HomeMy WebLinkAbout75A - 3501-3511 W SUNFLOWER AVEREQUEST FOR
COUNCIL ACTION
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
FE~U~Y 2~ 2004
TITLE:
P~LIC HEARING - ~E~ME~ APPLICATION
NO. 2003-11 TO ALLOW A ZO~ C~GE
FROM LIGHT I~USTRIAL TO SPECIFIC
DEVELOPME~ NO. 74 ~ CO~ITION~ USE
PE~IT NO. 2003-38 TO ALLOW A
CITY MANAGER
CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY:
APPROVED [] As Recommended
[] As Amended
[] Ordinance on 1s~ Reading
[] Ordinance on 2nd Reading
[] Implementing Resolution
[] Set Public Hearing For
CONTINUED TO
FILE NUMBER
RECOMMENDED ACTION
1. Approve and adopt the Negative Declaration,
2003-169.
2. Adopt an ordinance approving Amendment Application No. 2003-11.
3. Adopt a resolution approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-38
conditioned.
Planning Commission Action
Recommended that the City Council:
1. Approve and adopt the Negative Declaration,
2003-169.
2. Adopt an ordinance approving Amendment Application No. 2003-11.
3. Adopt a resolution approving Conditional Use
conditioned.
At its January 12, 2004 meeting by a vote of 7:0.
DISCUSSION
Rec~uest of Applicant
The Art Institute/Argosy University is
~pplication in order to allow professional
511 West Sunflower Avenue. Specifically,
zone change from Light Industrial (MI)
Environmental Review No.
as
Environmental Review No.
Permit No. 2003-38 as
requesting an amendment
trade school uses at 3501 and
the applicant is requesting a
to Specific Development No. 74
Page 125 75.A.
Amendment Application No. 2003-11
Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-38
February 2, 2004
Page 2
(SD-74). Additionally, a
professional school uses will
74 zoning district.
conditional use permit for trade and
be required in the Specific Development No.
Property Description
The project site is a 10.3-acre, irregular shaped parcel located along
Sunflower Avenue between Harbor Boulevard and Susan Street. The site is
improved with two existing two-story buildings, which include a 72,500
square foot office building (3501 Sunflower) and a two-story, 100,000
square foot industrial building (3511 Sunflower). The property has 596
on-site parking spaces and a zoning designation of Light Industrial (Mi),
consistent with its General Plan land use designation of Industrial
(IND). Surrounding land uses include an industrial business park to the
north, office uses to the east and south, and the existing Art Institute
to the west (Exhibits 1 and 2).
Pro~ect Descri~tion
The Art Institute is a highly specialized professional trade school that
intends to occupy a portion of each existing building in order to allow
for existing uses to continue. The proposed tenant is an accredited
institution which offers coursework and instruction for two and four-year
degrees in visual arts, media arts, culinary, fashion and design. As
part of the same parent company, Argosy University will offer
undergraduate, masters and doctoral degree programs in clinical
psychology, education, and business administration. The project would be
an expansion of the existing Art Institute facility to the west of the
project site at 3651 West Sunflower, which has been in operation since
July of 2000. The school will offer courses each day: in morning,
afternoon and evening sessions. Hours of operation for the proposed
trade school will be from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Evening classes will be
held from 6:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. The Specific Development Plan is
necessary to maintain the integrity of the existing site and provide
consistent uses and development standards throughout the 10.3-acre
parcel.
The project will change the zoning designation of the existing site from
Light Industrial (Mi) to Specific Development No. 74 (Exhibit 3). The
intent of the Specific Development Plan is to accommodate professional
and trade school uses which are not typically contained within the Light
Industrial zoning designation. Additionally, the proposed zoning
amendment would allow for existing manufacturing and office uses to
remain as permitted by right (Exhibit 4). The Art Institute/Argosy
75.A.
Page 126
Amendment Application No.
Conditional Use Permit No.
February 2, 2004
Page 3
2003-11
2003-38
University intends to occupy 17,760 square feet of the existing office
building at 3501 Sunflower Avenue and an additional 16,030 square feet
within the existing manufacturing building at 3511 Sunflower Avenue.
There are no proposed changes to the building exteriors or parking lot
areas. A total of 589 parking spaces are required to accommodate the
existing and proposed uses (Exhibits 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9).
Analysis of the Issues
Amendment Application
The City's Specific Development District was authorized and established
for the purpose of protecting and enhancing the value, appearance and
orderly development of property. In order to facilitate the proposed
professional trade school use and maintain the existing office and
industrial components of the project site, the proposed zone change to
Specific Development No. 74 would be most appropriate. The Specific
Development would allow professional trade school and office uses,
typically limited to Commercial and Professional zones. The Specific
Development would also allow for the retention of the existing
manufacturing operations on site. The proposal supports the General Plan
policies of encouraging commercial development along arterial streets,
promoting rehabilitation of commercial properties, and supporting
developments that are harmonious with existing development in the area.
Uses such as trade schools, office and manufacturing facilities will
further strengthen the City's commercial base, and provide support
services and products to the surrounding commercial businesses such as
the adjacent Art Institute.
Conditional Use Permit
In order to maintain consistency with the existing Art Institute,
Specific Development Plan No. 74 would require an approved conditional
use permit to operate a professional trade school use. The applicant
intends to occupy a total of 33,800 square feet of area within the two
existing buildings. The parking for the project will be directly tied to
the specific floor plan submitted. Any future expansion of trade school
uses or deviation from the approved uses or floor plan resulting in a
higher parking demand would require a re-evaluation of the conditional
use permit by the Planning Commission. The property currently meets the
City's parking requirements, as the existing site provides 596 parking
Daces while the code requires 589 spaces.
Page 127
75.A.
Amendment Application No. 2003-11
Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-38
February 2, 2004
Page 4
Approval is recommended for the proposed amendment application and
conditional use permit as the Art Institute/Argosy University will
continue to provide a use that will serve the commercial area of the city
through existing office and industrial uses as well as providing
educational opportunities for residents within the City. Based upon the
above analysis of the project, consistency with the City's General Plan,
existing and proposed uses on-site, and applicable zoning requirements,
it is recommended that Amendment Application No. 2003-11 and Conditional
Use Permit No. 2003-38 be approved as conditioned.
Environmental Impact
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, Negative
Declaration Environmental Review No. 2003-169 has been prepared for this
project (Exhibit 10).
ASct~iPnh~nExG~c~nDgirector
Planning & Building Agency
VC: rb
vc/repor t s/aa03 - 11. cup03 - 38. cc
75.A. Page '128
M2
M1
SD-58
C5
MAC ARTHUR BL.
PROJECT /~
SITE
City of Cos ta Mesa
A1 GENERAL AGRICULTURAL CR COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL R1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
-S PARKING MOOIFICATION GC GOVERNMENT CENTER R2 TWO FAMILY RESIDENCE
C'SM COMMERCIAL SOUTH MAIN M1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL R3 MULTIPLE DENSITY MULTIPLE
C1 COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL M2 HEAVY INDUSTRIAL FAMILY RESIDENCE
CloMO COMM. COMMERCIAL~MUSEUM DISTRICT MO MILITARY OPERATIONS R4 SUBURBANAPARTMENTS
C2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL 0 OPEN SPACE RE RESIDENTIAL SSTATE
C3 CENTRAL BUSINESS P PROFESSIONAL SO SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT
C3-A CENTRAL BUSINESS-ARTIST VILLAGE PCD PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SP SPECIFIC PLAN
C4 PLANNED SHOPPING CENTER PRD PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
C5 ARTERIAL COMMERCIAL
1' = 1000 FEET
AA 03-11/CUP 03-38
ART INSTITUTE/ARGOSY UNIVERSITY
3501-3511 WEST SUNFLOWER AVENUE
PLANNING AND BUILDING
-- -- =500FEET
EXHIBIT 1
Page 129
A G ~ _bL_ C Y_
75.A.
