsite; • substantially increase the rate or amount of surface water runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or offsite;
• create or contribute to runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff, or
• impede or redirect flood flows?
Less Than Significant Impact.

Result in substantial erosion or siltation onsite or offsite: The SWPPP would prevent substantial erosion or siltation onsite or offsite during construction. In the post -Project condition, stormwater would flow south (Rancho Vista Drive ) to north (Tierra Vista Drive), along the new curb and gutter where it will be collected in catch basin located at Tierra Vista and Ynez Road. The sideslope along the east side of the road would be graded and compacted in a manner that reduces erosion.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.10: Hydrology and Water Quality Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface water runoff in a manner which would result in flooding. Although the Projectwould increase the impervious surface of the roadway by 0.5 acre, the roadway is designed to direct water off the road surface and into the catch basin located at Tierra Vista and Ynez Road. The catch basin was designed to capture the flows from the expanded Ynez Road, therefore, the Project would not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface water runoff in a manner which would result in flooding in the roadway or intersections.

Create or contribute to runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Stormwater along Ynez Road, from Rancho Vista Road, is designed to drain north to a catch basin that contains a treatment system at the corner of Ynez Road and Tierra Vista Road. The catch basin has been designed to accommodate the new flows from the Project.

While the culvert can handle the totalflows of 2,679 cubic feet (CF), of which 1,132 CF would be treated within the catch basin's treatment system, and approximately 1,546.9 CF would not be treated within the catch basin; however, 1,546.9 CF of water quality credits elsewhere in the Citywould occur through the City's water quality credit program. Therefore, the Project would not create or contribute to runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff.

Impede or redirect flood flows. The Project is not located in a flood hazard area according to FEMA Flood Maps 06065C2720G and 06065C3285C. Therefore, the Project would not impede or redirect flood flows.

Overall, the Project would not 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 increase flooding, stormwater system capacity or flooding. The impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
d) Would the project in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
Less Than Significant. The Project alignment is not located within a flood zone according to FEMA flood maps. Therefore, there would be no impact regarding a flood hazard.

A seiche is a standing wave that oscillates in an enclosed or partially enclosed body of water, like a lake or bay, caused by external factors such as strong winds, earthquakes, atmospheric pressure changes, or tsunamis. This rhythmic oscillation causes water levels to rise and fall and can lead to flooding along the shoreline. The only large body of water that may be subject to a seiche is the Temecula Duck Pond, which is an approximately 2 acre, manmade pond located on the northeast corner of Ynez Road and Rancho California Road, approximately 435 feet from the Project alignment. And though the Project alignment is located in an earthquake zone, the small size of the pond creates a remote possibility that a

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.10: Hydrology and Water Quality seiche may impact the Project alignment in a manner that may flood the Project alignment.

As such, the impact would be less than significant.

Regarding risk from a tsunami, there would be no impact because the City of Temecula is Located more than 48 miles from the coast.

As such, the impacts related to the release of pollutants due to project site inundation in flood hazard, tsunami, and seiche zones would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required.
e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. As specified above, the Project would complywith applicable City of Temecula and County of Riverside stormwater requirements and would be required to obtain coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. In addition, the Project would not adversely impact a groundwater management plan because project -related runoff would not otherwise impede groundwater replenishment in the Murrieta-Temecula Groundwater Basin. In addition, as noted above, Project implementation would not have the potentialto result in significant adverse impacts to surface water and groundwater quality or otherwise conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (Basin Plan).

4.10.2 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures associated with impacts to Hydrology and Water Quality apply to the proposed Project.

4.10.3 Conclusion
Potential impacts of the proposed Project associated with Hydrology and Water Quality would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.11: Land Use Planning

4.11 LAND USE PLANNING

4.11.1 Impact Analysis
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No Impact or

CEQATHRESHOLDS
Significant
with
Significant
Does Not
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Apply
Incorporated
XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING:

Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
X
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due
to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or
X
regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
Discussion
a) Would the project physically divide an established community? No Impact. The project would widen and extend an existing roadway and other elements within the right-of-way and would not physically divide an established community. Therefore, no impacts would occur.
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?
No Impact. The project would widen and extend an existing roadway consistent with the City's General Plan Circulation Element and thus would not conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Therefore, no impacts would occur.

