The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About31A - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION . CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: ~ ~ CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: AUGUST 2, 2004 TITLE: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 2004-02 (COUNTY MAP NO. 16576) FOR A NEW RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION APPROVED 0 As Recommended 0 As Amended 0 Ordinance on 1st Reading 0 Ordinance on 2nd Reading 0 Implementing Resolution 0 Set Public Hearing For û4z¿ CITY MANAGER CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER RECOMMENDED ACTION Receive and file the staff report approving Tentative Tract Map No. 2004- 02 (County Tentative Tract Map No. 16576). PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION . After receiving public testimony, the Planning Commission approved and adopted the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2003-133 and adopted a resolution approving Tentative Tract Map No. 2004-02 (County Map No. 16576) as conditioned at its July 12, 2004 meeting by a vote of 7:0 (Exhibit A) to subdivide the property into 17 parcels in the North Harbor Specific Plan (SP2) zoning district at 1101 through 1219 North Jackson Street. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. stl£1zt¿ng Executive Director Planning & Building Agency AN: rb an\plancomm\ttm04-02.cc . 31A-1 REQUEST FOR Planning Commission Action I~ §n~ ~ PLANNING COMMISSION SECRETARY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: JULY 12, 2004 TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 2004-02 (COUNTY MAP NO. 16576) FOR A NEW RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION APPROVED 0 As Recommended 0 As Amended 0 Set Public Hearing For DENIED 0 Applicant's Request 0 Staff Recommendation CONTINUED TO Prepared by Ann Hsin-An Ni ~~ ----1 Executive Director ~A- Planning Manager RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Approve and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2003-133. 2 . Adopt a resolution approving Tentative (County Map No. 16576) as conditioned. Tract Map No. 2004-02 DISCUSSION Request of Applicant Sunset Homes is requesting approval of a tentative tract map to subdivide a 2.70-acre parcel of land into 17 lots in order to construct 17 single-family dwelling units at 1101 through 1219 North Jackson Street. Property Description The property is located within the North Harbor Specific Plan (SP2) zoning district and has a General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential at seven dwelling units per acre (LR7). This site is surrounded by the Willowick Golf Course to the east and a combination of single and multi-family residences to the west, north and south (Exhibits 1 and 2) . The subject property is approximately 2.70 acres in area. The property is flat, rectangular in shape and is currently occupied by 24 mul ti- family dwelling units used as church rehab facilities for substance abuse recovery. The property is located on the east side of Jackson Street between Eleventh Street and Washington Avenue. EXHIBIT A 31A-2 ~entative Tract July 12, 2004 Page 2 Map No. 2004-02 Project Description The proposed project involves the demolition and removal of 24 multi- family dwellings and the construction of 17 new single-family residences, also known as the Willowick Greens. The parcels for the project will have street frontage that varies from 50 to 63 feet. The lots will range in size from 6,000 square feet to 7,383 square feet. A private cul-de-sac, Lincoln Way is proposed. A total of three different floor plans are proposed for this proj ect . Plan 1 includes 2,813 square feet of living area with four bedrooms plus a bonus room and three bathrooms; Plan 2 includes 3,015 square feet of living area with four bedrooms, a bonus room and three bathrooms; and Plan 3 includes 3,295 square feet of living area with four bedrooms, a master retreat and three and one half bathrooms. An interior laundry room, a center island in the kitchen, separate tub and shower in the master bathroom, a walk-in closet in the master bedroom and a fireplace in the .amilY room are proposed as interior amenities. Plans 1 and 3 have the option of using the tandem garage space as the fifth bedroom. A three-car attached garage and two spaces in the driveway will be provided for each unit. A six- foot high block wall is proposed for Lots 3, 6, 11 and 15 where their back yard abuts the street to assist in noise attenuation. Additionally, a 50-foot high safety net will be constructed along the east property line to reduce property damage caused by errant golf balls. The architectural style proposed for this project is Spanish Mediterranean. Exterior materials to be used include tile roofs, stucco, precast concrete stone veneer, wrought iron grills and railings, and decorative window surrounds. Additionally, arched doorways, windows, porches and other features will be used to define the architectural style (Exhibits 3 through 10) . Analysis of the Issues The tentative tract map is proposed to subdivide the existing 2.70-acre si te into 17 parcels. The subdivision has been reviewed and is in conformance with the City's subdivision regulations as well as the 411falifornia Subdivision Map Act. The individual parcels meet the provisions of the zoning code with respect to minimum lot size and frontage. Additionally, the private street has been designed to comply with Public Works Agency standards. Covenants, 31A-3 Tentative Tract July 12, 2004 Page 3 Map No. 2004-02 Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) will be required for the project to maintain an owner's association and ensure the maintenance of the private street and the safety net. The CC&Rs will need to be approved by the City prior to recordation of the final map. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the Low Density Residential land use designation and all other elements of the General Plan as well as the North Harbor Specific Plan. As a result, staff recommends approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 2004-02 (County Map No. 16576) as conditioned (Exhibits 11 and 12) . CEQA Compliance In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2003-133 has been prepared for this project (Exhibit 13). ~' Ann Hsin-An Ni Associate Planner Vince Fregos Senior Planne AN:JM an\plancomm\ttm04-02.pc 31A-4 C i t y 0 f Garden Grove 0 ~ ~ ---1LJ1 -- . =- ::, " -~I -ïl -~) C2 SP-2 SP-2 R1 0 R1 ~ R1 1\ \~ ill í\ I .1_ll____" _J ~ '-"î -,.--,..-..., I II II II II I 1_)1_)1 "_)1_) ____1..,1___- R4-PRD R1 , SP- ~ 2 -$5-7' . . I ~ SP-: R2 2 I I I ~ .,,,, ~ SP- I ~ 2 SP- 2 A1 -B C-SM C1 C1-MD C2 C3 C3-A C4 C5 GENERAL AGRICULTURAL PARKING MODIFICATION COMMERCIAL SOUTH MAIN COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL COMM. COMMERCIAUMUSEUM DISTRICT GENERAL COMMERCIAL CENTRAL BUSINESS CENTRAL BUSINESS-ARTIST VILLAGE PLANNED SHOPPING CENTER ARTERIAL COMMERCIAL SP- 2 R2 ~ ~ > R2 i R2 R2 \ "I /PROJECT SITE J,-J,;. - =1 HU K;~E R AD T WBERRY LN- =1 WESTMINSTER AV. SP-2 SP-2 ~ SP-2 R2 ~ SP- 2 SPæl2 R1 ¡ ~ I R1 30- 7TH ST. SP-2 SP-2 MAR-LES '" i Sp.2 Sp.2 . MQRNING::õIDE AV. C2 R2 R2 , ~~ I ~~' ., R2- ìi PAD ~ R2 R1 M1 R1 R2 R3 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TWO FAMILY RESIDENCE MULTIPLE DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE SUBURBAN APARTMENTS RESIDENTIAL ESTATE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT SPECIFIC PLAN ~ R2 R2 R2á CR GC M1 M2 MO 0 P PCD PRD COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL GOVERNMENT CENTER LIGHT INDUSTRIAL HEAVY INDUSTRIAL MILITARY OPERATIONS OPEN SPACE PROFESSIONAL PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT R4 RE SD SP ~ ~ TTM 04-2 WILLOWICK GREENS 1101 NORTH JACKSON STREET A eW 1" = 1000 FEET p L G A N N N A N D B L D u :ff~~š 1 - - =500 FEET N G G y c A E N ~ ~~ P LAN N vj [ß ex: ).. ).. ).. ~ ~ ::::! "I: li:UJ UJ UJex: -J -J :i; ¡-: <: U) en Ùj WASHINGTON AV. MOBILE H 0 M E -J :>.: ~ dj Q æ UJ ex: ).. ~ 11: UJ -J -J (,!) ~ Q.. [ß [ß ex: ex: ).. ).. ::::! -J :::J ~ ~ 11: 11: ¡::: UJ :5 -J (,!) ~ <: a Ü) W I- en I- 0 w' ~ 0 ø: &Ió.. G 0 L F C 0 U R 5 E ELEVENTH ST. SFR z [ß 0 UJ TR PLEX en ex: § ~ ).. DUPLEX 0 ::::! a ~ (.) ~ I.L. ~ -J SFR UJ a -J (,!) SFR :i; U) TTM 04-2 WILLOWICK GREENS 1101 NORTH JACKSON STREET N G A N D B U L D N G 3f~~tf A G PAR K A ð{' ENe Y V'o" _.,~.,-,,"'...~._." TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16576 -I "",:". ,"'-"" i)~ ~ : ~~S ~t! ):~: *.\.,; "!!" I, . ,..- ?,I~, ~ ~..~¡I' I .. !LJ' I .. ',' I~ iA IN THE CITY OFSAN.TA ANA, COUNTY OF ORANGE. STA TE OF CALIFORNIA ""';'~"=f\..\&"',:.¿,~ VICINITY MAP GOLf NETTING EXAMPLE w g WI\) WILLOWWICK GOLF COURSE ~ I i I i U:G¡I,L vtS('RWTW!'< BENCH MARh. 0 ,.*- ... ~~ Q:I<I ...!!! ~O ...Z ~~ zoo:( IU:=E ... ! i t ~ PRWtCl NUMSO? J~r~YN£J¡~S3â~131NVld ÇÇÞ901>'96t>6 9LS9L D~.I. 3^1l'\f.l.N31- NOISIAlosns liNn n 9l9é6 ,I:) è!\i'" '3rJ VNO~O'J S 3..1.1"':5 3A" ONO:JJS ~H¡: i I ,.--------,---_u':"'" ~--~~) 1 u J3:1H1S ffJ/Y3A'IU' ~ -: f - I :z: >. '"' ~ ~-,-~'~_U_-~G""~---"-'--r~~r--.----- ~ I'~¡l!rí~~ li \: . . r 1 : !;-J' I f:;--:'~"._'-'>----' , 1:-+- t '. lJ-0j 1 r-t'): w,~. ., j' ..~_.. -i; ~.'..'- ¡ l_.'..i...].. :~ : . . ... . ,..j! . ¡ . .z, I .' :a..~ '! ... ...~: ~..' ': . . . '. r ¡',,! . \:. >- - ".e ." ' : '.,...L X i '~. 0 - Iy'.~ . /'-----< '" ' .. c. .-- j /,";- I ) , /-,"'---l.. . ... '.,' ,. i/ ......... .-"_.J f . !JalIUS. 1\ . AV.i I . ¡ \. .C... .., /:'. .--:-~, 'rtlr'i:['r!~) ~ i,: 0 Is" + G - . L3.....l.. _--_.l§._---!.~--.h-"~._---'-<"-' Ii' ...¡: .l[] ¡ ". 1.- .' - ' . 41 ! , -~ - . °- .- I' I,' ¡ .. ) I, : . - ---// r-~- --.l--,--- - -=-,~ _~L,~- --" ~ -- ~~-~: c ~-~- "~r-:-- --- ~ '--' "- -::; ~ , " ,----t '. .. . ',:1,1 V AOJ:JV¡fI,S'Vifl TIM 04-2 E~A"l:.8 Sl9Z6 YJ '},'Vr; 130 VNQ):jO:J S 31lns AMH lSltO:! '3 t>1>Ll S3V-¡OH .i3SNnS I I I ¡ ~ I I I I 1- ~,' :--- CO I y; ~ 1 "C '-, I "'I ¡ i I I I I. i I I L, II I ,l ~ C> .,¡ v; ~ 0 z z « 0.. ~ õi " ~ ~ ~ ! .' , ~~ n ~ , ~ . I. ~ g ; ~ ~ t ~ ~ §¡¡n a ~ ~ n g 8'0' ., ~ ¥ ð , Ii ~ > 53 i \ 8 t,~ ~ & ~ "- ::l..-i> I " I I ! II~ ' 0 . Q 0 í~ 'io9r6 >r.J b\;ry¡cO¡QV1'/OtjC) (, 31:"'5 ~^V aNO:j3~ ,.Il SSÞ90t96t;6 9¡.,!H 1:J~13/\IlV1N31- NOISIAIOanSllNn L! , , Z <i ...1 Q. '" 0 0 ...1. u.. , 0 :, Z CO 0 w U -' UJ "" UJ i;i ,8~ ~ "". ~~. 10 z « .....J 0..... ,., ,. :'tè.~ w Z <i ...1 Q. '" 0 0 ~ --.J ;' LL 3 f- UJ w ~ j lL "' [ . 'C_~~,"J: -->,-- -~ .. 0 J ~ä q~¡:6 '<fJ 1:'fh' -"'0 VNO¡,¡OJ .; 31108 3,~'>' UNO;J3S 11\: gSV9 01>'9 676 9l99, D\i1:Il. 3^1.11tl.N31 ., a !! Ii , .. ~~ ~. /)~Ümfì~~ , -r !.;,:.,,-.,~:,:,.~ ~ t,', . !:::'"':.-~~-~ , ,. " ; ~ '. ,0"" ." ," ,........, :. ., . . '. ; <þ :. . . ., . I ., ---'----'----,-'"-----"'1 imm'~ :.," .1 ~ :.: ~~:.. .:':;~ , ", .':,< T !;' ,...:.. .f'.. C;¡. . 1'i . '. ~ .. z ~ « .....J a... .. -. .. 3~m ~ ô ¡c ~ iû Q' ~ '!! .~ . I t!~~ ~ I!! ¡ ¡ -it' " ~ ~ .~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ E.. ~ f-. ~ S'Jt>90Þ9Ö76 8Nt:NÐIs'3ä'13'N\f1d 9<:9(':6 'V::J '~\fIO' 1;:10 I,tNO~O:) g ,Hlns 'AMH lS\10:) 3 Vl>il S31'10H 13SNnS 9¿S9~ l.:J~13!,.ll,tl.N3J.' NOISI^IOSnS liNn n Sl,te" \f:) H"'~ 'JU "'NO~O:) ].1IiìS 3.~"'m,0:)3S 1..\ ~. 1.: N Z <i -.J (L iØ G ~._.".,- ~f"~~ 1 '" " ~ ~ '"""\I' z « --' CL 0:: 0 0 --' . LL IT 0 :, Z :0 0 '" U ~ \..L ;S , .. .~ -.. (/) V) ....0.., , : z <! --' CL 0:: 0 0 ~ -.J ." LL :; f- (f) ~ ~ 3 LL m ;...,,-.:.. ~j ~~ ;~ ~~H6 V:;- '~\I"i . ~O "'NOtO:J ç 3.l11Î'3 '3(,'0' wNO::J3S ~,>r ;1 ~! ¡i " . . ~ ~~ , i; ,~ (j) ¿ g :~ Z .:; ~ ~ ¡ ¡ ~~ 'i~ '" ::¡¿ .. ~ ~ '" w -; ',~_l I g ~, C:¡ :J .~ ~ 'j;î ~ I<' ~i; ~ i i~~ ~ i ãnr~ "" L.. .1 "'-.1'- CD (!) @ CD CD J z , '<! ...J D- C>: 0 0 ...J '"- -, 0 :., Z :0 0 W u ~ UJ " (/) :,; 1 ~ - ':' ->c- iQ to Z « --.J CL z --..- ~ ... <[ ...J D- C>: 0 0 ...J ' LL ~ to ~ ~ ~ '"- ~ '\ 31~rf!~ Ii .::t Ciþ.. PLAN3-m STAIN WOOD tLl't_~:;i,I/>t,e.AN ' !J;"~'.' ,--""..'.... . &-"_.!~'.."- .. FRONì ELEVATION 1/4" BACK ELEVATION ". ~"";OR'''T.'''',= ",n"'.",c.-"'" '''''Coo<o-o".i~ ",., 0 so"~ ¡' . . .~--- .-.--""---'1 .-- ._-~.:. r,.....-.....,,__-....--=-- ìl " - '.--..--""-'N"'-----------.." i.. . :.-.. :-... -,.,..,,°, '-.-1/~' . ......----. .-... ........ ..........1....--..... - f.........'.. . . . £~) ~. ' " '; . .. .. . LEFT EL~ ,ATIGN ---- ------------------------- . . '-é RIGHT ELEVATION '^,'-'''' ~"""'" ,,,,,,....,,.. -",><:.,,,.A().""",:,,,-,,~ t-"'" J I ODORS T -~ G I i-'IGH DENSITY FOAM H I WINDQWS q...)'f';;C!.\H...N- L~,:.,t. .,(-''.~c/:<.~ Q 1/4" """"""";,...,,,,,,,,,,'''' " "" ROOFING CEMENT PLASTER Ill." .."..,'¡,..-., "'r.'I! ,",~",' ,A"" r.''''"''' ",-"" " "" """"'-"'""I? n'F"~"é«' PRECAST CONCRE IE: E I [LEVA TiON KEYNOTES :1 ~~ {-) U 'I"" A,~~iii _Qi :;; Z~! " Ø~I fß~1 oij I- §II UJõ I < z~1 ~Ò «v II 5' ~ 1",..0 a: IIII~ ~;¡; I~ð ~~ ~8 ~~ ~. ;1 H - ~entative Tract July 12, 2004 Page 1 of 2 Map No. 2004-02 Findings of Fact A. The proposed project, as conditioned, and its design and improvements are consistent with the Low Density Residential land use designation of the General Plan and are otherwise consistent wi th all other elements of the General Plan and any applicable specific plans. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the Low Density Residential land use designation and all other elements of the General Plan as well as the North Harbor Specific Plan. B. The proposed proj ect, as conditioned, conforms to all applicable requirements of the zoning and subdivision codes as well as other applicable City ordinances. . The proposed project, as conditioned, conforms to the provisions of the zoning code with respect to lot size and frontage and setbacks. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) are required for the project, which need to be approved by the City prior to City Council approval of the final map. C. The project site is physically suitable for the type and density of the proposed project. The proposed site is physically suitable for the single-family development as proposed since the property is located within the Single-Family district of the North Harbor Specific Plan (SP2) zoning district and has a General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential at seven dwelling units per acre (LR7). Additionally, this site is surrounded by the Willowick Golf Course to the east and a combination of single and multi-family residences to the west, north and south. D. The design and improvements of the proposed project will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish and wildlife or their habitat. . A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared pursuant to the California Environment Quality Act for the project. The project site is located in an urbanized area, and there are no TTM 04-2 . E~tpAj15 Tentative Tract July 12, 2004 Page 2 of 2 Map No. 2004-02 known fish or wildlife populations existing on the project site. Therefore, the proposed subdivision will not cause any substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish and wildlife or their habitat. E. The design or improvements of the proposed project will not cause serious public health problems. The proposed subdivision is not anticipated to have any detrimental effects upon the general public. Each property will have sewer, water and the necessary infrastructure improvements as conditioned in Development Project Review No. 02-33. F. The design or improvements of the proposed project will not conflict with easements necessary for public access through or use of the property within the proposed project. The design or improvements of the proposed proj ect will not conflict with easements necessary for public access through or use of the property within the proposed project since there is no easement within this property. 31A-16 eUL Y 12, 2004 PAGE 1 OFS Conditions for Approval Tentative Tract Map No. 2004-02 is approved subject to compliance, to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Manager, with all 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. The applicant must comply in full with each and every condition listed below prior to exercising the rights conferred by this approval. The applicant must remain in compliance with all conditions listed below throughout the life of the tentative tract map. Failure to comply with each and every condition may result in the revocation of the tentative tract map. A. Planning Division . . 1. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) are required prior to final map approval addressing operational standards, common area maintenance, drainage, architecture, parking and circulation. The CC&Rs shall be recorded with the final map. 2. Two copies of the recorded final parcel map and CC&Rs shall be submitted each to the Planning Division, Building Division and Public Works Agency within 10 days of recordation. 3. The tentative tract map, final map and all improvements required to be made or installed by the subdivider shall be in accordance with the requirements and design standards and specifications of the City of Santa Ana and the requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act. 4 . After proj ect occupancy, landscaping is to be maintained in accordance wi th the landscape plan approved for the proj ect . This shall include the minimum levels of plant materials shown on the landscape plan and installed at the time of occupancy. Mitigation Measures 5. All materials excavated or graded will be sufficiently watered to prevent excessive amount of dust. Watering with complete coverage shall occur at least twice daily, once in the late morning and once after work is done for the day. TTM 04-2 3 ~)(i8I1712 JULY 12, 2004 PAGE20F5 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. All clearing and earthwork activities shall cease during period of high winds (winds greater than 25 mph averaged over one hour) or during Stage 1 or Stage 2 smog episodes. Streets surrounding the project site should be cleaned at the end of each day of construction. All materials transported off-site shall either be sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. The amount of area disturbed by clearing activities shall be minimized at all times. and earthwork To the extent feasible, equipment engines shall be maintained in good condition and in proper tune according to manufacturer's specifications. To the extent feasible, gasoline powered equipment shall be used for on-site and off-site construction activities. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall provide proof of coverage under an NPDES General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit, which includes a copy of the project number and two copies of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. Foundations for two-story dwellings shall be by a homogenous layer of certified compacted five feet beyond the perimeter of the footprint. supported entirely fill not less than proposed building The proj ect shall comply with the bearing capacity, lateral design, concrete slab on-grade, asphalt concrete and seismic coefficient design recommendations provided in the geotechnical report prepared for the proj ect by Nunez Engineering, in May 2002. Prior to grading, existing vegetation, trash, surface structures and debris shall be removed and disposed off-site as a legal dumpsite. Any existing utility lines or other subsurface structures, which are not to be utilized, should be removed, destroyed or abandoned in compliance with current governmental regulations. 31A-18 ~UL Y 12,2004 ~AGE30F5 . . 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. Excavated soil may be used as fill and backfill provided that it is clean and free of debris. All areas where certified compacted fill is to be placed shall first be cleaned of structures, concrete, asphalt concrete, vegetation and debris materials. The excavated bottoms of all fill soil excavations shall be observed and approved by the Soil Engineer and the City Building Inspector before backfill with certified compacted fill begins. The soils to be used for compactions should be mixed and watered to obtain uniform optimum moisture content. The soils shall be placed in a layer not thicker that eight inches and Mechanically compacted or wheel-rolled to a minimum relative compaction of 90-percent. Prior to demolition of any structures on the project site, an asbestos and lead paint survey shall be prepared to determine the presence of asbestos building materials and lead paint. The asbestos/lead paint survey shall be submitted to the City's Environmental Coordinator for review. Prior to issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall submit for review and approval a surface drainage/grading/erosion control plan prepared by a registered Civil Engineer, showing the direction and means of flow to the adj acent street. The plan is to include existing and proposed elevations adjacent to all property lines. Drainage routed to the street must be directed beneath the sidewalk and through the curb. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare an NPDES post-construction storm water management plan per Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) that includes all structural and non-structural Best Management Practices. a. Submit and have approved a surface drainage/utility plan that includes all Structural Best Management Practices. b. Provide two copies of the Water Quality Management plan that includes a description of all applicable Structural and Non-Structural Best Management Practices, which may apply to this project. Prior to issuance of shall receive approval Water Quality Control operations. grading permits, the project applicant of NPDES permit from the State Regional Board for proposed on-site dewatering 31A-19 JULY 12,2004 PAGE40F5 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. The proposed proj ect would be subj ect to City of Federal Clean Water Protection Enterprise Fees. Santa Ana Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall submit a final surface water runoff evaluation for review and methods of draining the site without exceeding the capacity of any street or adjacent storm drain facility. Prior to shall be systems. the issuance of building permits, the project applicant responsible for the construction of on-site storm drain The proposed proj ect Fee. is subj ect to Drainage Area I Assessment Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy permits, the project shall coordinate with Willowick Golf Course on the construction of a 50-foot high safety net along the frontage of the project along the fairway to deflect errant golf balls from causing property damage. Grading plans and building plans for the proposed project shall note that construction activities on the project site shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or any time on Sunday or a federal holiday. No construction equipment on the project including warming up until after 7:00 a.m. shall operate site All construction equipment shall tuned to minimize noise emissions. be maintained and properly All equipment shall be fitted with properly operating mufflers and air intake silencers no less efficient than those originally installed. Stockpiling and vehicle staging areas shall be located away from existing residential uses. The name and telephone posted on-site. number of person shall be a contact Construction shall be subject to any and all provisions forth by the City of Santa Ana Planning Department. set 31A-20 AJULY 12, 2004 "PAGE50F5 . . 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project developer shall submit evidence to the City of Santa Ana of a fee payment between the developer and the Garden Grove School District to offset school facility impacts. Prior to issuance of building permits, the project shall pay Area F Transportation System Improvement fee. The site plan for the proposed project shall reflect the construction of a six-inch public water main and appurtenances at 10-feet north of the centerline of Lincoln Way. The project applicant shall coordinate with the City of Santa Ana Water Department regarding the final depths, and locations and of the proposed water distribution facility. The site plan for the proposed project shall reflect the construction of a six-inch public water main and appurtenances at 10-feet north of the centerline of Eleventh Street and to extend approximately 200-feet to the east of the centerline on Jackson Street. The project applicant shall coordinate with the City of Santa Ana Water Department regarding the final depth, and locations and of the proposed water distribution facility. Water conservation measures recommended by the State Department of Water Resources and applicable state laws requiring the use of water-efficient plumbing fixtures and recommendations for low-water using landscape shall be incorporated into the project design as appropriate. The site plan for the proposed project shall reflect the construction of an eight-inch private sewer main and manhole at five feet to the south of the centerline on Eleventh Street and to extend approximately 200 feet to the east of centerline on Jackson Street. The project applicant shall coordinate with the City of Santa Ana Water Department regarding the final depth, and locations of the proposed sewer distribution facility. The proposed proj ect shall verify if the existing sewer line along the length of the project site is active or abandoned. 31A-21 MAYOR Miguel A. Pulido MAYOR PRO TEM Brett E. Franklin COUNCILMEMBERS Claudia 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 Ana. California 92702 www.santa-ana.org CITY MANAGER David N. Ream CITY ATTORNEY Joseph W. Fletcher CLERK OF THE COUNG 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: Jackson Street Homes Project Description: The proposed project is a request for a tentative tract map to allow the subdivision of 17 lots to construct 17 single-family dwellings. Project Location: 1101 North Jackson Street Project Number: ER 2003-133 Public Review Period: 5-31-2004 to 6-19-2004 Hearing Date: 6-28-2004 Hearing Location: City of Santa Ana Council Chambers 22 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, 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 Ana 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 6-19-2004. 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 Ann Ni at (714) 667-2700. RHCB\lnotice\er TTM 04-2 J:t:IABB~ .~~-~ CS 606-2 MAYOR Miguel A. Pulido MAYOR PRO TEM ~ret1 E. Franklin NClLMEMBERS - Claudia C. Alvarez Lisa Bist Alberta D. Christy Mike Garcia Jose Solorio ~ ~ CITY OF SANTA ANA CITY MANAGER David N. Ream CITY ATTORNEY Joseph W. Fletcher CLERK OF THE COUNCIL Patricia E. Healy PLANNING & BUILDING AGENCY 20 Civic Center Plaza (M-20J P.O. BOX 1988 . Santa Ana. California 92702 www.santa-ana.org M ITIGÄTED :~:.'N EGA TI~Ët~ DECIlÄRAIIÖN --Gl.....,~....~..............c..........-...Ir._... ,,l.>":. ..,~,- ,-~ -",---~'~.u..:........IIt.'IIIiwIo.~~_LCoI'II."""',,"''''''_'''~''~~'''''''-''''' 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 2003-133 . Applicant: Martin Henrikson, Sunset Homes Project Location I Address: 1101 North Jackson Street Project Title I Description: Jackson Street Homes/Proposed project is a request for a tentative tract map to allow the subdivision of 17 lots to construct 17 single-family homes. And does hereby find: That although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because of revisions to the project and mitigation measures placed on the project, and agreed to by the applicant, reduce each impact to below a level of significance. Signature: Date: ~ This determination is not final until adopted by the decision-making body or administrative official, and a Notice of Determination is filed. . 31~~' CS 6Q6. 2 Jackson Street Homes Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ER 2003-133 Proposed Project The proposed project is a request for a tentative tract map to allow the subdivision of 17 lots to construct 17 single-family residences. Setting The project site is located at 1101 North Jackson Street in the City of Santa Ana, Orange County California. The project site consists of approximately 2.70 acres and is currently occupied by eight multi-family dwelling units used as church rehab facilities for substance abuse recovery. The project site is located on the east side of Jackson Street between Eleventh Street and Washington Avenue. The project site is surrounded by the Willowwick Golf Course to the east, a combination of single family and multi-family residences to the west, north and south. The proj ect Plan (SP2) designation acre (LR7). site is located within the North Harbor Specific zoning district and has a General Plan land use of Low Density Residential at 7 dwelling units per Proposed Project The proposed project involves the demolition and removal of eight buildings consisting of 24 multi-family dwellings, and the construction of 17 new single-family residences. The lot sizes would range from 6,000 square feet to 7,383 square feet. A total of three different floor plans are proposed for the project. Plan 1 includes 2,813 square foot of living area; Plan 2 includes 3,015 square feet of living area and Plan 3 includes 3,295 square foot of living area. Access to the proposed proj ect would be provided from Jackson Street. A 3-car attached garage and two tandem spaces in the driveway would be provided for each unit. The architectural style proposed for this project is Spanish Mediterranean. The exterior material proposed includes tile roof, stucco, precast concrete stone veneer, wrought iron grills 1 31=AU24 . . I. and railings and decorative window surrounds. Additionally, arched doorways, windows, porches and entry are features used on the elevations to characterize the Spanish Mediterranean architectural style. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS The following is an environmental analysis on the proposed proj ect based on the City of Santa Ana's CEQA Environmental Checklist Form. The analysis incorporates by reference the analysis in the City of Santa Ana Updated General Plan Land Use Element FEIR. Additionally, a site-specific geotechnical report has been prepared for the proposed project and has been incorporated into the environmental analysis. For each environmental issue, the analysis identifies the level of impact that is anticipated to occur. Where applicable, mitigation measures have been identified to reduce potentially significant impacts to a level considered less than significant. I. AESTHETICS A. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? B. Damage scenic resources, including but not limited to trees, rock outpourings and historic buildings within a State highway? Less Than Significant Impact The project site is situated within an urban setting and surrounded by developed land uses. There are no scenic vistas or scenic resources within the immediate vicinity of the project si te. Therefore, implementation of the proposed proj ect would not result in adverse impacts to any scenic vista or scenic resources along a State Highway. C. Substantially degrade the existing visual quality of the site and it's surrounding? or character Less Than Significant Impact The project site is located within the North Harbor Specific Plan and subject to the North Harbor Specific Plan Design Guidelines. Additionally, the General Plan Urban Design Element identifies that the project site is located within the Santa Anita Design District. The Urban Design Element establishes goals and policies to help guide the design of land uses 2 31~~25 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 architectural style of the proposed project would be Spanish Mediterranean. The exterior material proposed includes tile roof, stucco, precast concrete stone veneer, wrought iron grills and railings and decorative window surrounds. Additionally, arched doorways, windows, porches and entry are features used on the elevations to characterize the Spanish Mediterranean architectural style. Through the City's development review process, the proposed project was determined to be consistent with the City's Urban Design Element and compatible with the existing aesthetic environment within the project area. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not decrease the existing visual character of the project site or surrounding project area. 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 The project site is situated within an urbanized area and is surrounded by onstreet lighting. Implementation of the proposed proj ect would not introduce substantial amounts of new sources of light and glare into the project area. Any lighting provided on the project site would be designed and located so that all direct rays are confined to the project site. I. AGRICULTURE C. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agriculture use? Conflict with existing zoning for agriculture 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-agriculture use? A. B. 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 3 31PÞ:~26 . . . Statewide Importance. Additionally, based on a site visit conducted by the City's Environmental Coordinator, the project site is currently not in agriculture production. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in adverse impacts to any agricultural resources. AIR QUALITY A. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of applicable Air Quality Attainment Plan or congestion Management Plan? No Impact The project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin and subj ect 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 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 proj ections provided in regional planning programs 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 planning programs and/or local general plans. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and its associated growth proj ections. The::-efore, the proposed proj ect would be considered to be consistent with the growth projections and air quality objectives established in the South Coast AQMP. B. Violate any stationary source air quality contribute to an existing or proposed violation? standard or air quality Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated As mentioned previously, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) regulates air quality pollutants in the South Coast Air Basin. Pollutants for which ambient standards have set are referred to as criteria pollutants. Criteria pollutants include Ozone (03), Carbon Monoxide (CO), Nitrogen Dioxide (N02), Sulfur Dioxide (S02), and Particulate Matter (PM10). The South Coast Air Basin is currently a non-attainment area for Carbon Monoxide, Ozone and Particulate Matter. The SCAQMD 4 3'~~~ considers an air quality impact to be significant if it exceeds the criteria pollutant thresholds identified in the Table 1. Table 1 EMISSION THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Project Pollutant Construction Tons/ Operations Pounds/Day Quarter Pounds/Day Carbon Monoxide 550 24.75 550 Reactive Organic Compounds 75 2.5 55 Nitrogen Oxides 100 2.5 55 particulate Matter 150 6.75 150 Long-ter.m Operational Air Quality Impacts The proposed project would involve the development of 17 single- family dwelling units. 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. Using the South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook as guideline, the threshold for potentially significant long-term air quality impacts would involve the development of 166 single-family dwelling units. The proposed proj ect would be less than the threshold of significance for long-term air quality impacts established by the CEQA Air Quality Handbook. Short-ter.m constructed Related Air Quality Impacts Construction operations associated with the proposed project could potentially result in short-term increases in particulate mater, and to a lesser degree increases in carbon monoxide and ozone. Peak day construction emissions for most pollutants would occur during the clearing, excavation and grading phases. Using the South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook as a guideline, the threshold for potentially significant short-term air quality impacts would involve the grading of 1, 309, 000 square feet of area. Assuming grading of the entire project site, approximately 117,612 square feet of area would be graded. The proposed grading would be considerably less than the threshold of significance established by the CEQA Air Quality Handbook. To minimize dust impacts during 5 3'~~8 . . . construction, the proposed proj ect would be required to comply with SCAQMD Fugitive Dust Rule 403 to suppress dust generated by construction operations. Mitigation Measures To ensure compliance with SCAQMD Fugitive Dust Rule 403, grading plans and demolition plans for the proposed project shall reflect the following notes: 1. All material excavated or graded will be sufficiently watered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. Watering with complete coverage shall occur at least twice daily I once in the late morning and once after work is done for the day. 2. All clearing during period averaged over smog episodes. and earthwork activities shall cease of high winds (winds greater than 25 mph one hour) or during Stage 1 or Stage 2 3. Streets surrounding the project site should be cleaned at the end of each day of construction. 4. All material transported offsite shall sufficiently watered or securely covered excessive amounts of dust. either be to prevent 5. The amount of area disturbed by clearing and earthwork activities shall be minimized at all times. 6. Equipment engines shall be condition and in proper manufacturer's specifications. maintained in tune according good to 7. To the extent shall be used activities. feasible, gasoline powered equipment for onsite and offsite construction c. 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? Less Than Significant Impact 6 31~~29 The proposed project would be consistent with the City's General Plan and would 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. Expose Sensitive concentrations? receptors to substantial pollutant Less than Significant Impact The proposed project would not exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District threshold for potentially significant long-term and short-term air quality impacts. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to any substantial concentrations of air quality pollutants. E. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Less Than Significant Impact The operation of the proposed project would not generate significant objectionable odors to the public. Construction operations associated with the proposed project could emit construction equipment emission odors that. could potentially be objectionable. However, the potential impact would be short-term and would not be considered a significant impact. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES A. 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? B. Have a substantial adverse irnpact 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? 7 3~Â'ao . . , I. I I ! C. Adversely impact federally protected wetlands either individually or in combination with the known or probable impacts of other activities through direct removal, filling hydrological interruption, or other means? D. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact The project site is situated within an urban setting. According to the California Department of Fish and Game Natural Diversity Data Base and the City's Updated General Plan Land Use Element EIR, there are no sensitive biological resources located on or wi thin the nearby vicini ty of the proj ect si te . Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in any adverse impacts to any sensitive biological resources. CULTURAL RESOURCES A. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? Less Than Significant Impact According to the Santa Ana Local Register of Historical Structures and the Federal Register of Historical Structures, there are no historically significant structures located on the project site. B. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? C. Directly or indirectly disturb paleontogical resource or site? a unique destroy or D. Disturb any human remains, of formal cemeteries. including those interred outside Less Than Significant The project site is currently improved with several buildings. According to the General Plan Land Use Element EIR, there are no known cultural resources on the project sites. Given the fact that the project site is currently improved, the probability for the discovery of unknown cultural resources would be low. 8 ~,~~, VI. GEOLOGY/SOILS The following analysis is based on a Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation prepared by Nunez Engineering in May of 2002. The Geotechnical Investigation is available for review at the City of Santa Ana Planning Department. A-l. 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? No Impact The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act of 1991 established a statewide seismic hazard mapping and technical advisory program to assist cities and counties in protecting the public health and safety from the effects of strong ground shaking, liquefaction, landslides or other ground failure and other seismic hazards caused by earthquakes. Additionally, the Alquist-Priolo Act directs the State Geologist to delineate regulatory zones that encompass surface traces of active faults that have potential for future surface fault rupture to regulate development near active faults in order to mitigate the hazard of surface fault rupture. The Tustin Quadrangle Official Map of Seismic Hazard Zones dated January 17, 2001 was reviewed to evaluate the site location relative to mapped zones of required investigation for liquefaction and earthquake-induced land slides. According to the Seismic Hazard Zone Map, the project site is not located within a current Alquist-Priolo "Earthquake Fault Zone for fault surface rupture hazard. The surface traces of any active or potentially active faults are not known to pass directly through or extend towards the project site. Therefore, the potential for surface rupture due to faulting occurring beneath the site during the design life of the proposed project is considered low. A-2. Strong Seismic Ground shaking? 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 9 31~~rn . . . 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 proj ect site could potentially be subj ect to a maximum credible horizontal ground acceleration of o. 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. To minimize potential seismic shaking impacts, the proposed proj ect would be subj ect to the seismic safety standards of the Uniform Building Code. Compliance with the Uniform Building Code would reduce potential seismic shaking impacts to a level considered less than significant. A-3. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less Than Significant Impact Soil liquefaction occurs when loose soil deposits below the water table are subj e.cted 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 proj ect geotechnical report, soils conditions on the proj ect site between 10 and 30 feet are classified as medium dense, between 30 and 50 as dense and higher than 50 as very dense. Most of the soils below a depth of 15-feet, the probable upper limit of groundwater saturation, are classified as dense to very dense. The project geotechnical report concluded that the potential for liquefaëtion at the project site is not likely, nor probable. The upper 5 feet soils, which would be considered the least dense would be removed and compacted. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would result in less than significant liquefaction risks. A-4. Landslides No Impact The project area is flat without any topographical relief. According to the project geotechnical report, there are no landslide planes or slopes within the project êŒea. Therefore, implementation of the project would not result in adverse impacts in regards to landslides. 