0 F F I C E
D
U S T R / A L
THE ART
INSTITUTE
SUNFLOWER
SANTA ANA CiTY LIMITS
AVENUE
VACANT
OFFICE
(VACANT)
L A T I M E S
AA 03-11/CUP 03-38
INSTITUTE/ARGOSY UNIVERSITY
ART
3501-3511 WEST SUNFLOWER AVENUE
P L A N N I N G A N D B U ) L D ) N G A G E N C Y
75.A
· Page 130
AA 03-11/CUP 03-38 ,~
ART INSTITUTE/ARGOSY UNIVERSITY ~¢
3501-3511 WEST SUNFLOWER AVENUE
-- -- =500FEET
1" = 1000 FEET
P L A N N I N G A N D B U I L D I N G
EXHIBIT3
Page 131
A ~.__E ._~_ C Y_
75.A.
ART INSTITUTE/ARGOSY UNIVERSITY
Specific Development Plan No. 74
Section 1. Applicabilit~ of Ordinance
The specific development zoning district for the Art Institute/
Argosy University, as authorized by Chapter 41, Division 26, Sec.
41-593 et/seq, of the Santa Aha Municipal Code (SAMC), is
specifically subject to the standards and regulations contained in
this plan for the express purpose of establishing land use
regulations and standards. Ail other applicable chapters, articles
and sections of the SAMC shall apply unless expressly stated or
superseded by this ordinance.
Section 2. Purpose
The Specific Development Plan No. 74 (SD-74), consisting of
standards and regulations, is hereby established for the express
purpose of protecting the health, safety and general welfare of the
people of the City by promoting and enhancing the value of
properties and encouraging orderly development.
Art Institute/Argosy University SD-74 sets the development and
design criteria for a development consisting of approximately 10.3
acres. The purpose of this specific development plan is to permit
flexibility in the site planning and design to respond to market
conditions while assuring high quality development.
SD-74 specifically establishes for the property the following:
· Permitted uses
· Development standards, including building height limits,
required setbacks, parking requirements, landscaping
provisions and enforcement policies
· Operational standards
· Maximum authorized development intensity
· Signage provisions
Section 3. Objectives
The objectives of the Art Institute/Argosy University Specific
Development Plan No. 74, include provisions of the following:
· Landscaping that is appropriate to the level of
development and sensitive to the surrounding community.
EXHIBIT 4
75.A.
Page 132
· A visually harmonious development as viewed both
internally and externally.
· A circulation system that is responsive to the needs of
both vehicular and pedestrian travel.
Flexibility of development in response to market
conditions, while achieving overall City and community
goals.
· Creation of new employment opportunities.
Section 4. Uses Permitted
Uses Permitted on all parcels in the SD-74 District:
(a)
The compounding, processing, or treatment of raw or
previously used materials into a finished or semi-finished
product, excluding those specified in SAMC section 41-
489.5.
(b)
The manufacture of products from raw or previously treated
materials, excluding those uses specified in section 41-
489.5.
(c)
The assembly of products from raw or previously treated
materials, excluding those uses specified in section 41-
489.5.
(d)
The packaging or distribution of previously prepared
products or materials, excluding those uses specified in
section 41~489.5.
(e)
Wholesale establishments where the primary trade is
business-to-business sale of products, supplies and
equipment.
(f) Enclosed storage, warehouse and wholesale.
(g) Bulk products sales (25 cubic feet or greater) when such
products are the primary sales activity.
(h) Professional, administrative and business offices, except
medical offices.
(i) Eating establishments not specified in section 41-472.5.
Page 133
75.A.
Uses subject to a conditional use permit on all parcels in the SD-74
District:
(a) Trade and professional schools
(b)
Child care other than as permitted by section 41-472.1 of
the SAMC
(c) Eating establishments permitted in section 41-472 which
operate between 12:00 and 5:00 a.m.
Section 5. Maximum Permitted Building Intensity
The maximum authorized building intensity
Institute/Argosy University is 202,490 square feet
uses. The maximum floor area ratio allowed is 0.45.
for the Art
for industrial
Section 6. Development Standards
Building Height. Ail future on-site uses will be subject to a
height limitation of 35 feet above ground level, which is
defined as the vertical distance measured from the curb level
to the highest point of the roof surface.
Setbacks. A minimum 15-foot front yard setback shall be
provided between proposed on-site uses and any future right-of-
way boundaries for Sunflower Avenue.
3 o
Parking and loading. The off-street parking requirements for
the proposed uses are as follows:
(a)
(b)
Warehouse, distribution and storage: One space for each
1,000 square feet of gross floor area.
Manufacturing facilities: Two spaces for each 1,000
square feet of production area. Office space exceeding 30
percent of the gross floor area of a manufacturing
facility must meet the off-street parking requirements for
office use.
(c) Processing,
1,000 square feet of gross floor area.
(d) Offices, business and professional: Three spaces
1,000 square feet of gross floor area.
(e) Trade and professional schools: One space for each 40
square feet of classroom floor area, plus one space for
each three 333 square feet of office floor area. A
passenger loading and unloading zone shall be painted and
provided for each building used for instruction purposes.
packaging and treatment: Two spaces for each
for each
75.A. Page 134
Walls and Screening.
(a)
Any equipment, whether on the roof, side of building or
ground, shall be screened. The method of screening shall
be architecturally integrated with the building in terms
of materials, color, shape and size.
Landscaping Standards. Ail areas not used for buildings,
parking or storage shall be landscaped using the following
guidelines consistent with the Commercial Landscape Standards.
Ail landscaped areas shall be irrigated using an automatic
irrigation system. The project shall provide landscaping
consistent with the existing landscape theme and existing
improvements on-site. A six-inch raised concrete curb shall be
required around all landscape planters unless approved by City
Landscape Associate.
(a)
A landscaped area not less than 15 feet wide shall be
maintained along any property line to the extent that it
abuts Sunflower Avenue, except at approved driveways.
Ail new landscaped planters and landscaped areas shall
meet the commercial landscape planter standards.
Architectural and Design Features.
Exterior Materials: Exterior materials and finishes to
comply with an approved materials board. Trash enclosure
and similar ancillary structures are to match the texture,
materials and color palette of the proposed buildings.
Design Features: Shall
the existing buildings.
original in terms of
color.
be designed to be integrated with
Any new additions shall match the
scale, rooflines, materials and
· Color Scheme: Neutral colors shall be used for the
overall color scheme.
Lighting Standards/fixtures: A minimum of one-foot candle
of light shall be provided throughout the parking area.
Specifications of light standards/fixtures and
photometrics plan shall be submitted to the Planning
Division for approval.
Enforcement. The penal provisions and permit requirements of
the SAMC (effective as of the date of adoption of this SD-74)
shall apply to all development within the Art Institute
Specific Development Plan No. 74.
Page 135
75.A.
Section 7. Signage.
Ail future on-site signs shall conform to Article
41-850 through 41-1099 of the SAMC.
XI, Subsections
75.A.
Page 136
_ . . ~ . ~ ~ ~ ,
-- .~ .... ~/I ~ ~'1'~I~'~','~ .~ , ~ ~
- ~ ~ -F-*~?~ , ~ ~ ~ /~ ~
.... ~ ~ ....... ,, ~.~, -~
-~ ~ ~ ~: ~ I , ~ L'_~.