4.11.2 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures associated with impacts to Land Use and Planning apply to the proposed Project.

4.11.3 Conclusion
There would be no potential impacts of the proposed Project associated with Land Use and Planning, and no mitigation would be required.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.12: Mineral Resources

4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES

4.12.1 Regulatory Setting
In 1975, the California Legislature enacted the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA). This Act provides for the reclamation of mined lands and directs the State Geologist to classify (identify and map) the non -fuel mineral resources of the State to show where economically significant mineral deposits occur and where they are likely to occur based upon the best available scientific data.

4.12.2 Impact Analysis
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No Impact or

CEQATHRESHOLDS
Significant
with
Significant
Does Not
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Apply
Incorporated
XII. MINERAL RESOURCES:

Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to the
X
region and the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site
X
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or
other land use plan?
Discussion
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?
Less Than Significant. According to the City of Temecula General Plan, the State Division of Mines and Geology has classified the project area as MRZ-3a. This classification indicates the presence of sedimentary deposits with the potential to provide sand and gravel for concrete production, as well as crushed stone for aggregate. However, these deposits are not deemed to hold significant economic value. Given the limited scope of disturbance associated with the Project and the predominantly developed or future development zoning in the surrounding area, implementation of the Project is not anticipated to result in the loss of availability of a mineral resource considered valuable at the regional or state level.

Impacts are less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.12: Mineral Resources
b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recoverysite delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Less Than Significant. The Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 required the State Geologistto initiate mineral land classification to help identify and protect mineral resources in areas within the State. In accordance with guidelines established by the State Mining and Geology Board, mineral deposits in western Riverside County have been classified into Mineral Resource Zones (MRZ). According to the City of Temecula General Plan, the project area has been classified by the State Division of Mines and Geology as MRZ-3a. This area contains sedimentary deposits that have the potentialto supply sand and gravelfor concrete and crushed stone for aggregate. However, these areas are not considered to contain deposits of significant economic value. Given the limited area the project would disturb and the fact that the surrounding area is generally developed or zoned for future development, the Project would not 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. Impacts are less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

4.12.3 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures associated with impacts to Mineral Resources apply to the proposed Project.

4.12.4 Conclusion
There are no potential impacts of the proposed Project associated with Mineral Resources, and no mitigation would be required.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.13: Noise

4.13 NOISE
A Noise Impact Analysis to determine potential impacts from noise associated with the development of the proposed Project was prepared (Appendix F — Ynez Road Widening Project — Noise Review Letter —Temecula, CA, prepared by MD Acoustics, August 1, 2025).

Environmental noise is commonly measured in A -weighted decibels (dBA). A decibel (dB) is a unit of sound energy intensity. Sound waves, traveling outward from a source, exert a sound pressure level (commonly called a "sound level") measured in dB. An A -weighted decibel (dBA) is a decibel corrected for the variation in frequency response that duplicates the sensitivity of human ears.

Decibels are measured on a logarithmic scale. Generally, a three dBA increase in ambient noise Levels represents the threshold at which most people can detect a change in the noise environment; an increase of 10 dBA is perceived as a doubling of loudness.

Generally noise is perceptible at an increase of 3 dBA as illustrated by the Federal Highways Administration (FHWA) and identified in Table 5: Effects of dBA Changes.

Table 5: Effects of dBA Changes
Changes in Intensity Level,
dBA
Changes in Apparent
Loudness
1 Not perceptible
3 Just perceptible
5 Clearly noticeable
10 Twice (or half) as loud
Source: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environMent/noise/regulations_and_guidance/poIguide/po[ guideO2.cfm Noise Descriptors
The noise descriptors utilized in the noise study for this Project include but are not limited to the following:

Ambient Noise Level: The composite of noise from all sources, near and far. In this context, the ambient noise level constitutes the normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location.
• Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL� The average equivalent A -weighted sound level during a 24- hour day, obtained after addition of five (5) decibels to sound levels in the evening from 7:00 to 10:00 PM and after addition of ten (10) decibels to sound levels in the night before 7:00 AM and after 10:00 PM.