10 3,eÄ~~ B. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Erosion refers to the removal surfaces by water or wind. intensified with an increase in channels and by the removal of soil exposed. of soil from exposed bedrock The effects of erosion are slope, the narrowing of runoff groundcover, which leaves the Construction operations for the proposed proj ect would require the excavation, removal and recompaction of onsite soils, importing of fill material, and grading. The uncovered soils on the project site could potentially result in erosion and sedimentation impacts to onsite and offsite drainage facilities. This potential impact could increase during periods of rain. To reduce potential erosion impacts to a level considered less than significant, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented. Mitigation Measure . Prior to issuance of a grading permit the project applicant shall provide proof of coverage under NPDES General Construction Activity storm Water Permit, which includes, a copy of the project number and two copies of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. c. Would the project result in the loss of a unique geological feature? No Impact According to the project geotechnical report and the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, the 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. D. In 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? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated 11 3'AlSít . . . According to the project geotechnical report, the earth materials on the project site consist mostly of a thin layer of fill soils overlying native silty sands. The fill soils consist of silty sands that are dry to moist, medium dense to very dense and beige. The maximum depth of fill encountered was 0.5 feet. The native soils also consist of silty fine sands to silty coarse sands that are moist to saturated, medium dense to very dense and beige to gray. The project geotechnical report concluded that construction of the proposed project would be geotechnically feasible with design recommendations incorporated into the project. Mitigations Measures The following geotechnical recommendations shall be incorporated into plans and specifications. . Foundations for two-story dwellings shall be supported entirely by a homogenous layer of certified compacted fill not less than five feet in thickness and extending three feet beyond the perimeter of the proposed building footprint. . The project shall comply with the bearing capacity, lateral design, concrete slap on-grade, asphalt concrete and seismic coefficient design recommendations provided in the geotechncial report prepared for the project by Nunewz Engineering, in May 2002. . Prior to grading, existing vegetation, trash, surface structures and debris shall be removed-and disposed off- site at a legal dumpsite. Any existing utility lines, or other subsurface structures, which are not to be utilized should be removed, destroyed, or abandoned in compliance with current governmental regulations. . Excavated soil may be used as fill and backfill provided that it is clean and free of debris. All areas where certified compacted fill is to be placed shall first be cleaned of structures, concrete, asphalt concrete, vegetation and debris materials. The excavated bottoms of all fill soil excavations shall be observed and approved by the Soil Engineer and the City Building Inspector before backfill with certified compacted fill begins. The soils to be used for compaction should be mixed and watered to obtain uniform optimum moisture content. The soils shall be placed in a layer not thicker than 8 inches and 12 !~A>!35 mechanically compacted or wheel-rolled to a minimum relative compaction of 90-percent. E. Where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater is the soil capable of supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems? No Impact The project site is located within urban setting service is available. The proposed proj ect would septic tanks or alternative disposal systems. where sewer not require VII. HAZARDS/HAZARDOUS MATERIALS A. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? B. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous hazardous materials, substance or waste within mile of an existing or proposed school? or acutely one-quarter Less Than Significant Impact The operation of the proposed project would not involve activities that would emit hazardous emissions or involve the routine handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials. Construction operations associated with the proposed project could involve incidental handling of hazardous materials such as solvents, paints, gasoline and oil. However, the proposed proj ect would be subj ect to compliance with local, state and federal laws and regulations regarding the storage and handling of hazardous materials. Compliance with local, state and federal laws and regulations would reduce the handling of hazardous materials to a level considered less than significant. The proposed project would require the demolition of several existing residential structures. It appears that the residential structures were constructed in the early 1960' s. During that period of time asbestos containing building materials and lead paint were common building materials. Both asbestos containing building materials and lead paint could pose a health hazard if they are inadvertently released into the air and inhaled by employees during construction operations. 13 ~'~~36 . . . Mitigation Measure . Prior to the demolition of any structures on the project site, an asbestos and lead paint survey shall be prepared to determine the presence of asbestos building materials and lead paint. The asbestos/lead paint survey shall be submitted to the City's Environmental Coordinator for review. C. Be located on a site which is located on a list of hazardous material sites compiles pursuant to Government Code Section 659662.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? No Impact According to the EDR database, state and federal records and the City Santa Ana Fire Department, the project site is not included on a list of hazardous material sites. Implementation of the proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. D. For a proj ec t located wi thin an airport land use plan or where such a plan has not been adopted, wi thin two miles where a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? Less Than Significant Impacts According to the Orange County Airport "Land Use Commission Airports Environs Land Use Plan, the project site is not located wi thin an accident potential zone I clear zone or FAA Notification Area. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in safety hazards to people residing within the project area. VIII. HYDROLOGY/WATER QUALITY A. Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated The primary sour:ce of potential adverse water quality impacts associated with the operation of the proposed project would be 14 3~A~37 from nuisance flows. Nuisance flows is defined as runoff that occurs during periods that are not usually associated with rainfall¡ and are most commonly produced from landscaping irrigation, leaking pipes¡ and water used to wash off surfaces tributary to the street. Since nuisance flows usually originates in the street¡ they commonly contain many common pollutants found in streets such as oil and grease and sediment. Such impacts could potentially be in conflict with water quality standards established by the State Regional Water Quality Control Board. Additionally, surface water runoff generated from the project site during construction operations could be degraded potentially resulting in adverse water quality impacts to downstream receiving waters. To reduce potential water quality impacts to a level considered less than significant the following mitigation measure shall be implemented. Mitigation Measures . Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall provide proof of coverage under NPDES General construction Activity Storm Water Permit, which includes a copy of the project permit number and two copies of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. . Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall prepare an NPDES post-construction storm water management plan per Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) that includes all structural and non~structural Best Management Practic~s for the project. a. Submit and have approved a surface plan to include all structural Practices. drainage/utility Best management b. Provide two copies of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) that includes a description of all-applicable Structural and Non-Structural Best Management Practices, which would apply to this project. . Prior to issuance of grading permits the project applicant shall receive approval of NPDES Permit for the State ~.e9ional Wate1.- Quality Contx.ol Board fo1.- proposed onsite dewatering operations. 15 31a1\2jä . . I. . The proposed project would be subject to City of Santa Ana Federal Clean Water Protection Enterprise Fees. B. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. No Impact The project geotechnical report encountered underground water at a depth of 17-feet. Construction operations for the project would not require dewatering activities. The proposed project would also not interfere with ground water recharge because the project area is not located in an area that is known to recharge the ground water system. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in significant impacts to any underground water supplies. C. 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 stor.m water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted run-off? D. Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated The proposed project would not introduce substantial amounts of new impervious surfaces onto the project site. Existing rates of surface water runoff are not anticipated to increase significantly. Through the City's development review process, the Public Works Agency has determined the existing drainage facilities within the project area could provide adequate drainage for the proj ect . However, final drainage plans would still need to be prepared to determine the size and exact location of onsite drain facilities. Mitigation Measure . Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall submit a final surface water runoff evaluation for review and approval showing existing and proposed facilities and methods of draining the site 16 31 ~t:.CS9 E. F. G. without exceeding the capacity of any street or adjacent storm drain facility. . Prior to the issuance of building permits the project applicant shall be responsible for the construction of onsite storm drain systems. . The proposed project is subject to Drainage Area I Assessment Fee. 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 100-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? Less Than Significant Impact The City of Santa Ana is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Communities participating in the NFIP must adopt and enforce minimum floodplain management standards, including identification of flood hazards and flood risks. Participation in the NFIP allows communities to purchase low cost insurance protection against losses from flooding. The published Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) for the project site are included on Community Panel No. 0602320143H. The project site located entirely in Zone X, which is defined as areas beyond the limits of the 100-year flood. and 500-year flood. Implementation of the proposed proj ect would not significantly increase the potential for flood risks. IX. LAND USE/PLANNING A. Physically divide an established community? Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated The project site is situated within an area that is characterized with residential land uses. The proposed proj ect would be compatible with existing residential uses in the area. However, the proposed project would be adjacent to the existing Willow wick Golf Course. Another residential project in the City adj acent to a golf course has reported a number of instances where errant golf balls have resulted in property damage. The 17 3Ðf~~lJO . . . proposed project would not have any buffer or fencing between the homes and the golf course to deflect errant golf balls. Therefore, there is the potential that errant golf balls from the adjacent golf course could result in property damage to residential dwellings adj acent to or near the golf course. To avoid potential impacts from errant golf balls, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented. Mitigation Measure . Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy permits, the project shall coordinate with Willow wick Golf Course on the construction of a 50-foot high safety net along the frontage of the project along the fairway to deflect errant golf balls from causing property damage. B. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Less Than Significant Impact The project site is located within the North Harbor Specific Plan (SP2) zoning district and has a General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential at 7 dwelling units per acre (LR7). The proposed project is consistent with density requirements in the General Plan and the site development standards in the North Harbor Specific Plan. Implementation of the proposed project would not be in conflict with any relevant planning programs in the City. C. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community plan? No Impact According to the City's General Plan, the project site is not included within any habitat conservation plan or any natural community conservation plan. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not be in conflict with any habitat conservation plan. X. MINERAL RESOURCES 18 3Pf~~~' A. Resul t 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? No Impact According to the City's Updated General Plan Land Use Element EIR, there are no areas in Santa Ana that are designated significant Mineral Aggregate Resource Areas. Therefore, implementation of the proposed proj ect would not result in the loss of any regionally or locally important mineral resource. XI. NOISE A. C. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Less Than Significant Impact The project is located within the City of Santa Ana and subject to noise standards and guidelines in the General Plan Noise Element and Municipal Code Noise Ordinance. The City of Santa Ana Land Use Guidelines included in Table 2 is to be used in sitting new land uses. TABLE 2 CITY OF SANTA ANA LAND USE GUIDELINES FOR EXTERIOR NOISE Land Use Noise Level (dBA CÑEL or Ldn) Desirable Maximum Acceptable Maximum Low Density 55 65 Residential Medium Density 60 65 Residential High Density 65 70 Residential Schools 60 70 Commercial, Office 65 75 Industrial 70 75 The proposed project includes single-family dwellings. The desirable maximum noise level the development of detached Noise Element establishes a of 55 dB CNEL and maximum 19 3~Þ¡-42 . . . acceptable noise level family dwellings would interior noise standards night. of 65 dB CNEL. The proposed single- also be required to meet the City's of 55 dBA during the day and 45 dBA at The project site is situated within an area that consists of residential land uses. Roadways adj acent to the proj ect site have relatively low traffic volumes. Existing noise levels within the project area are anticipated to be less than 65 dB CNEL. For those dwelling units that have outdoor living areas adj acent to proj ect area roadways, a concrete block wall would be provided to reduce noise levels. Additionally, based on a typical attenuation factor of 20 dBA with windows closed for Title 24 residential development, interior noise levels for the project would not exceed the City's interior noise standards. The proposed project would generate a minimal amount of traffic within the project area. No significant increases in existing noise levels are expected to occur from project related traffic. B. Exposure of persons to or generation of groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. excessive Less Than Significant Impact Vibration is a trembling, quivering, or oscillating motion of the earth. Vibration can be either natural as in the form of earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, sea waves, landslides, etc., or man-made as from explosions, the action of heavy machinery, or heavy vehicles such as trucks or trains. Both natural and man- made vibration may be continuous such as from operating machinery, or transient as from an explosion. Construction operations for the proposed project would involve conventional construction equipment and building practices. No significant vibration impacts would result from construction operations. Additionally, the operation of the proposed project would not result in any long-term vibration impacts. D. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without project. Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Short-term noise impacts preparation, excavation, associated with construction of site the are impacts grading, and 20 3'~~lí~ proposed project. The construction-related short-term noise levels would be higher than the existing or ambient noise levels in the project area, but would no longer occur once construction of the project is complete. The City's Municipal Code recognizes that some forms of noise are required for urban development and maintenance and are difficult to control. Section 18-314 (e) exempts noise sources associated with construction, repair, remodeling, or grading of any real property, provided said activities do not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, including Sa~urday, or any time on Sunday or a federal holiday. While adverse, construction, when performed in compliance with the requirements of the Municipal Code is typically considered to be less than significant. However, construction noise associated with the project would have the potential to create nuisance noise at nearby residential land uses. To minimize short-term construction noise impacts the following mitigation measures shall be implemented. Mitigation Measures . Grading Plans and Building Plans for the proposed project shall note that construction activities on the project site shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or any time on Sunday or a federal holiday. . No construction equipment on the project site shall operate including warming up until after 7:00 a.m. . All construction equipment shall be properly maintained and tuned to minimize noise emissions, . All equipment shall be fitted with properly operating mufflers and air intake silencers no less efficient than those originally installed, . Stockpiling and vehicle staging areas shall be located away from existing residential uses. . The name and telephone number of a contact person shall be posted on-site, and . Construction sllall be subject to any and all provisions set forth by the City of Santa Ana Planning Department. 21 31~244 . . . E. For a project located within an airport land use plan or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact According to the Orange County Airport Environs Land Use Plan, the project site is not located within an area that is subject to high levels of aircraft noise. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not expose people within the project area to significant aircraft noise impacts. XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING A. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly through extension of roads or other infrastructure. Less Than Significant Impact Based on population estimates from the California Department of Finance, there were 343,700 residents in the City of Santa Ana in 2002. Presently, the average household size in Santa Ana is 4 . 65 persons. The proposed proj ect would add an addi t ional 1 7 single-family dwelling units to the City's existing housing stock. Based on the City's current average household size, the population in the City is projected to increase by approximately 79 persons. This increase is consistent with the City's General Plan proj ections. The proj ected populatiori increase associated with the proposed project would not exceed or significantly contribute to exceeding the regional population growth projections for Santa Ana. B. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacem~nt housing elsewhere? c. No Impact The proposed proj ect would increase the housing stock in the City and would not displace any existing onsite residential uses or any offsite residential uses surrounding the project area. 22 31~~45 XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES Fire Protection: Less than Significant Impact The City of Santa Ana Fire Department would provide fire protection and emergency services to the project area. The City maintains ten fire stations throughout the City. The stations are situated where no location in the City is outside of an approximate 1.5 radius of a fire station. Additionally, the City maintains a Mutual Aid Agreement for fire protection services wi th the neighboring Cities of Fountain Valley, Garden Grove, Tustin, Irvine and Costa Mesa. According to the City of Santa Ana Insurance Service Organization, the City has a low fire risk rating. According to the Santa Ana Fire Department, the goal of the fire department is to have an onsite response time of 5: 00 or less 80% of the time. Fire Station No.8 located at 501 North Newhope would be the closest fire station to the project site. Presently, a shift at Fire Station No.8 consists of six fire fighters, 1 fire truck, and 1 emergency response unit. The proposed proj ect would result in an increased demand for fire protection and emergency services within the project area. The Santa Ana Fire Department has indicated that under existing levels of manpower and equipment, it does not anticipate any significant constraints in providing adequate fire protection services to the proposed project. The existing fire stations in the project area would be able to adequately respond to project- :r;elated demand for fire and emergency services. Additionally, through the City's development review pröcess, the Santa Ana Fire Department has determined that the proposed project would be in compliance with the City's Fire Code. Police Protection: Less Than Significant Impact The Santa Ana Police Department would provide police protection services for the proposed project. The Police Department is headquartered at 60 Civic Center Plaza. The City of Santa Ana is subdivided into four policing districts, with each district serving a section of the City. The proposed project is located within the Westend District. Implementation of the proposed project would increase the demand for police protection services. The Santa Ana Police Department has indicated that under existing levels of manpower and 23 31~~4<6 . . . equipment, they would have police protection services. the provide adequate ability to School Facilities: Potentially Incorporated Significant Unless Mitigation The project site is within the boundaries of the Garden Grove School District. The proposed project would increase the number of students at nearby schools and would contribute to increase demand for school services. The proj ect would be subj ect to school impact fees to fund the enhancement of existing school facilities or for the construction of new school facilities. The payment of school impact fees to the Garden Grove School District would mitigate project-related impacts to school services to a level considered less than significant. Mitigation Measure . Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project developer shall submit evidence to the City of Santa Ana of a fee payment between the developer and the Garden Grove School District to offset school facility related impacts. Parks: Less Than Significant The City of Santa Ana presently operates 35 facilities within its parks and recreation network, along with several public school grounds. The park and recreation facilities within the City of Santa Ana include 342.5 acres of lands, which is equivalent to approximately one acre per 1,000 residents. According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, the City's current goal for parkland is i.o acres per 1,000 residents. Based on the Cities current parkland goal and existing parkland to population ratio, additional parkland is needed to meet the park needs of the community. The City's Subdivision Code requires residential proj ects with 50 or more units to dedicate open space to help increase private and public parkland in the City. The proposed project involves the development of 17 single-family dwellings and therefore, would not be subj ect to the Subdivision Code parkland requirements. Implementation of the proposed project would result in minimal increases in the City's population and would have less than a significant impact on the existing parkland/population ratio in the City. XIV. RECREATION 24 31~~i47 A. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? B. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Less Than Significant Impact As mentioned above, additional parkland is needed in Santa Ana to meet current and future park needs of the community. Without additional parkland and recreational facilities being provided, residents would continue to use existing recreational facilities in the City. Implementation of the proposed project would result in minimal increases in the City's population and would have less than a significant impact on the demand for existing or new recreation facilities. xv. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC B. Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system? Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? A. Potentially Significant unless Mitigation Incorporated The proposed project is consistent with thè City's General Plan and Zoning Code. Traffic volumes generated by the proposed project would be consistent with the traffic projections in the Circulation Element. No additional circulations improvements would be needed for project related traffic impacts. However, the proposed project would incrementally increase regional traffic impacts wi thin the proj ect area. To mitigate potential regional traffic impacts the project would be subject to Transportation Systems Improvement Fees. Mitigation Measure . Prior to issuance of building permits the project shall pay Area F Transportation System Improvement fee. 25 3.<A~ß . . . c. Result in a change in either an increase in location that results in air traffic patterns, including traffic levels or a change in substantial safety risks? Less Than Significant Impacts Implementation of the proposed project would not increase the level air traffic or increase safety risks within the project area. D. Substantially increase hazards to a design feature Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project would provide a number of traffic improvements within the project area to enhance vehicle and pedestrian circulation within the project area. Such improvements include construction of new sidewalks along portions of Jackson Street, Eleventh Street and Washington Avenue, corner cut-off dedications and construction of wheelchair access ramps and construction of cul-de-sacs for Eleventh Street and Washington Avenue. No significant vehicle or pedestrian safety hazards would be associated with the implementation of the proposed project. E. Result in inadequate emergency access Less Than Significant Impact As part of the City's development review process the Santa Ana Police Department and the Santa Ana Fire Department has reviewed the proposed project for potential impacts in regards to emergency access. Both the Fire Department and the Police Department have indicated that implementation of the proposed project would not pose any emergency access constraints or adverse impacts. F. Result in inadequate parking capacity Less Than Significant Impact Through the City's development review process, the Planning Department has determined that the proposed project is providing an adequate amount of parking. G. Conflict with transportation alternative adopted policies supporting 26 31gAs.49 Less Than Significant Impact Presently, there are alternative modes of transportation within the proj ect area to help reduce traffic trips generated by the proposed project. The Orange County Transportation Authority operates a fixed route bus service when the project area. Metrolink and Amtrak Train Service would also be available through bus service to the Santa Ana Regional Transportation Center. The proposed project would not be in conflict with any City policies regarding alternative modes of transportation. Nor would implementation of the proposed project displace any existing modes of public transportation provided within the project area. UTILITY/SERVICE SYSTEMS D. Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Less than Significant Impact The City of Santa Ana Water Department would provide domestic water service for the proposed proj ect. The City of Santa Ana produces water from two sources. The Orange County Groundwater Basin provides 66% of the annual water supply and the Metropolitan Water District provides 34% of the annual water supply. The City of Santa Ana has 19 active wells with combined capacities of approximately 42,500 gallons per minute. The City also has seven MWD connections with combined normal operating capacities of 20,700 gallons per minute.' The total combined capacity of all water production facilities is 63,200 gallons per minute. According to the City's 2000 Urban Water Management Plan, the projected water demand for the City in 2004 would be approximately 51,000 acre feet per year. According to the City's Water Department the current demand is less than the proj ect demand at approximately 48,ODO acre feet per year. Additionally, according to the to the Water Department long-term water demand in the City is not forecasted to increase. Presently, the City of Santa Ana utilizes a water demand rate of 110 gallons per day per person. This rate includes both domestic water use and wastewater demands. Based on the City of Santa Ana average household size of 4.65 persons per household, the project would have a water demand of approximately 8,695 gallons per day. The water demands for the project are accounted for in 27 31~~5t) . . . the City's Urban Water Management Plan. However, to adequately service the proposed project new water distribution facilities would be needed. With the construction of new water distribution facilities, impacts on water service would be less than significant. Mitigation Measure . The site plan for the proposed project shall reflect the construction of a 6-inch public water main and appurtenances at 10-feet north of the centerline of Lincoln Way. The project applicant shall coordinate with the City of Santa Ana Water Department regarding the final depths, and locations and of the proposed water distribution facility. . The site plan for the proposed proj ect shall reflect the construction of a 6-inch public water main and appurtenances at 10-feet north of the centerline of Eleventh Street and to extend approximately 200-feet to the east of he centerline on Jackson Street. The project applicant shall coordinate with the City of Santa Ana Water Department regarding the final depths, and locations and of the proposed water distribution facility. . Water conservation Department of Water requiring the use of recommendations for incorporated into the measures recommended by the State Resources and applicable state laws water-efficient plumbing fixtures and low-water-using . landscape shall be project design as appropriate. A. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? the of B. 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? E. Result in the determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to sei-ve the project's projected demand in addition to the providers existing commitments. Less Than Significant Impact 28 31~~5' The project area is improved with exiting wastewater distribution facilities. However, it is unknown if the existing sewer line located project site is active or abandoned. Wastewater service for the proposed proj ect would be provided by, the City of Santa Ana and the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD). Wastewater from the project would be treated at the OCSD treatment plant No.1 in the City of Fountain Valley. As mentioned previously, the City of Santa Ana utilizes a water demand rate of 110 gallons per day per person to calculate both domestic water demand and wastewater demand. The proposed proj ect would have a wastewater demand of approximately 8,695 gallons per day. The wastewater demands for the proj ect are accounted for in the City's Urban Water Management Plan. The wastewater flows generated from the proposed project would provide an incidental increase in the amount of wastewater flows to the Fountain Valley treatment plant and would not have a significant impact on wastewater treatment facilities. However, to adequately service the proposed project new wastewater distribution facilities would be needed. With the construction of new wastewater distribution facilities, impacts on wastewater service would be less than significant. Mitigation Measure c. . The site plan for the proposed proj ect shall reflect the construction of an 8-inch private sewer main and manhole at 5' to the south of the centerline on Eleventh Street and to extend approximately 200' to the east of centerline on Jackson Street. The project applicant shall coordinate with the City of Santa Ana Water Department regarding the final depths, and locations and of the proposed sewer distribution facility. . The proposed proj ect shall verify if line along the length of the proj ect abandoned. the existing sewer site is active or Require or result in the construction of new drainage facilities or expansion of existing the construction of which could cause environmental effects? storm water facilities, significant Less Than Significant Impact 29 31~!.52 . . . Implementation of the proposed proj ect would not significantly increase the amount of surface water runoff currently generated from the project site. The project would include the development of onsite drainage systems. However, the construction of the facilities would not cause significant impacts to the environment. F. Is the project served by a landfill with per.mitted capacity to accommodate the project's disposal needs? Comply with federal, state and regulations related to solid waste? and sufficient solid waste G. local statutes Less Than Significant Impacts The City of Santa Ana would provide solid waste collection services to the project site. Solid waste is transported to the Environmental Service transfer station in Irvine, and then taken to the Bowerman Landfill. The Bowerman Landfill is permitted to accept 8,500 tons per day and is anticipated to close in year 2024. The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939) mandates all cities and counties in California to divert fifty percent of solid waste generated from landfill disposal. As part of the General Plan, the City of Santa Ana has prepared a Source Reduction and Recycling Element, which describe how the City complies with the mandates of AB 939. In order to comply with the requirements of AB 939, the City has implemented several waste reduction programs including green waste programs, source reduction programs, and recycling programs. According to the California Integrated Waste Management Board, a standard generation rate of 1 ton per person per year is used to estimate the quantity of solid waste generated. The proposed project would have a solid waste disposal demand of approximately 79 tons per year or .22 tons per day. The increases in solid waste would be considered minor in comparison to the 8,500 tons of solid waste taken to the Bowerman Landfill daily. Additionally, the proposed project would be required to comply with the City's recycling program for residential uses to reduce the demand for solid waste disposal. Compliance with the City's recycling program would reduce long-term solid waste disposal service impacts to a level considered less than significant. XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 30 31a~~53 A. 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. Less Than Significant Impact Implementation of the proposed proj ect would not substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species or cultural resources, in that no fish, wildlife or cultural resources are known to exist on the project site. B. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? Less Than Significant Impact Implementation of the proposed proj ect 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, conditions of approval and mitigation measures, which provide specific requirements that would avoid any significant cumulative impacts within the project area. Furthermore, the incremental impacts associated with the proposed proj ect would be at a level where there would not be considered cumulatively considerable. C. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed proj ect involves the development of residential land uses. Construction and. operation of the proposed proj ect would not involve any activities that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Mitigation measures have been identified to reduce potential impacts to the environment and human beings to a level considered less than significant. 31 ~1Ä~~4 . . . 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 proj ect could not have a significant effect on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared. XVIV REFERENCES City of Santa Ana Updated General Plan Land Use Element February 1998. City of Santa Ana Updated General Plan Land Environmental Impact, January, 1998, SCH 97071058 Use Element City of Santa Ana Zoning Ordinance, December 1998 City of Santa Ana Urban Design Element, July 6, 1998 City Santa Ana Local Register of Historic Structures City Santa Ana National Register of Historic Structures Soil Investigation for 12 Proposed, Dwellings, Nunez Engineering, May 2002 Single Family Two-Story Flood Insurance Rate Map Community Panel No. 06059C0029F Personal Communication Santa Ana Water Department City of Santa Ana Development Review Committee, July 2003 South Coast Air Quality Management Handbook, 1993 District CEQA Air Quality California Environmental January 1999 Quality and Guidelines, Act Statues Site Visit by Dan Bott Environmental Coordinator, October 2000 California Integrated Waste Management Website City of Santa Ana 2000 Urban Water Management Plan xx. PREPARERS 32 P~¥~~55 Dan Bott, City of Santa Ana Environmental Coordinator 33 jafjt!~6 . Œff'^ Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance PLANNING DIVISION I. Project Title: Jackson Street Homes II. Project Numbers: ER 2003-133 III. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Santa Ana Planning Division P.O. Box 1988 (M-20) Santa Ana, CA 92702 IV. Environmental Coordinator and Phone Number: Dan Bott (714) 667-2719 V. Project Location: 1101 North Jackson Street Environmental Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation, I find that: . A. 0 The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. B. .v 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.D The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. D.D 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 (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. 0 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. F. 0 Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR (EIR No. -) has been prepared earlier; however, subsequent proposed changes in the project andlor new information of substantial importance will cause one or more sig' nt effec 0 previously discussed. A SUBSEQUENT EIR shall be prepared. \ ~ature \~ -'ÀV\ ~\ Printed Name . March 1. 2004 Date -- db\Env Form CEOA Chklsl P3"Ä~<S7 Page 1 of 1 auf AI Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance --.-, _.-~-- n_.____-- -- J Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: I. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). II. 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 Impacf' 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 Impacr to a "Less than Significant Impacr. The ISad agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues & Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact I. Aesthetics - Would the project: A. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? D . 0 .~ 0 B. Damage scenic resources, including but nollimited 0 0 ~ 0 to, trees, rock outpourings and historic buildings within a state highway? C. Substantially degrade the existing visual character ß( D or quality of the site and its surroundings? D D D. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views 0 0 K 0 in the area? I". IIIC.ï\i1 ,';'NUJ J\t;j;\/ check.uoc\'1.15.99 Page 1 of íO Page 37 of60 31A-58 anfA . Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact II. 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: . A. 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.) D D D D D D D D D ÆJ ~ ~ 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: I. B. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Contract? C. 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? A. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of applicable Air Quality Attainment Plan or Congestion Management Plan? B. Violate any stationary source air quality standard or contribute to an existing or proposed air quality violation? C. 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)? . D. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? md\msword\envcheck.doc\1.15.99 31Ao!59 D D D D D ~ D D D D j4 M A D 0 0 Page 2 of 10 aRIA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources E. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? IV. Biological Resources - Would the project: A. 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? B. 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? C. 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? D. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance? V. Cultural Resources - Would the project: A. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? B. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resource pursuant to define Section 15064.5? C. Directly or indirectly disturb or destroy a unique. paleontogical resource or site? md\msword\envcheck.doc\ 1.15.99 31~~80 Potentially Significant Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 Less Than Significant Impact J( D 0 0 D ~ ~ Pi No Impact 0 K j( ~ )\ D D 0 Page 3 or 10 . DnfA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources D. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? VI. Geology and Soils - Would the project: A. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 1. 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? c. Would the project result in the loss of a unique geologic feature? D. 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? E. Where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater, is the soil capable of supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems? . md\mswordlenvcheck.doc\ 1.15.89 84~U61 Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D D D D D D Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D D D D D D þ{ D ~ D Less Than Significant Impact ~ D 0 ~ D D D D D No Impact D D fr{ D D ft( 0 i( D rA Page 4 of 1 0 ŒnfA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources VII. Hazardous and Hazardous Materials - Would the project: A. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? B. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substance or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? C. 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? D. 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: A. Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? B. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (Le., 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)? mdlmswordlenvcileck.docI1.15.9::¡ p~ ~ Ji:~62 Potentially Significant Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated 0 0 0 D ø: D Less Than Significant Impact ~ ~ D IX D D No Impact 0 0 % 0 0 ~ Page 5 of 10 . aŒfA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources C. 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? D. 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? E. 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? . F. Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? G. 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? B. C. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? X. Mineral Resources - Would the project: A. Result in the loss of avai!ability of a loca!ly-' important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local genera! plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? . rnd\mswonJlenvcheck.doc\1.15.99 PaS11(2.63 Potentially Significant Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated jE{ ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 D Less Than Significant Impact 0 0 ~ ft( Xi 0 ~ 0 D No Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ K Paqe 6 of 10 anfA -------- ---- " Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources XI. Noise - Would the project result in: A. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? B. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? D. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without project? E. For a project located within an airport land use plan or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive nois'3 levels? XII. Population and Housing - Would the project: A. 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)? B. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? n Id\m:>worU\dnVcheck.ooc\ i .15.99 Pa~o~-64 Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D D D D Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D D D ]x( D D D D Less Than Significant Impact K ~ R D D Jf D D No Impact D D D D ~ D j¡f ,( Fa8e 7 oí îû . Œn~fA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources XIII. 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 rations, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public service: Fire protection? Police protection? . Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? XIV. Recreation A. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. 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? xv. Transportation I Traffic A. 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 substantia!' increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ration on roads, or congestion at intersections?) . md\rnsword\envcheck.doc\ ¡.'j 5.99 31~~65 Potentially Significant Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 ;I Less Than Significant Impact 0 )( Ä 0 )( j\ Þ( Ä 0 No Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Page 8 of 10 ~~fA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources B. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? C. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? 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? B. 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? C. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? D. Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources or are new or expanded entitlements needed? E. 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? rndlrnswordlenvcheck.doc\1.1 ;:¡.9~ P31Ä~<66 Potentially Significant Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D Less Than Significant Impact 0 ~ A È( J:( ~ ~ ~ D X M No Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 D Page 9 ot 10 . an,A Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources F. Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's sold waste disposal needs? G. Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? XVII. Mandatory Findings of Significance A. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or 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? . B. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, effects of other current projects and the effects of probable future projects). C. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? . mrjlmsworÜ\envcheck.doc\ 1.15.99 pa~,o~-67 Potentially Significant Impact 0 0 0 0 0 Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated 0 0 0 0 0 Less Than Significant Impact P( x K 9( ø: No Impact 0 0 0 0 0 Page 10 of 10 JACKSON STREET HOMES ER 2003-133 MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN MITIGATION MEASURE To ensure compliance with SCAQMD Fugitive Dust Rule 403, grading plans and demolition plans for the proposed project shall reflect the following notes: All material excavated or graded will be sufficiently watered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. Watering with complete coverage shall occur at least twice daily, once in the late morning and once after work is done for the day. All clearing and earthwork activities shall cease during period of high winds (wind~ greater than 2S mph averaged over one hour) or during Stage TIMMING Prior to Grading/Building Permits 31pÞ(:BSO RESPONSIBLE AGENCY Building/Planning Public Works . VERIFICATION . . . 1 or Stage 2 smog episodes. Streets surrounding the project site should be cleaned at the end of each day of construction. All material transported offsite shall either be sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. The amount of area disturbed by clearing and earthwork activities shall be minimized at all times. Equipment engines shall be maintained in good condition and in proper tune according to manufacturer's specifications. To the extent feasible, gasoline powered equipment shall be used for onsite and offsite JatAo.!69 . construction activities. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the project applicant shall provide proof of coverage under NPDES General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit, which includes, a copy of the project number and two copies of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. The following geotechnical recommendations shall be incorporated into plans and specifications. Prior to Grading Building/Planning Permits Public Works Foundations for two-story dwellings shall be supported entirely by a homogenous layer of certified compacted fill not less than five feet in thickness and extending three feet beyond the perimeter of the proposed building . 31~2.rn . footprint. The project shall comply with the bearing capacity, lateral design, concrete slap on-grade, asphalt concrete and seismic coefficient design recommendations provided in the geotechncial report prepared for the project by Nunewz Engineering, in May 2002. . Prior to grading, existing vegetation, trash, surface structures and debris shall be removed and disposed off- site at a legal . dumpsite. Any existing utility lines, or other subsurface structures, which are not to be utilized should be removed, destroyed, or abandoned in compliance with . current governmental regulations. 31~5_7f Excavated soil may be used as fill and backfill provided that it is clean and free of debris. All areas where certified compacted fill is to be placed shall first be cleaned of structures, concrete, asphalt concrete, vegetation and debris materials. The excavated bottoms of all fill soil excavations shall be observed and approved by the Soil Engineer and the City Building Inspector before backfill with certified compacted fill begins. The soils to be used for compaction should be mixed and watered to obtain uniform optimum moisture content. The soils shall be placed in a layer not thicker than 8 31s~~'2 . inches and mechanically compacted or wheel-rolled to a minimum relative compaction of 90-percent. . Prior to the demolition of any structures on the project site, an asbestos and lead paint survey shall be prepared to determine the presence of asbestos building materials and lead paint. The asbestos/lead paint survey shall be submitted to the City's Environmental Coordinator for review. . Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall provide proof of coverage under NPDES General construction Activity Storm Water Permit, which includes a copy of the Prior to Demolition Permits Building/Planning Prior to Grading Building/Planning Permits Public Works 3tAq~ project permit number and two copies of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall prepare an NPDES post- construction storm water management plan per Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) that includes all structural and non-structural Best Management Practices for the project. Prior to Grading Building/Planning Permits Public Works Submit and have approved a surface drainage/utility plan to include all structural Best management Practices. Provide two copies of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) that includes a description of all- applicable Structural 3.~~I7~ . . . and Non- Structural Best Management Practices, which would apply to this project. Prior to Prior to Grading Building/Planning issuance of Permits Public Works grading permits the project applicant shall receive approval of NPDES Permit for the State regional Water Quality Control Board for proposed onsite dewatering operations. The proposed Prior to Public Works project would be Building Permits subject to City of Santa Ana . Federal Clean Water Protection Enterprise Fees. Prior to Prior to Grading Public Works issuance of a Permit grading permit, the project applicant shall submit a final surface water runoff evaluation for review and approval showing 3 'Ai'5 existing and proposed facilities and methods of draining the site without exceeding the capacity of any street or adjacent storm drain facility. Prior to the issuance of building permits the project applicant shall be responsible for the construction of onsite storm drain systems. The proposed project is subject to Drainage Area I Assessment Fee. Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy permits, the project shall coordinate with Willow wick Golf Course on the construction of a 50-foot high safety net along the frontage of the project along the fairway to deflect errant golf balls from causing property Prior to Building Permits Prior to Building Permit Prior to Certificate of Occupancy 3'~~?6 Building/Planning Public Works Building/Planning . damage. Grading Plans Prior to Building/Planning and Building Grading/Building Plans for the Permits proposed project shall note that construction activities on the project site shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or any time on Sunday or a federal holiday. . No construction equipment on the project site shall operate including warming up until after 7:00 a.m. All construction equipment shall be properly maintained and tuned to minimize noise emissions, . All equipment shall be fitted with properly operating mufflers and air intake silencers no less efficient than those originally 31~.:?77 installed, Stockpiling and vehicle staging areas shall be located away from existing residential uses. The name and telephone number of a contact person shall be posted on-site, and Construction shall be subject to any and all provisions set forth by the City of Santa Ana Planning Department. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project developer shall submit evidence to the City of Santa Ana of a fee payment between the developer and the Garden Grove School District to offset school facility related impacts. -- Prior to issuance of building permits . Prior to Building Permits Building/Planning . Prior to Building Permits Public Works 3'1)\z~8 . the project shall pay Area F Transportation System Improvement fee. . The site plan for the proposed project shall reflect the construction of a 6-inch public water main and appurtenances at 10-feet north of the centerline of Lincoln Way. The project applicant shall coordinate with the City of Santa Ana Water Department regarding the final depths, and locations and of the proposed water distribution facility. . The site plan for the proposed project shall reflect the construction of a 6-inch public water main and appurtenances at 10-feet north of the centerline of Eleventh Street and to extend approximately 200-feet to the Prior to Building Permits Building/Planning 31eA2.79 east of he centerline on Jackson Street. The project applicant shall coordinate with the City of Santa Ana Water Department regarding the final depths, and locations and of the proposed water distribution facility. Water conservation measures recommended by the State Department of Water Resources and applicable state laws requiring the use of water- efficient plumbing fixtures and recommendations for low-water- using landscape shall be incorporated into the project design as appropriate. The site plan for the proposed project shall reflect the construction of an 8-inch private sewer . Prior to Building Permits Public Works 31~4JO . . . main and manhole at 5' to the south of the centerline on Eleventh Street and to extend approximately 200' to the east of centerline on Jackson Street. The project applicant shall coordinate with the City of Santa Ana Water Department regarding the final depths, and locations and of the proposed sewer distribution facility. The proposed project shall verify if the existing sewer line along the length of the project site is active or abandoned. . 31~!81 KO-07/16/04 RESOLUTION NO. 2004-23 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATED MONITORING PROGRAM; AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 2004-02 FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 1101 THROUGH 1219 NORTH JACKSON STREET (COUNTY MAP NO. 16576) BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. B. C. Tentative Tract Map No. 2004-02 (County Map No. 16576) came before the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana for a duly noticed public hearing July 12, 2004. Tentative Tract Map No. 2004-02 has been filed seeking approval of a tentative tract map to subdivide a 2.70-acre parcel of land into 17 lots in order to construct 17 single-family dwelling units at 1101 through 1219 North Jackson Street. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana determines that the following findings have been established: 1. The proposed project, as conditioned, and its design and improvements are consistent with the Low Density Residential land use designation of the General Plan and are otherwise consistent with all other elements of the General Plan and any applicable specific plans. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the Low Density Residential land use designation and all other elements of the General Plan as well as the North Harbor Specific Plan. 2. The proposed project, as conditioned, conforms to all applicable requirements of the zoning and subdivision codes as well as other applicable City ordinances. The proposed project, as conditioned, conforms to the provisions of the zoning code with respect to lot size and frontage and setbacks. Covenants, Conditions and 31A-82 Resolution No. 2004-23 Page 1 of 4 . Restrictions (CC&Rs) are required for the project, which need to be approved by the City prior to City Council approval of the final map. 3. The project site is physically suitable for the type and density of the proposed project. The proposed site is physically suitable for the single-family development as proposed since the property is located within the Single-Family district of the North Harbor Specific Plan (SP2) zoning district and has a General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential at seven dwelling units per acre (LR7). Additionally, this site is surrounded by the Willowick Golf Course to the east and a combination of single and multi-family residences to the west, north and south. 4. The design and improvements of the proposed project will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish and wildlife or their habitat. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared pursuant to . the California Environment Quality Act for the project. The project site is located in an urbanized area, and there are no known fish or wildlife populations existing on the project site. Therefore, the proposed subdivision will not cause any substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish and wildlife or their habitat. 5. The design or improvements of the proposed project will not cause serious public health problems. The proposed subdivision is not anticipated to have any detrimental effects upon the general public. Each property will have sewer, water and the necessary infrastructure improvements as conditioned in Development Project Review No. 02-33. 6. The design or improvements of the proposed project will not conflict with easements necessary for public access through or use of the property within the proposed project. The design or improvements of the proposed project will not conflict with easements necessary for public access through or use of the property within the proposed project since there . is no easement within this property. 31A-83 Resolution No. 2004-23 Page 2 of 4 Section 2. The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in the initial study and the mitigated negative declaration and mitigation monitoring program for Environmental Review No. 2003-133 was prepared with respect to this Project. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the State CEQA Guidelines, the Mitigated Negative Declaration adequately addresses the expected environmental impacts of this Project and reflects the Planning Commission's independent judgment and analysis. On the basis of this review, the Planning Commission 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 Planning Commission hereby approves and adopts the negative declaration and mitigation monitoring program 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 Planning Commission 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 Planning Commission after conducting the public hearing hereby approves Tentative Tract Map No. 2004-02 as conditioned in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein. This decision is based upon the evidence submitted at the above said hearing, which includes but not is not limited to: the Request for Planning Commission Action dated July 12, 2004 and exhibits attached thereto; and the public testimony, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference. ADOPTED this 12th day of July, 2004 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: Commissioners: Cribb, De La Torre, Leo, Lutz, Mondo, Nalle, Sinclair (7) Commissioners: Commissioners: None (0) None (0) None (0) Commissioners: Glenn Mondo Chairperson 31A-84 Resolution No. 2004-23 Page 3 of 4 . . . APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joseph W. Fletcher, City Attorney By: Kylee O. Otto Deputy City Attorney CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, Martha Ramirez, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2004-23 to be the original resolution adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana on July 12, 2004. Date: Planning Commission Secretary City of Santa Ana 31A-85 Resolution No. 2004-23 Page 4 of 4 Conditions for Approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 2004-02 Tentative Tract Map No. 2004-02 (County Map No. 16576) is approved subject to compliance, to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Manager, with all 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. The applicant must comply in full with each and every condition listed below prior to exercising the rights conferred by this approval. The applicant must remain in compliance with all conditions listed below throughout the life of the tentative tract map. Failure to comply with each and every condition may result in the revocation of the tentative tract map. A. Plannina Division 1. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) are required prior to final map approval addressing operational standards, common area maintenance, drainage, architecture, parking and circulation. The CC&Rs shall be recorded with the final map. 2. Two copies of the recorded final parcel map and CC&Rs shall be submitted each to the Planning Division, Building Division and Public Works Agency within 10 days of recordation. 3. The tentative tract map, final map and all improvements required to be made or installed by the subdivider shall be in accordance with the requirements and design standards and specifications of the City of Santa Ana and the requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act. 4. After project occupancy, landscaping is to be maintained in accordance with the landscape plan approved for the project. This shall include the minimum levels of plant materials shown on the landscape plan and installed at the time of occupancy. Mitiaation Measures 5. All materials excavated or graded will be sufficiently watered to prevent excessive amount of dust. Watering with complete coverage shall occur at least twice daily, once in the late morning and once after work is done for the day. 6. All clearing and earthwork activities shall cease during period of high winds (winds greater than 25 mph averaged over one hour) or during Stage 1 or Stage 2 smog episodes. Streets surrounding the project site should be cleaned at the end of each day of construction. 7. EXHIBIT "A" 31A-86 . . . 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. All materials transported off-site shall either be sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. The amount of area disturbed by clearing and earthwork activities shall be minimized at all times. To the extent feasible, equipment engines shall be maintained in good condition and in proper tune according to manufacturer's specifications. To the extent feasible, gasoline powered equipment shall be used for on-site and off- site construction activities. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall provide proof of coverage under an NPDES General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit, which includes a copy of the project number and two copies of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. Foundations for two-story dwellings shall be supported entirely by a homogenous layer of certified compacted fill not less than five feet beyond the perimeter of the proposed building footprint. The project shall comply with the bearing capacity, lateral design, concrete slab on- grade, asphalt concrete and seismic coefficient design recommendations provided in the geotechnical report prepared for the project by Nunez Engineering, in May 2002. Prior to grading, existing vegetation, trash, surface structures and debris shall be removed and disposed off-site as a legal dumpsite. Any existing utility lines or other subsurface structures, which are not to be utilized, should be removed, destroyed or abandoned in compliance with current governmental regulations. Excavated soil may be used as fill and backfill provided that it is clean and free of debris. All areas where certified compacted fill is to be placed shall first be cleaned of structures, concrete, asphalt concrete, vegetation and debris materials. The excavated bottoms of all fill soil excavations shall be observed and approved by the Soil Engineer and the City Building Inspector before backfill with certified compacted fill begins. The soils to be used for compactions should be mixed and watered to obtain uniform optimum moisture content. The soils shall be placed in a layer not thicker that eight inches and Mechanically compacted or wheel-rolled to a minimum relative compaction of 90-percent. Prior to demolition of any structures on the project site, an asbestos and lead paint survey shall be prepared to determine the presence of asbestos building materials and lead paint. The asbestos/lead paint survey shall be submitted to the City's Environmental Coordinator for review. EXHIBIT "A" 31A-87 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 18. Prior to issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall submit for review and approval a surface drainage/grading/erosion control plan prepared by a registered Civil Engineer, showing the direction and means of flow to the adjacent street. The plan is to include existing and proposed elevations adjacent to all property lines. Drainage routed to the street must be directed beneath the sidewalk and through the curb. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare an NPDES post- construction storm water management plan per Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) that includes all structural and non-structural Best Management Practices. a. Submit and have approved a surface drainage/utility plan that includes all Structural Best Management Practices. b. Provide two copies of the Water Quality Management plan that includes a description of all applicable Structural and Non-Structural Best Management Practices, which may apply to this project. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall receive approval of NPDES permit from the State Regional Water Quality Control Board for proposed on- site dewatering operations. The proposed project would be subject to City of Santa Ana Federal Clean Water Protection Enterprise Fees. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall submit a final surface water runoff evaluation for review and methods of draining the site without exceeding the capacity of any street or adjacent storm drain facility. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall be responsible for the construction of on-site storm drain systems. The proposed project is subject to Drainage Area I Assessment Fee. Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy permits, the project shall coordinate with Willowick Golf Course on the construction of a 50-foot high safety net along the frontage of the project along the fairway to deflect errant golf balls from causing property damage. Grading plans and building plans for the proposed project shall note that construction activities on the project site shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or any time on Sunday or a federal holiday. No construction equipment on the project site shall operate including warming up until after 7:00 a.m. EXHIBIT "A" 31A-88 . . . 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. All construction equipment shall be properly maintained and tuned to minimize noise emissions. All equipment shall be fitted with properly operating mufflers and air intake silencers no less efficient than those originally installed. Stockpiling and vehicle staging areas shall be located away from existing residential uses. The name and telephone number of a contact person shall be posted on-site. Construction shall be subject to any and all provisions set forth by the City of Santa Ana Planning Department. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project developer shall submit evidence to the City of Santa Ana of a fee payment between the developer and the Garden Grove School District to offset school facility impacts. Prior to issuance of building permits, the project shall pay Area F Transportation System Improvement fee. The site plan for the proposed project shall reflect the construction of a six-inch public water main and appurtenances at 10-feet north of the centerline of Lincoln Way. The project applicant shall coordinate with the City of Santa Ana Water Department regarding the final depths, and locations and of the proposed water distribution facility. The site plan for the proposed project shall reflect the construction of a six-inch public water main and appurtenances at 10-feet north of the centerline of Eleventh Street and to extend approximately 200-feet to the east of the centerline on Jackson Street. The project applicant shall coordinate with the City of Santa Ana Water Department regarding the final depth, and locations and of the proposed water distribution facility. Water conservation measures recommended by the State Department of Water Resources and applicable state laws requiring the use of water-efficient plumbing fixtures and recommendations for low-water using landscape shall be incorporated into the project design as appropriate. The site plan for the proposed project shall reflect the construction of an eight-inch private sewer main and manhole at five feet to the south of the centerline on Eleventh Street and to extend approximately 200 feet to the east of centerline on Jackson Street. The project applicant shall coordinate with the City of Santa Ana Water Department regarding the final depth, and locations of the proposed sewer distribution facility. The proposed project shall verify if the existing sewer line along the length of the project site is active or abandoned. EXHIBIT "An 31A-89 31A-90