EDUCATION MANAGEMENT CORPOR i
m~';-~" .......... CUP 03-38 ~ [i ~' ~ ~
75.A.
OVERALL FIRST FLOOR PLAN (REVISEE))
EXHIBIT 6
AA 03-11/CUPExHiBiT 703'38 ~L SECOND FLOO~ ~"
AA 03-11/CUP 03-38
75.A EXHIBIT 8
· Page 140
AA 03-11/CUP 03-38~
ge 141 EXHIBIT9 ~, ~l,~d~,,,
MAYOR
Mi§uel A. Pulido
MAYOR PRO TEM
Brelt E. Franklin
COUNCILME,MBERS
C~audia C. Alvarez
Lisa 8ist
Albe~a D. Christy
Mike Garcia
lose $olorio
CITY OF SANTA ANA
PLANNING & BUILDING AGENCY
20 Civic Center Plaza
P.O. BOX lg88 · Santa Ana, California g2702
www.$anta-ana.or§
CITY MANAGER
David N. Ream
CITY ATTORNEY
Joseph W. FleZcher
CLERK'OF THE COUNCIL
Patricia E. Healy
NOTICE OF INTENT
TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
This is to inform the general public that the City of Santa Ana proposes to adopt a
Negative Declaration for the following project:
Project Title:
Art Institute
Project Description:
The proposed project is a zone change from M1 (Light Industrial)
to SD-74 for a 10.7-acre existing industrial park and request for a
conditional use permit to allow a trade school within existing
buildings.
Project Location:
3501 and 3511 Sunflower Avenue
Project Number:
ER 2003-169
Public Review Period: 12-17-2003 to 1-5-2004
Hearing Date:
1-12-2004
Hearing Location:
City of Santa Ana Council Chambers
22 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Aha, CA 92702
The Negative Declaration and Initial Study as well as all referenced documents will be
available for public review at the City of Santa Aha Planning and Building Agency located
at 20 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, California. Please submit any comments on the
Negative Declaration to the City on or before 1-5-2004. Please direct your comments to:
Dan Bott, Environmental Coordinator, City of Santa Ana, P.O. Box 1988, M-20, Santa Ana,
CA, 92702.
If you have any questions or would like any additional information, please contact Verny
Carvajal at (714) 667-2700.
RHCB\lnotice\er
75.A.
AA 03-1 l/CUP 03-38
EXHIBIT ~10
MAYOR
Mi§uel A. Pulido
MAYOR PRO TEM
Brelt E, Franklin
OCcOUNCILMEMBERS
laudia C. Alvarez
Lisa Bist
Alberta D. Christy
Mike Garcia
Jose Solorio
CITY OF SANTA ANA
PLANNING & BUILDING AGENCY
20 Civic Center Plaza (M-20)
P.O. BOX 1988 · Santa Aha, California 92702
www.sama-ana.org
CITY MANAGER
David N. Ream
CITY ATTORNEY
Joseph W. Fletcher
CLERK'OF THE COUNCIL
Patricia E. Healy
Pursuant to the Procedures of the City of Santa Ana for implementation of the California
Environmental Quality Act, the Environmental Evaluator has completed an Initial Study for
the project described below:
Project Number: ER 2003-169
Applicant: Art Institute/Argosy University
Project Location / Address: 3501-3511 West Sunflower Avenue, Santa Aha, CA
Project Title I Description: Art Institute/The proposed project is a zone change from M1
(Light Industrial) to SD-74 for a 10.7-acre existing industrial park and a request for a
conditional use permit to allow a trade school within existing buildings.
And does hereby find:
Signature:
That the proposed project cannot, or will not, have a significant effect on the
environment. Negative Declaration status is therefore granted for this project. No
mitigation measures are required for the proposed project.
This determination is not final until adopted by the decision-making body or administrative
official, and a Notice of Determination is filed.
Page 143
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
ER2003-169
REQUEST
The proposed project is a zone change from.M1 (light Industrial)
to SD-74 for a 10.7-acre existing industrial park and a request
for a conditional use permit to allow trade school within
existing buildings.
EXISTING SETTING
The project site is an existing 10.75-acre industrial park
located near the intersection of Sunflower.Avenue and Harbor
Boulevard. Presently, located on the project site are two
existing 2-story buildings and surface parking areas.
The project site has a General Plan designation of Industrial
and a Zoning designation of M-1 Industrial. The project situated
within in area that is characterized with light industrial land
uses.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project would change the existing zoning on the
project site from Light Industrial to Specific Development (SD-
74). Under the SD-74 zoning designation, professional and trade
school uses would be conditionally permitted and light
manufacturing, warehouse and office uses would be allowed by
right.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
The following is an environmental analysis on the proposed
project, based on the City of Santa Ana's CEQA Environmental
Checklist. For each environmental issue, the analysis identifies
the level of impact that is anticipated to occur.
I. AESTHETICS
(A.B) No Impact
The City's Urban Design Element indicates that there are no
scenic vistas or scenic resources on the project site or within
the nearby vicinity. The project site is not located within the
immediate vicinity of any state highway system. Implementation
of the proposed project would not result in adverse impacts to
any onsite or adjacent scenic resources.
75.A.
Page 144
(C) No Impact
The General Plan Urban Design Element identifies that the
project site is located within the South Harbor Boulevard Design
District. The Urban Design Element establishes goals and
policies to help guide the design of land uses proposed within a
Design District. Specifically, land uses proposed within a
Design District should exhibit high quality design and should
incorporate design elements that are proportional and
aesthetically related to the District setting.
The proposed project would not involve any new construction or
modifications to the exterior of any existing buildings on the
project site. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project
would not degrade the existing character of the project site and
the surrounding area.
(D) No Impact
The proposed project would not introduce substantial amounts of
new lighting into the project area. Therefore, Implementation of
the proposed project would not result in significant light and
glare impacts within the project area.
II. AGRICULTURE
(A.B.C) NO Impact
According to the California Department of Conservation Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program, the project site does not
contain Unique Farmlands, Prime Farmlands or Farmlands of
Statewide Importance. Additionally, based on a site visit
conducted by the City's Environmental Coordinator, the project
site is currently not in agricultural production. Implementation
of the proposed project would not result in the loss of any
farmlands.
III. AIR QUALITY
(A) No Impact
The project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin and
subject to the requirements of the Clear Air Act at both the
Federal and State level, as implemented by the South Coast Air
Quality Management District. The South Coast Air Quality
Management Plan (AQMP) is the primary planning document to
75.A.
monitor if air quality standards and objectives are being
achieved in the South Coast Air Basin. The air quality
objectives in the AQMP are based upon population and growth
projections provided in regional plans and local general plans.
A project could be in conflict with the AQMP if it results in
population and growth impacts beyond those identified in
regional plans and local general plans.
The proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan
and would not effect the population and growth projections for
the City. Therefore, it would not be in co~flict with the
population and growth projections established in the South Coast
Air Quality Management District AQMP.
(B) Less Than Significant Impact
As mentioned previously, the South Coast Air ~uality Management
District (SCAQMD) regulates air quality in the South Coast Air
Basin. The South Coast Air Basin is currently a non-attainment
area for carbon monoxide, ozone, particulate matter and nitrogen
dioxide. The SCAQMD considers an air quality impact to be
significant if it exceeds the thresholds identified in the Table
below.