Equivalent Sound Level (LEO): The sound level corresponding to a steady noise level over a given sample period with the same amount of acoustic energy as the actual time -varying noise level. The energy average noise level during the sample period.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255 January 2026 Section 4.13: Noise
Vibration
Ground -borne vibrations consist of rapidly fluctuating motions within the ground that have an average motion of zero. The effects of ground -borne vibrations typically only cause a nuisance to people, but at extreme vibration levels, damage to buildings may occur. Although ground -borne vibration can be felt outdoors, it is typically only an annoyance to people indoors where the associated effects of the shaking of a building can be notable. Ground -borne noise is an effect of ground -borne vibration and only exists indoors since it is produced from noise radiated from the motion of the walls and floors of a room and may also consist of the rattling of windows or dishes on shelves.

4.13.1 Regulatory Setting
City of Temecula Guidelines
According to the City of Temecula's noise compatibility matrix as identified in Table N-2 of the City's General Plan Noise Element, an exterior noise level of up to 60 dBA CNEL is normally acceptable for residential uses and an exterior noise level of up to 70 dBA CNEL is conditionally acceptable for residential uses. The noise study in Appendix F compares the traffic noise levels to the City's noise requirements.

City of Temecula's Code of Ordinances in Section 9.20.060(D) regulates construction noise. The ordinance states:

No person shall engage in or conduct construction activity, when the construction site is within one - quarter mile of an occupied residence, between the hours of six -thirty p.m. and seven a.m., Monday through Friday, and shall only engage in or conduct construction activity between the hours of seven a.m. and six -thirty p.m. on Saturday. No construction activity shall be undertaken on Sunday and nationally recognized holidays unless exempted by Section 9.20.070 of the Temecula Municipal Code.

Public works projects of any federal, state or local entity or emergency work by public utilities are exempt from the provisions of this subsection. Residents working on their homes or property are exempt from the prohibition of construction activities on Sundays and holidays and shall only engage in or conduct construction activity between the hours of seven a.m. and six -thirty p.m. when working on Sundays and holidays. The city council may, by formal action, exempt projects from the provisions of this chapter.

4.13.2 Environmental Setting
The proposed Project is located approximately 0.3 mile east of Interstate 15 (1-15) and approximately 857 feet south of Rancho California Road (Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 2).

The proposed Project limits are Ynez Road beginning at Tierra Vista Road at its northern limit, spanning approximately 1,763 feet to Rancho Vista Road at its southern limit. Land uses along the Project alignment include single family residential approximately 150 feet on the west side, and multi -family to vacant on the east side of the road segment.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
Q2_5 January 2026
Section 4.13: Noise
The City's General Plan identifies Ynez Road as a six -lane, north -south Principal Arterial in the City of Temecula between Winchester Road (north) and Rancho Vista Road (south). Between Rancho California Road, south of Winchester Road, and Rancho Vista Road, Ynez Road accommodates four traffic lanes with turn lanes. However, in the Project alignment between Tierra Vista, south of Rancho California Road, and Rancho Vista Road, the roadway is only striped for three lanes (one northbound Lane and two southbound lanes) and provides for turn lanes at the intersections with Tierra Vista and Rancho Vista Road. While the west side of Ynez Road along the Project alignment is built out with sidewalk, curb and gutter and streetlights, the east side is one lane, with an asphalt curb and a dirt/unimproved raised shoulder.

4.13.3 Impact Analysis
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No Impact or

CEQATHRESHOLDS
Significant
with
Significant
Does Not
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Apply
Incorporated
XIII.NOISE:

Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
vicinity of the project site in excess of standards
X
established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration
X
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,
X
would the project expose people residing or
working in the project area to excessive noise
Levels?
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? Less Than Significant Impact.

The noise study in Appendix F conducted a 24-hour noise measurement on July 16, 2025 that determined that the ambient noise level ranges from 49 to 58 dBA Leq.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
Construction
Section 4.13: Noise
The analysis in Appendix F analyzed Construction noise associated with the proposed Project calculated utilizing methodology presented in the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual and the FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model, together with several key construction parameters, including distance to each sensitive receiver, equipment usage, percent usage factor, and baseline parameters for the Project alignment (Appendix F).

The degree of construction noise may vary for different areas of the project site and also vary depending on the construction activities. Project construction is anticipated to occur in four phases, as shown in Table 6: Construction Noise Level by Phase (dBA). The construction model assumes equipment operating as close as 75 feet and an average of 200 feet away from the southern residencies. Many sensitive receptors are further than these distances and have walls and will therefore have lower levels than those presented in Table 6.

Table 6: Construction Noise Level by Phase (dBA)
Phase
Leq at Nearest
Residences
Linear, Grubbing, & Land Clearing
71 Linear, Grading, & Excavation
78 Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & Sub -Grade
73 Linear, Paving
76 Construction noise is considered a short-term impact and would be considered significant if construction activities are taken outside the allowable times as described in the City of Temecula's Municipal Code. As shown in Table 6, Project construction noise will be up to 78 dBA Leq(h) near sensitive receptors. These reflect the worst -case noise levels at Temecula residences closest to the construction work. In addition, residents with walls will have a reduction in sound level.

The City does not adopt noise level standards for construction noise. However, construction would not occur between the hours of 6:30 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., Monday through Saturday, and all -day Sunday, as required by the Municipal Code. Construction is anticipated to occur during the permissible hours according to the Municipal Code. Therefore, noise generated by construction equipment would be less than significant.

Operations
A significant increase in noise levels would occur if Project -added traffic results in an increase of 3 dB or more. The Project's primary operational noise source would be vehicular traffic. The potential off -site noise impacts caused by the proposed roadway expansion were calculated in Appendix F at distances of 80 feet on the south side, and distances of 105 feet on the north side, which are the closest residential properties to the roadway. The Project

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
Section 4.13: Noise
proposes widening Ynez Rd from three travel lanes to four travel lanes. The noise levels were calculated for the Existing and Future traffic conditions along the study roadway segments with and without the proposed Project. Table 7: Existing/Existing + Project Scenario — Noise Levels (dBA CNEL) compares the traffic noise levels from Existing traffic conditions with the existing lane configuration (Existing without Project) to the noise levels from Existing traffic conditions with the proposed lane configuration (Existing plus Project).

Table 7: Existing/Existing+ Project Scenario — Noise Levels (dBA CNEL) CNEL(dBA)
Change
Existing
Existing
Roadway
Segment
Receptor Location
(Without
Plus
in Noise
Project)
Project
Level
Tierra Vista to
Southern Residential P/L

64.6 64.7

0.1 Northern Residential
Ynez Rd
Rancho Vista
Facade

65.4 66.9

1.5 The identifies an exterior noise level of up to 60 dBA CNEL is normally acceptable for residential uses and an exterior noise level of up to 70 dBA CNEL is conditionally acceptable for residential uses. As shown in Table 7, the width increase of Ynez Road will increase the existing traffic noise levels by 0.1 to 1.5 dB. It takes a change of 3 dB or more to hear an audible difference, which would occur with a doubling of traffic. Therefore, the traffic noise impact is less than significant. Traffic calculations are provided in Appendix F.

Overall, the Project would not generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project site in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. The impacts of construction and operations are less than significant. b) Would the project result in the generation of excessive groundborne vibration orgroundborne noise levels?
Less Than Significant Impact. Construction activities can produce vibration that may be felt by adjacent land uses. The construction of the proposed Project would not require the use of equipment such as pile drivers, which are known to generate substantial construction vibration levels. The primary vibration source during construction may be from a vibratory roller. A vibratory has a vibration impact of 0.210 inches per second peak particle velocity (PPV) at 25 feet which is perceptible but below any risk to architectural damage.

Construction activities are anticipated to occur as close as 130 ft to the nearest buildings. At a distance of 130 feet, a vibratory roller would yield a worst -case 0.034 PPV (in/sec), which is perceptible but below any risk of damage. Therefore, the Project would result in less than significant generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
Section 4.13: Noise
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?
Less Than Significant. The Project is subject to some distant aircraft noise, though the site is not located near an active airport. The nearest airports are the Bear Creek Airport, located approximately 4 miles to the north, and the French Valley Airport, located approximately 5 miles to the northeast. At these distances, no effects related to airport noise would occur at the Project site, and impacts would be less than significant.