EMISSION THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Project
Pollutant Construction Tons/ Operations
Pounds/Day Quarter Pounds/Day
Carbon Monoxide 550 24.75 550
Reactive Organic
Compounds 75 2~ 55
Nitrogen Oxides 100 2.5 55
Particulate
Matter 150 6.75. 150
Long-term Operational Air Quality Impacts
The proposed project involves a zone change and establishment of
a trade school within an existing building. The primary source
of operational emissions would be generated by vehicle travel to
and from the project site. A relatively minor amount of gaseous
emissions would also occur from natural gas and electricity
usage.
The proposed project is consistent
and would not increase the amount
with the City's General Plan
of development on the project
75.A.
Page 146
site. The proposed trade school would be situated within an
existing building. There would be no increases in air quality
impact emissions beyond what was previously projected for and
evaluated in the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not
result in any significant long-term air quality impacts.
Short-Term Construction Air Quality Impacts
The proposed project would be established within an existing
building. Some interior modifications to the existing building
would be needed to implement the project. However, short-term
air quality impacts associated tenant improvements would be
considered less than significant.
(C) Less Than Significant Impact
The proposed project would be consistent with the City's General
Plan and would therefore be consistent with the local grOwth
forecasts for the Orange County sub region and regional
emissions budget developed by the Southern California
Association of Governments for the 1999 Air Quality Management
Plan. SCAG has determined that the air pollution impacts of any
project that conforms to local growth forecasts would be
consistent with this forecast and the regional air quality
impacts would be adequately mitigated by the Plan to a level
considered less than significant.
(D) Less than Significant Impact
As mentioned previously, the proposed project would not exceed
the South Coast Air Quality Management District threshold for
potentially significant long-term air quality impacts or short-
term construction related air quality impacts. The project is
also consistent with the City's General Plan and thus consistent
with~p[the South Coast Air Quality Management Plan. Therefore,
~"lmpl.~entatlon of the proposed ~project would not expose
~sens'it~ve receptors to any 's~b~tahtial concentrations of air
quality pollutants.
(E) No Impact
The proposed project would not generate any short-term
construction related or long-term operational odors.
4
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
(A.B.C.D) No Impact
The project site is situated within an urban setting. According
to the California Department of Fish and Game Natural Diversity
Data Base, there are no sensitive biological resources located
on the project site. Therefore, implementation of the proposed
project would not result in any adverse impacts to any onsite
sensitive biological resources.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
(A) No Impact
According to the National Register of Historical Structures and
City of Santa Aha Local List of Historical Structures there are
no historical structures located on the project site. Therefore,
implementation of the proposed project would not result in
significant impacts to any historic resource.
(B.C.D) No Impact
According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, there
are no known or recorded cultural resource sites on or within
the immediate vicinity of the project site. Additionally, the
proposed project would not involve any earthwork activity.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not
result in impacts to unknown cultural resources that may be
present on the project site.
VI. GEOLOGY/SOILS
(A-l) No Impact
According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR there
are no known active earthquake faults or fault zones on the
project site. Therefore, potential ground rupture impacts are
unlikely.
(A-2) Less Than Significant Impact
The project site is situated within a highly active seismic
region of southern California. A total of 38 active faults have
been identified within an approximate 60-mile radius of the
project site. The Newport/Inglewood Fault located approximately
13 miles south from the City of Santa Ana is considered to be
one of the most dominant faults in regard to potential seismic
shaking impacts. The project site could potentially be subject
to a maximum credible horizontal ground acceleration of 0.30g
from a magnitude 6.9 earthquake along the Newport/Inglewood
fault zone. A seismic event of this scale could potentially
result significant damage to the proposed project. However, the
seismic risks at the project site would not be considered
significantly different from other areas in the southern
California region. The proposed project would not involve any
new construction and therefore would not increase the risk for
seismic impacts.
(A-3) Less Than Significant Impact
soil liquefaction occurs when loose soil deposits below the
water table are subjected to large ground accelerations
generated from seismic events. Liquefaction is generally known
to occur in saturated cohesionless soils at depths shallower
than about 50-feet.
According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, the
project site is located in an area that is characterized with
high to very high liquefaction potential. However, the proposed
project would not involve any new construction and therefore
would not increase the risk for liquefaction impacts.
(A-4) No Impact
The project site is flat without any topographical relief.
According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR,
are no landslide planes on the project site. Therefore,
implementation of the project would not result in adverse
impacts in regards to landslides.
there
(B) No Impact
The proposed project site would not involve earthwork activity.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not
result in erosion or sedimentation impacts.
(C) NO Impact
According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, the
proposed project site does not contain any unique geologic
features. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project
would not result in adverse impacts to any unique geologic
feature.
6
75.A.
(D) No Impact
According the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, the
project site is located on Bolsa Silty Loam Soils that have
moderate shrink/swell potential, high corrosion potential to
uncoated steel and low corrosion potential to concrete. The
proposed project would not involve any earthwork activity and
therefore would not be subject to geotechnical constraints that
would effect the geotechnical stability of the project site.
(E) No Impact
The project site is a developed light industrial park with an
improved sewer system. In terms of geological stability, the
project site would be able to support the expansion of
additional sewer facilities if needed.
VII. HAZARDS/HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
(A.B) Less Than Significant Impact
The operation of the proposed project would not involve the
routine transportation, handling, storage or disposal of
hazardous materials or the emission of hazardous emissions. The
long-term operation and construction activities for the proposed
project could involve the handling of incidental amounts of
hazardous materials. Any hazardous substances handled or stored
on the project site would be subject to local, state and federal
laws and regulations. Compliance with these laws and regulations
would reduce potential hazard safety impacts to a level
considered less than significant.
(C) No Impact
According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR and
the Santa Aha Fire Department, the project site is not
identified as a hazardous material site. Implementation of the
project would not create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment.
(D) No Impact
According to the Orange County Airport Environs Land Use Plan,
the project site is not located within an accident potential
zone, or clear zone. The project site is situated within a FAA
Notification Area. According to FAA criteria, obstructions to
75.A.
air navigation could occur if a structure is at least 500 feet
high. Additionally, obstructions could occur if structures are
200 feet higher than the ground elevation of the of the runway
and within 3 miles of the airport, 300 feet or more at 4 miles,
400 feet or higher at 5 miles and 500 feet or higher at 6 miles
or more. The proposed project would be situated within a two-
story building and would not be in conflict with FAA criteria.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not
result in any airport related safety hazards to people residing
in or working within the project area.
viii. HYDROLOGY/WATER QUALITY
(A) No Impact
The operation of the proposed project would not involve routine
waste discharges that would be in conflict with water quality
standards established by the State Regional Water Quality
Control Board. Additionally, the proposed project would only
involve tenant improvements to an existing building. No adverse
water quality impacts are anticipated to be associated with
construction activity for the proposed project.
(B) No Impact
The proposed project would not interfere with ground water
recharge because the site is not located in an area that is
known to recharge the ground water system. The long-term
operation of the project would not have any impact on
groundwater supplies
(C.D) No Impact
The project site and surrounding project area is currently
improved with drainage facilities. Implementation of the
proposed project would not alter the direction of existing
drainage patterns on the project site or significantly increase
existing rates of surface water runoff.
(E.F.~) No Impact
According to Flood Rate Insurance Map (FIRM) Panel No.
0602320037, the project site is located within Zone X, and not
subject to 100-year flood impacts. Implementation of the
proposed project would not subject persons or property to
significant flood risks.
Fage 151
75.A.
IX. LAND USE/PLANNING
(A) NO Impact
The proposed project would not physically divide any established
community, in that no existing residential uses are located on
the project site. No adverse land uses impacts would be
associated with implementation of the proposed project.