4.13.4 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures associated with impacts to Noise apply to the proposed Project.

4.13.5 Conclusion
Potential impacts of the proposed Project associated with Noise would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255January 2026 Section 4.14: Population and Housing

4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING

4.14.1 Impact Analysis
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No Impact or

CEQATHRESHOLDS
Significant
with
Significant
Does Not
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Apply
Incorporated
XIV.POPULATION AND HOUSING:

Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an
area, either directly (for example, by proposing
new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
X
example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the construction
X
of replacement housing elsewhere?
Discussion
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
Less Than Significant. The City's 2005 General Plan identifies Ynez Road as a six -lane, north -south Principal Arterial in the City of Temecula between Winchester Road (north) and Rancho Vista Road (south). Between Rancho California Road, south of Winchester Road, and Rancho Vista Road, it only accommodates four lanes with turn lanes. However, in the Project alignment between Tierra Vista (north) and Rancho Vista Road (south), the roadway is only striped for three lanes (one northbound lane and two southbound lanes) and provides for a turn lane at the intersections with Tierra Vista and Rancho Vista Road.

In the existing condition, the lane constriction of this three -lane segment creates a "bottleneck" between Tierra Vista Road and Rancho Vista Road due to the lane restriction.

Therefore, the purpose of the Project is to provide for consistent traffic flow between Tierra Vista Road and Rancho Vista Road as envisioned by the City's General Plan.

The expanded roadway will accommodate future traffic levels projected under the buildout of the General Plan. Therefore, although the Project involves the expansion of infrastructure, it would accommodate planned growth rather than induce growth.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
0255January 2026 Section 4.14: Population and Housing
The Project does not include land uses, such as homes or business, that would directly induce population growth. As such, the Projectwould not induce director indirect population growth, and impacts would be less than significant.
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. The proposed Project would involve improvements to an existing roadway. There are no existing residences within the Project alignment and no people or housing units would be displaced. No impact would occur.

4.14.2 Mitigation Measures:

No mitigation measures associated with impacts to Population and Housing apply to the proposed Project.

4.14.3 Conclusion
Potential impacts of the proposed Project associated with Population and Housing would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026

4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES

4.15.1 Impact Analysis
Section 4.15: Public Services
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No Impact or

CEQATHRESHOLDS
Significant
with
Significant
Does Not
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Apply
Incorporated
XV. PUBLIC SERVICES:
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

Fire protection?
X
Police protection?
X
Schools?
X
Recreation/Parks?
X
Other public facilities?
X
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

Fire Protection
Less Than Significant Impact. The closest fire station to the Project Site is Riverside County Fire Department Station 12, located at 28330 Mercedes Street, approximately 1.9 miles southeast of the Project site. This station would be the first to respond to calls for service from the site. During construction, fire protection may be required in the case of accident conditions, but these would be short-term demands and would not require increases in the level of service offered or affect these agencies' response times. No new fire stations or fire station alterations would be required as a result of the Project.

Police Protection
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed Project would not result in an increase in demand for police protection services beyond existing conditions, and therefore, would not have operational impacts to police protection or cause a need for new or altered police protection facilities. A police protection need could occur during Project construction if theft or crime associated with the construction equipment or construction site would occur;

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
Section 4.15: Public Services
however, these types of events would not trigger an increase above provided police protection levels. Therefore, the Project would result in less than significant impacts.

Schools
No Impact. The proposed Project would place no demand on school services because it would not involve the construction of facilities that would generate school -aged children and would not involve the introduction of a temporary or permanent population into this area.

Therefore, the Project would have no impact on schools.

Recreational/Parks
No Impact. The proposed Project would place no demand on parks because it would not involve the introduction of a temporary or permanent population into the area that would use parks. Therefore, the Project would have no impact on parks.

Other public facilities
No Impact. The proposed project would not involve the introduction of a temporary or permanent human population into this area. Therefore, the project would have no impact on other public facilities.

4.15.2 Mitigation Measures:

No mitigation measures associated with impacts to Public Services apply to the proposed Project.