(B) Less Than Significant
The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and
would not be in conflict with any planning programs or policies
in the City.
(C) No Impact
According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, the
project site is not included within any habitat conservation
plan or any natural community conservation.plan.
X. MINERAL RESOURCES
(A) No Impact
According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, there
are no areas in the City that are designated as Significant
Mineral Aggregate Resource Areas. Therefore, implementation of
the proposed project would not result in the loss of any
regionally or locally important mineral resource.
XI. NOISE
(A.C) NO Impact
The proposed project would be situated within an existing
building and would not be subject to noise levels in excess of
the noise standards in the General Plan. Additionally, the
proposed project would not significantly increase traffic
volumes and associated mobile source noise impacts in the
project area. Implementation of the proposed project would not
significantly increase ambient noise levels or expose people to
noise levels in excess of City standards..
75.A.
Page-152
(B) No Impact
The proposed project would only require conventional
construction equipment and building practices. No significant
ground borne noise impacts or ground borne vibration impacts
would be associated with the proposed project.
(D) Less Than Significant Impact
The proposed project would only involve tenant improvements to
the interior of the building. Construction activity for the
proposed project would be subject to the City's Noise Ordinance
and would be limited to 7 AM to 8 PM Monday through Saturday and
not permitted on Sundays or federal holidays. Implementation of
the proposed project would not result in any significant
construction-related noise impacts.
(E) No Impact
According to the Orange County Airport Environs Land Use Plan,
the proposed project site is not located within an area that is
subject to high levels of aircraft noise.
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING
(A.B.C) No Impact
The proposed project involves a zone change and the
establishment of a trade school within an existing building.
Implementation of the proposed project would not induce
additional population growth into the area. Nor would it
displace any existing households or housing.
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
Fire Protection: Less than Significant Impact
The Santa Ana Fire Department would provide fire protection and
emergency medical services for the proposed project.
Implementation of the proposed project would not significantly
increase the demands for fire protection services over current
levels of demand within the project area. The fire department
has indicated that under existing levels of manpower and
equipment, they would have the ability to provide adequate fire
protection services. Implementation of the proposed project
would result in less than significant impacts to fire protection
services.
t0
Police Protection: Less than Significant Impact
The Santa Ana Police Department would provide police protection
services for the proposed project. Implementation of the
proposed project would not significantly increase the demand for
police protection services. The police department has indicated
that under existing levels of manpower and equipment, they would
have the ability to provide adequate police protection services.
Implementation of the proposed project would result in less than
significant impacts to police protection services.
Schools: No Impact
The proposed project involves the establishment of a trade
school within an existing building. Implementation of the
proposed project would not generate a need for new school
facilities.
Parks/Other Public Facilities: No Impact
The proposed project involves the establishment of a trade
school within an existing building. Implementation of the
proposed project would not increase the demands for park
facilities or other park facilities.
XIV. RECREATION
(A.B) No Impact
The proposed project involves the establishment of a trade
school within an existing building. Implementation of the
proposed project would not have an adverse impact on any
recreational services or facilities.
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
(A.B) Less Than Significant Impact
The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and the
traffic projections in the Circulation Element. The Public Works
Department determined that implementation of the proposed
project would not result in significant traffic impacts.
75.A.
(C) No Impact
The proposed project involves a zone change and the
establishment trade school within an existing two-story
building. Implementation of the proposed project would not
result in any changes to air traffic patterns. Nor would the
proposed project result in any substantial safety risks related
to aircraft traffic.
(D) No Impact
The proposed project does not involve any design features that
would create a hazard to the public.
(E) NO Impact
As part of the City's development review process, the Fire
Department has reviewed the proposed project for potential
impacts in regards to emergency access. The Fire Department has
identified conditions of approval to ensure that adequate
emergency access is provided. Implementation of the proposed
project would not result in significant emergency access
impacts.
(F) No Impact
The City's Planning Department has determined that adequate
amount of parking is provided for the proposed project.
Implementation of the proposed project would not result in
significant parking impacts.
(G) NO Impact
The proposed project would not be in conflict with any adopted
policies regarding alternative modes of transportation. Public
transportation facilities would be available in the vicinity of
the project area to provide public access to the project site.
XVI. UTILITIES
(A.B.E) Less Than Significant Impact
The City of Santa Ana and/or the Orange County Sanitation
District would provide wastewater service to the project site.
The treatment of wastewater would be provided at Reclamation
Plant 1 in the City of Fountain Valley. The proposed project
would not significantly increase the demand for additional
12
wastewater facilities. Additionally, the proposed project would
not require an increase in wastewater treatment facilities. Nor
would the project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of
the State Regional Water Quality Control Board.
(C) No Impact
Implementation of the proposed project would not increase the
amount of surface water runoff generated from the project site.
The project would not require the construction of new drainage
facilities that could cause significant impacts to the
environment.
(D) Less Than Significant Impact
The City of Santa Ana would provide water service to the project
site. The proposed project would not significantly increase
current demands for water service. Through the City's
development review process, the Public Works Department has
indicated that the City would have the ability to provide
adequate water service to the project site.. No adverse impacts
in regards to the provision of adequate water service would be
associated with the proposed project.
(F.G) Less Than Significant Impact
Great Western Reclamation would provide solid waste disposal
service for the proposed project. The proposed project would not
significantly increase the demand for solid waste disposal.
Additionally, the City has adopted a Source Reduction and
Recycling Element establishes policies and programs to reduce
the City's overall demand for solid waste disposal. No
significant adverse impacts would be associated with providing
solid waste disposal service for the proposed project.
XVIi. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
(A) No Impact
Implementation of the proposed project would not substantially
reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, in that no fish
or wildlife populations are known to exist on the project site.
The operation or construction of the proposed project would not
degrade the overall quality of the environment.
(B) Less Than Significant Impact
75.A.
page 156
Implementation of the proposed project would result in
cumulative impacts to the environment. However, the proposed
project's incremental contribution would not be considered
cumulatively considerable because the proposed project would
comply with the applicable requirements of the uniform building
code, and City regulations and standards, which provide specific
requirements that would avoid any significant cumulative impacts
within the project area. Furthermore, the incremental impacts
associated with the proposed project would be at a level where
they would not be considered cumulatively considerable.
(C) Less Than Significant Impact
The proposed project involves a zone change and the
establishment of a trade school within an existing building. The
operation and construction of the proposed project would not
have any direct or indirect adverse impacts' on ~uman b~ings.
XVIII DETERMINATION
Based upon the evidence in light of the whole record documented
in the above environmental evaluation and cited references, I
find that the proposed project could not have a significant
effect on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration
has been prepared.
XVIV REFERENCES
City of Santa Aha General-Plan, September 1982 .~ 1
Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan Land Use
Element, August 1997
City of Santa Ana Zoning Ordinance, December 1998
South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality
Handbook, 1993
California Environmental Quality Act Statues and Guidelines,
January 1999
1,.
Site Visit by Dan Bott Environmental Coordinator, December 2003
California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program
Ca%ifornia D~partment Fish and Game Natural Diversity Data Base
14
:page 16 of 28
Page 156.'i 75.A.
National Register of Historical Structures
City of Santa Aha Local list of Historical Structures
Uniform Building Code
Flood Rate Insurance map 0602320037F
City of Santa Aha Noise Ordinance
City of Santa Ana Development Review Committee
XX. PREPARERS
Dan Bott, City of Santa Aha Environmental Coordinator
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
PLANNING DIVISION
I. Project Title: Art Institute
II. Project Numbers: ER 2003-169
III.
Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Santa Aha Planning Division
P.O. Box 1988 (M-20)
Santa Ana, CA 92702
IV. Environmental Coordinator and Phone Number:
Dan Bott (714) 667-2719
V. Location: 3501 and 3511 Sunflower Avenue
VI. Environmental Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation, I find that:
A. [] 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 to the project have been made by or agreed to by the applicant. A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
C. [] The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT is required.
Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially
significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an eadier EIR (EIR No. - ) pursuant to applicable
standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation
measures that are imposed upon the project, nothing further is required.
E. []
Pursuant to Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR (EIR No. - ) has been prepared earlier and only
minor technical changes or additions are necessary to make the previous EIR adequate and these changes do
not raise important new issues about the significant effects on the environment. An ADDENDUM to the EIR
shall be prepared.
Printe~ Name
[] Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR (EIR No. - ) has been prepared eadier; however,
subsequent proposed changes in the project and/or new information of substantial importance will cause one
or more significant effects no previously discussed. A SUBSEQUENT EIR shall be prepared.
7mS~dAc;.doc\ 1.15.99
F'ad 58
Page I of 1
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
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 projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fautt 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).
I1.
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,
III.
"Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If
there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is
required,
IV.
"Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation
measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact".
The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to
a less than significant level.
Issues & Supporting Information Sources
I. Aesthetics - Would the project:
Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
Damage scenic resources, including but not limited
to, trees, rock outpourings and historic buildings
within a state highway?
Substantially degrade the existing visual character
or quality of the site and its surroundings?
Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
md~msword\envc~eck.doc\1.15.99
PpE 8159
75;A.
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Issues & Supporting Information Sources
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
I1.
Agricultural 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 prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in
assessing impacts on agricultural farmland. Would the project:
Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) to
non-agricultural use? (The Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program in the California Resources
Agency, Department of Conservation, maintains
detailed maps of these and other categories of
farmland.)
Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a
Williamson Contract?
Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could
individually or cumulatively result in loss of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
Air Quality - Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or
III. pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
applicable Air Quality Attainment Plan or Congestion
Management Plan?
Violate any stationary source air quality standard or
contribute to an existing or proposed air quality
violation?
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 (including
releasing emission which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
Page 2 of 10
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Issues & Supporting Information Sources
E. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
[] [] []
No
Impact
IV. Biological Resources - Would the project:
Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly
or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies or
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services?
Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian
habitat or natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the
California Department of fish and Game or U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service?
Adversely impact federally protected wetlands
(including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) either individually or in combination
with the known or probable impacts of other
activities through direct removal, filling hydrological
interruption, or other means?
Conflict with any local policies or ordinances [] [] [] [~
protecting biological resources, such as tree
-\
preservation policy or ordinance?
V, Cultural Resources - Would the project:
Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
Section 15064.5?
Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a unique archaeological resource
pursuant to define Section 15064.57
Directly or indirectly disturb or destroy a unique
paleontogical resource or site?
md~msword\envcheck.doc\l. 15.99
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Issues & Supporting Information Sources
D. Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
[] [] []
No
Impact
VI. Geology and Soils - Would the project:
Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving:
Rupture of an known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent 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?
2. Strong seismic ground shaking?
3. Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
4. Landslides?
B. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion
or the loss of topsoil?
Would the project result in the loss of a unique
geologic feature?
Is the project located on strata 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?
Where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater, is the soil capable of supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastawatar
disposal systems?
[] [] [] []
[] []
[] [] []
[] [] []
[] [] []
[] [] []
[] [] []
[]
[]
Page 4 of 10
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Issues & Supporting Information Sources
VII. Hazardous and Hazardous Materials - Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use or
disposal of hazardous materials?
Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substance or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
Be located on a site which is located on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 659662.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
For a project located within an airport land use plan
or where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles where of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
VIII. Hydrology and Water Quality -Would the project:
Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water
quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby
wells would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted)?
mdVnsword\envcheck.doc\1.15.99
'f age 163
75:A.
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Issues & Supporting Information Sources
Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of stream or river, or substantially
increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in flooding on or off-
site?
Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted run-off?
Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
Place within a lO0-year floodplain structures which
would impede or redirect flood flows?
Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
IX. Land Use and Planning- Would the project:
A. Physically divide an established community?
Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy,
or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over
the project (including, but not limited to the general
plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan []
or natural community conservation plan?
X. Mineral Resources -Would the project:
Result in the loss of availability of a locally-
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or
other land use plan?
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
[] [] []
[] [] []
[] [] []
[] [] []
[] []
[] [] []
No
Impact
Pa j 164
Page 6 of 10
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
issues & Supporting Information Sources
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
Xl. Noise - Would the project result in:
Exposure of persons to or generation of noise
levels in excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or greundborne noise levels?
A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without project?
For a project located within an airport land use plan
or where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people residing or
working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
Xll. Population and Housing - Would the project:
Induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and business) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
md~msword~envcheck.doc\l. 15.99
75;A.
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Issues & Supporting Information Sources
Xlll. Public Services
Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered governmental facilities,
need for new or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service rations, response
times or other performance objectives for any of the
public service:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
[] [] [] []
XlV, Recreation
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.
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?
XV. Transportation I Traffic
Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of
the street system (i.e. result in a substantial
increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the
volume to capacity ration on roads, or congestion
at intersections?)
Pa 2 66
Page 8 of 10
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Issues & Supporting Information Sources
Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level
of service standard established by the county
congestion management agency for designated
roads or highways?
Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
D. Substantially increase hazards to a design feature
(e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)?
E. Result in inadequate emergency access?
F. Result in inadequate parking capacity?
G. Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
XVI. Utilities and Service Systems
A. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
Require or result in the construction of new water
or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
Require or result in the construction of new storm
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources or
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
Result in the determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project's projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
md~msword\envcheck.doc\l.l 5.99
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Issues & Supporting Information Sources
Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient
permitted capacity to accommodate the project's
sold waste disposal needs?
Comply with federal, state and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated impact Impact
XVIL Mandatory Findings of Significance
Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, effects of other current projects and the
effects of probable future projects).
Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
Page 10 of 10
Kdo/1/28/04
RESOLUTION NO, 2004-013
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA ANA APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. 2003-38 FOR A PROFESSIONAL TRADE SCHOOL
USES FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3501 AND
3511 WEST SUNFLOWER AVENUE
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines
and declares as follows:
Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-38 and Amendment Application No.
2003-11, which has been filed with the City of Santa Ana to change the
zoning district designation of the property located at 3501 and 3511 West
Sunflower Avenue from Light Industrial (M1) to Specific Development No.
74 (SD-74), came before the City Council of the City of Santa Ana for a
public hearing February 2, 2004.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-38 has been filed with the City of Santa
Ana seeking to allow a professional trade school use for the property
located at 3501 and 3511 West Sunflower Avenue.
The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana held a duly noticed
public hearing on January 12, 2004, on Amendment Application No. 2003-
11, and Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-38. After conducting the public
hearing, the Planning Commission determined that Amendment
Application No. 2003-11 is consistent with the General Plan of the City of
Santa Ana, and recommended by a vote of 7:0 that the City Council
approve Amendment Application No. 2003-1.1 and Conditional Use Permit
No. 2003-38.
Specific Development No. 74 (SD-74) allows trade and professional
schools subject to the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit.
Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-538 authorizes the City
Council to grant a conditional use permit upon making certain
findings.
Will the proposed use provide a service or facility which will
contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood or
the community?
Page 169
Res°luti°n ~l~a~A iiI
The development of the Art Institute/Argosy
University, as conditioned, will allow the expansion of
an educational facility which provides needed
instructional and cultural opportunities for the
surrounding community.
Will the proposed use under the circumstances of the
particular case be detrimental to the health, safety or general
welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity?
The Art Institute/Argosy University expansion, as
conditioned, will not present any detrimental affects to
the persons residing or working in the area. Parking
concerns are addresSed due to the excess of parking
on-site and through conditions imposed restricting the
applicant to the use of the building to the floor plan
submitted and approved in DP No. 03-51. Any
impacts to health, safety or welfare are sufficiently
mitigated through the conditions of approval imposed
on this project.
Will the proposed use adversely affect the present economic
stability or future economic development of properties
surrounding the area?
The proposed Art Institute/Argosy University, as
conditioned, will not create any negative or
detrimental impacts on the economic viability of the
surrounding area. This unique use will provide a
positive addition to the surrounding area, which will
complement and improve the existing Art Institute to
the west and will improve the economic viability of the
area.
Will the proposed use comply with the regulations and
conditions specified in Chapter 41 of the Santa Ana
Municipal Code for such use?
The proposed professional trade school and existing
office and industrial uses will be in compliance with all
applicable provisions of Chapter 41 of the Santa Ana
Municipal Code. Moreover, a condition of approval of
the use restricts the applicant to the submitted floor
plan square footage.
75.A.
Page 170
Resolution No. 2002-XXX
Page 2 of 4
Will the proposed use adversely affect the General Plan or
any specific plan of the City?
The proposed Art Institute/Argosy University will not
pose any adverse affects on the General Plan
designation of Industrial (IND). The Specific
Development Plan No. 74 will continue to allow the
existing industrial uses in addition to the proposed
trade school use.
The Negative Declaration for Environmental Review No. 2003-169 was
approved and adopted in the Ordinance for Amendment Application No.
2003-11 (AA No. 2003-11) adopted this same day.
Section 2. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby, approves
Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-38 as conditioned in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and
incorporated heroin.
Section 3. This Conditional Use Permit is expressly conditioned upon adoption
by the City Council of a zoning ordinance amendment rezoning the property located at
3501 and 3511 West Sunflower Avenue from Light Industrial (M1) to Specific
Development No. 74 (SD-74) (AA No. 2003-11). The rights of the applicant under this
Conditional Use Permit shall not vest until the effective date of such ordinance. Should
no such zoning ordinance amendment become effective, then this Conditional Use
Permit is null and void and of no effect.
ADOPTED this day of 2004.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Joseph W. Fletcher
City Attorney
Miguel A. Pulido
Mayor
By:
Kylee O. Otto
Deputy City Attorney
Resolution il~A
Page 171
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
NOT PRESENT:
Councilmembers
Councilmembers
Councilmembers
Councilmembers
CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, PATRICIA E. HEALY, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the
attached Resolution No. 2004-013 to be the original resolution adopted by the City
Council of the City of Santa Aha on
Date:
Clerk of the Council
City of Santa Ana
75.A. Page 172
Resolution No. 2002-XXX
Page 4 of 4
Conditions for Approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-38
Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-38 is approved subject to compliance, to the reasonable
satisfaction of the Planning Manager, with applicable sections of the Santa Ana Municipal
Code, the California Administrative Code, the Uniform Fire Code, the Uniform Building
Code, and all other applicable regulations. In addition, it shall meet the following
conditions of approval:
The applicant must comply with each and every condition listed below prior to exercising
the dghts conferred by the conditional use permit.
The applicant must remain in compliance with all conditions listed below throughout the life
of the conditional use permit. Failure to comply with each and every condition may result
in the revocation of the conditional use permit.
A. Planning Division
All proposed site improvements must conform to the Site Plan Review
approval of DP No. 03-51.
The curriculum for the Art Institute/Argosy University shall be limited to
daytime coursework and instruction for two and four-year degree programs
in visual arts, media arts, culinary, fashion, and design. Hours for these
programs shall be from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., seven days a week.
Additionally, masters and doctoral evening and weekend programs including
clinical psychology, education, and business administration courses shall be
allowed, but only during the hours of 6:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., Monday
through Friday, and 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m, on weekends.
A total of 589 parking spaces are provided for the trade school, office and
industrial uses on site. The parking provided for the project is based on the
floor plan configuration approved for the 'development project (DP No. 03-
51). Any proposed floor plan modification, which would result in a higher
parking demand, would require a review of the conditional use permit.
Elati j 173
75.A.
ORDINANCE NO. NS-2645
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SANTA ANA REZONING THE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 3501 AND 3511 WEST SUNFLOWER
AVENUE FROM LIGHT INDUSTRIAL (M1) TO
SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT NO. 74 (SD-74) (AA NO.
2003-11 ) AND ADOPTING SPECIFIC
DEVELOPMENT NO. 74 (SD-74) FOR SAID
PROPERTY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana does hereby find,
determine and declare as follows:
Amendment Application No. 2003-11 has been filed with the City of
Santa Ana to change the zoning district designation of certain real
property located at 3501 and 3511 West Sunflower Avenue from
Light Industrial (M1)to Specific Development No. 74 (SD-74). The
Specific Development No. 74 zoning distdct (SD-74) would allow the
processing of materials into a semi-finished product, manufacturing or
assembly of products, packaging of products, wholesale
establishments, enclosed storage, bulk products sales, profession
offices, eating establishments, trade and professional schools (with a
Conditional Use Permit), and child care (with a Conditional Use
Permit).
The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana held a duly
noticed public hearing on January 12, 2004, on Amendment
Application No. 2003-11 and determined by a vote of 7:0 to
recommend that the City Council approve Amendment Application
No. 2003-11 which is consistent with the General Plan, including but
not limited to its goals and policies to:
1. Encourage the location of child care facilities within
employment centers (Policy 2.2)
2. Support developments that create a business environment
that is safe and attractive (Policy 2.8)
3. Support land uses which provide community and regional
economic and service benefits. (Policy 4.3)
75.A.
Page 174
This Council, prior to taking action on this ordinance, held a duly
noticed public hearing on February 2, 2004.
The City Council also adopts as findings all facts presented in the
Request for Council Action dated February 2, 2004 accompanying
this matter.
For these reasons, and each of them, Amendment Application No.
2003-11 is hereby found and determined to be consistent with the
General Plan of the City of Santa Ana and otherwise justified by the
public necessity, convenience, and general welfare.
Section 2. The City Council has reviewed and considered the information
contained in the initial study and the negative declaration for Environmental Review
No. 2003-169 prepared with respect to this Project. It is determined that, as
required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality ACt ("CEQA") and the
State CEQA Guidelines, a negative declaration adequately addresses the expected
environmental impacts of this Project. On the basis of this review, the City Council
finds that there is no evidence from which it can be fairly argued that the project will
have a significant adverse effect on the environment. The City Council hereby
certifies and approves the negative declaration and directs that the Notice of
Determination be prepared and filed with the County Clerk of the County of Orange
in the manner required by law.
Pursuant to Title XIV, California Code of Regulations ("CCR")
§735.5(c)(1), the City Council has determined that, after considering the record
as a whole, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have the potential
for any adverse effect on wildlife resources or the ecological habitat upon which
wildlife resources depend. The proposed project exists in an urban environment
characterized by paved concrete, roadways, surrounding buildings and human
activity. Therefore, pursuant to Fish and Game Code §711.2 and Title XIV, CCR
§735.5(a)(3), the payment of Fish and Game Department filing fees is not
required in conjunction with this project.