4.15.3 Conclusion
Potential impacts of the proposed Project associated with Public Services would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026

4.16 RECREATION

4.16.1 Impact Analysis
Section 4.16: Recreation
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No Impact or

CEQATHRESHOLDS
Significant
with
Significant
Does Not
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Apply
Incorporated
XVI. RECREATION:
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial
X
physical deterioration of the facility would occur
or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities
or require the construction or expansion of
X
recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
Discussion
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?
No Impact. The proposed Project would not generate a population that would increase demand for parks or recreational facilities. Therefore, the proposed Project would not affect use of existing facilities. No impacts to recreation would occur. 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? No Impact. The proposed roadway improvements would not generate a population that would increase demand for parks or recreational facilities.

4.16.2 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures associated with impacts to Recreation apply to the proposed Project.

4.16.3 Conclusion
Potential impacts of the proposed Project associated with Recreation would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026

4.17 TRANSPORTATION
Section 4.17: Transportation
This analysis is based on technical studies that were prepared for the proposed Project, included as Appendix G - Ynez Road Widening Project Transportation Screening Assessment, prepared by Ganddini Group, Inc., July 9, 2025.

4.17.1 Impact Analysis
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No Impact or

CEQATHRESHOLDS
Significant
with
Significant
Does Not
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Apply
Incorporated
XVII. TRANSPORTATION:

Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation system, including
X
transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
X
Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
X
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
X
a) Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadways, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Less Than Significant Impact.

The City's 2005 General Plan identifies Ynez Road as a six -lane, north -south Principal Arterial in the City of Temecula between Winchester Road (north) and Rancho Vista Road (south).

Between Rancho California Road, south of Winchester Road, and Rancho Vista Road, it only accommodates four lanes with turn lanes. However, in the Project alignment between Tierra Vista (north) and Rancho Vista Road (south), the roadway is only striped for three lanes (one northbound lane and two southbound lanes) and provides for a turn lane at the intersections with Tierra Vista and Rancho Vista Road.

In the existing condition, the lane constriction of this three -lane segment creates a "bottleneck" between Tierra Vista Road and Rancho Vista Road due to the lane restriction.

Therefore, the purpose of the Project is to provide for consistent traffic flow between Tierra Vista Road and Rancho Vista Road as envisioned by the City's General Plan.

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ynez Road Improvement -Phase 1, PW23-02
^'^•��"^ '^'r January 2026
Section 4.17: Transportation
Because the purpose of the Project is to match the existing conditions at each end of the Project alignment and includes bicycle lanes and pedestrian facilities, there would be no increase in traffic nor would the Project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The impacts would be less than significant. b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Less Than Significant Impact. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 provides that transportation impacts of projects are, in general, best measured by evaluating the Project's vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Automobile delay (often called Level of Service) will no longer be considered to be an environmental impact under CEQA.

The Project VMT impact was assessed in Appendix G in accordance with guidance from the City of Temecula Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines ["TIA Guidelines"]. The City TIA Guidelines provide screening thresholds for certain types of projects that may be presumed to cause a less than significant VMT impact based on recommendations provided in the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (State of California, December 2018) and additional substantial evidence documented in the City's TIA guidelines.

The City's TIA Guidelines identifies transportation projects that "would not likely lead to a substantial or measurable increase in vehicle travel, and therefore generally should not require an induced travel analysis," based on guidance from the OPR Technical Advisory.

Two categories applicable to the Project are as follows:
• Addition of an auxiliary lane of less than one mile in length designed to improve roadway safety.
• Addition of roadway capacity on local or collector streets provided the project also substantially improves conditions for pedestrians, cyclists, and, if applicable, transit.

Northbound Ynez Road currently provides two lanes south of the project limits (Rancho Vista Road), one lane through the Project limits, and two lanes north of the project limits (Tierra Vista Road). There are currently no bicycle facilities or sidewalks provided on Ynez Road within the Project limits. The proposed Project would complete Ynez Road at its ultimate half -section width in accordance with the City's General Plan Circulation Element, including construction of a dedicated Class II bicycle lane with green rectangular markings at the intersection approach to Tierra Vista Road for enhanced safety and sidewalk improvements that would improve roadway safety.