Section 3. The real property located at 3501 and 3511 West Sunflower
Avenue in Santa Ana is hereby reclassified from Light Industrial (M1) to Specific
Development No. 74 (SD-74). Amended Sectional District Map number 34-5-10,
showing the above described change in use district designation, is hereby
approved and attached hereto as Exhibit "A "and incorporated by this reference as
though fully set forth herein.
Section 4. Specific Development No. 74 (SD-74) as attached to this
Ordinance is approved adopted in its entirety.
Page 175
75.A.
Section 5. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion
of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the
decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the
validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council of the City of
Santa Ana hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each
section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion thereof irrespective of the
fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or
portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
ADOPTED this ~ day of
Miguel A. Pulido
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Joseph W. Fletcher
City Attorney
By:
Kylee O. Otto
Deputy City Attorney
AYES:
Councilmembers
NOES:
Councilmembers
ABSTAIN:
Councilmembers
NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers
75.A.
Page 176
CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, PATRICIA E. HEALY, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the
attached Ordinance No. NS-2645. to be the original ordinance adopted by the
City Council of the City of Santa Ana on , and that said
ordinance was published in accordance with the Charter of the City of Santa Ana.
Date:
Clerk of the Council
City of Santa Ana
Page 177 75.A.
ART INSTITUTE/ARGOSY UNIVERSITY
Specific Development Plan No. 74 (SD-74)
Section 1. Applicabilit7 of Ordinance
The specific development zoning district for the Art Institute/ Argosy
University, as authorized by Chapter 41, Division 26, Sec. 41-593 et seq. of
the Santa Ana Municipal Code (SAMC), is specifically subject to the
standards and regulations contained in this plan for the express purpose of
establishing land use regulations and standards. All other applicable
chapters, articles and sections of the SAMC shall apply unless expressly
stated or superseded by this ordinance.
Section 2. Purpose
The Specific Development Plan No. 74 (SD-74), consisting of standards and
regulations, is hereby established for the express purpose of protecting the
health, safety and general welfare of the people of the City by promoting and
enhancing the value of properties and encouraging ordedy development.
Art Institute/Argosy University SD-74 sets the development and design
criteda for a development consisting of approximately 10.3 acres. The
purpose of this specific development plan is to permit flexibility in the site
planning and design to respond to market conditions while assudng high
quality development.
SD-74 specifically establishes for the property the following:
· Permitted uses
· Development standards, including building
required setbacks, parking requirements,
provisions and enfomement policieS
· Operational standards
· Maximum authorized development intensity
· Signage provisions
height limits,
landscaping
Section 3. Objectives
The objectives of the Art Institute/Argosy University Specific Development
Plan No. 74, include provisions of the following:
· Landscaping that is appropriate to the level of development
and sensitive to the surrounding community.
75.A.
Page 178
· A visually harmonious development as viewed both intemally
and externally.
· A circulation system that is responsive to the needs of both
vehicular and pedestrian travel.
· Flexibility of development in response to market conditions,
while achieving overall City and community goals.
· Creation of new employment opportunities.
Section 4. Uses Permitted
Uses Permitted on all parcels in the SD-74 District:
(a)
The compounding, processing, or treatment of raw or
previously used materials into a finished or semi-finished
product, excluding those specified in SAMC section 41-489.5.
(b)
The manufacture of products from raw or previously treated
materials, excluding those uses specified in section 41-489.5.
(c)
The assembly of products from raw or previously treated
materials, excluding those uses specified in section 41-489.5.
(d)
The packaging or distribution of previously prepared products
or materials, excluding those uses specified in section 41-
489.5.
(e)
Wholesale establishments where the pdmary trade is
business-to-business sale of products, supplies and
equipment.
(f) Enclosed storage, warehouse and wholesale.
(g)
Bulk products sales (25 cubic feet or greater) when such
products are the primary sales activity.
(h) Professional, administrative and business offices, except
medical offices.
(i) Eating establishments not specified in section 41-472.5.
Page 179
75.A.
Uses subject to a conditional use permit on all parcels in the SD-74
District:
(a) Trade and professional schools
(b)
Child care other than as permitted by section 41-472.1 of the
SAMC
(c)
Eating establishments permitted in section 41-472 which
operate between 12:00 and 5:00 a.m.
Section 5. Maximum Permitted Buildin,cl Intensity
The maximum authorized building intensity for the Art Institute/Argosy
University is 202,490 square feet for industrial uses. The maximum floor
area ratio allowed is 0.45.
Section 6. Development Standards
Building Height. All future on-site uses will be subject to a height
limitation of 35 feet above ground level, which is defined as the
vertical distance measured from the curb level to the highest point of
the roof surface.
Setbacks. A minimum 15-foot front yard setback shall be provided
between proposed on-site uses and any future right-of-way
boundaries for Sunflower Avenue.
Parking and loading. The off-street parking requirements for the
proposed uses are as follows:
(a)
Warehouse, distribution and storage: One space for each
1,000 square feet of gross floor area.
(b)
Manufacturing facilities: Two spaces for each 1,000 square
feet of production area. Office space exceeding 30 percent of
the gross floor area of a manufacturing facility must meet the
off-street parking requirements for office use,
(c)
Processing, packaging and treatment: Two spaces for each
1,000 square feet of gross floor area.
(d)
Offices, business and professional: Three spaces for each
1,000 square feet of gross floor area.
75.A.
Page 180
(e)
Trade and professional schools: ' One space for each 40
square feet of classroom floor area, plus one space for each
three 333 square feet of office floor area. A passenger loading
and unloading zone shall be painted and provided for each
building used for instruction purposes.
Walls and Screening. Any equipment, whether on the roof, side of
building or ground, shall be screened. The method of screening shall
be architecturally integrated with the building in terms of materials,
color, shape and size.
Landscaping Standards. All areas not used for buildings, parking or
storage shall be landscaped using the following guidelines consistent
with the Commercial Landscape Standards. All landscaped areas
shall be irrigated using an automatic irrigation system. The project
shall provide landscaping consistent with the existing landscape
theme and existing improvements on-site. A six-inch raised concrete
curb shall be required around all landscape planters unless approved
by City Landscape Associate.
(a)
A landscaped area not less than 15 feet wide shall be
maintained along any property line to the extent that it abuts
Sunflower Avenue, except at approved driveways.
(b)
All new landscaped planters and landscaped areas shall
meet the commercial landscape planter standards.
Architectural and Design Features.
Extedor Materials: Extedor materials and finishes to comply
with an approved materials board. Trash enclosure and
similar ancillary structures are to match the texture, materials
and color palette of the proposed buildings.
Design Features: Shall be designed to be integrated with the
existing buildings. Any new additions shall match the original
in terms of scale, rooflines, materials and color.
· Color Scheme: Neutral colors shall be used for the overall
color scheme.
Lighting Standards/fixtures: A minimum of one-foot candle of
light shall be provided throughout the parking area.
Specifications of light standards/fixtures and photometrics plan
shall be submitted to the Planning Division for approval.
Page 181
75.A.
Enforcement. The penal provisions and permit requirements of the
SAMC (effective as of the date of adoption of this SD-74) shall apply
to all development within the Art Institute Specific Development Plan
No. 74.
Section 7. Si.qna.qe.
All future on-site signs shall conform to Article XI, Subsections 41-850
through 41-1099 of the SAMC.
75.A.
Page 182
MAC ARTHUR
SUNFLOWER AVE.
City of Costa Mesa
-B PARKING MODIFICATION CR COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL R1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL L~t ~ Oaxa: I-2~"0~
03 CENTRAL BUSINESS 0 OPEN SPACE RE REAL ESTATE
I~L'I:fTRTT A