Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout75A - CRAZY HORSE CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: JUNE 19, 2006 TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 2006-02 AND SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 2006-01 TO CONSTRUCT THE CRAZY HORSE SQUARE DEVELOPMENT AT 1580 EAST WARNER AVENUE - DYERHOLLOW PARTNERS, L APPL APPROVED o As Recommended o As Amended o Ordinance on 1 st Reading o Ordinance on 2nd Reading o Implementing Resolution o Set Public Hearing For CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Approve and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2004-109. 2. Adopt an ordinance approving Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2006-02. 3. Adopt a resolution approving Site Plan Review No. 2006-01 as conditioned. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION On May 22, 2006, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2004-109, adopt an ordinance approving Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2006-02 and adopt a resolution approving Site Plan Review No. 2006-01 as conditioned by a vote of 6:0 (Cribb absent) to construct the Crazy Horse Square Development within the Specific Development No. 8 (SD-8) zoning district at 1580 East Warner Avenue. The Planning Commission made no changes to the recommended conditions of approval outlined in the attached staff report (Exhibit A). Staff received comments from the Airport Land Use Commission and Caltrans pertaining to the environmental documentation prepared for the project. Staff's response to these comments has been attached to the mitigated negative declaration (Exhibit B) . FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. J~y E c ive Director Planning & Building Agency BA:rb ba/reports2006/Crazy Horse Square.cc 75A-1 REQUEST FOR Planning Commission Action ~ ~ PLANNING COMMISSION SECRETARY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: MAY 22, 2006 TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING - FILED BY DYERHOLLOW PARTNERS, L.P. FOR ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 2006-02 AND SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 2006-01 TO CONSTRUCT THE CRAZY HORSE SQUARE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN SD-8 AT 1580 EAST WARNER AVENUE Prepared by Bill App 1 e APPROVED o As Recommended o As Amended o Set Public Hearing For DENIED o Applicant's Request o Staff Recommendation CONTINUED TO U~ecutive Director ~n~ RECOMMENDED ACTION Recommend that the City Council: 1. Approve and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2004-109. 2. Adopt an ordinance approving Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2006- 02. 3. Adopt a resolution approving Site Plan Review No. 2006-01 as conditioned. DISCUSSION Request of Applicant Dyerhollow Partners, L. P. is requesting approval of a zoning ordinance amendment (ZOA) to amend Specific Development No. 8 to create a third project area (Zone III) that will allow retail and food uses on the project site. In addition, the applicant is requesting approval of a site plan review to construct three buildings for retail/food uses within a Specific Development zone. Property Description The proj ect site, located at 1580 East Warner Avenue, is wi thin the 34.7-acre Brookhollow Office Park, a 25 building, 399,516 square foot master planned development. The office park is divided into two project areas. Zone I is the largest portion of the office park and primarily permits office uses. Zone II also permits office uses but also allows EXHIBIT A 75A-2 t Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2006-02 Site Plan Review No. 2006-01 May 22, 2006 Page 2 retail, furniture and bulk merchandise stores with a maximum of two tenants per building. The property has a zoning designation of Specific Development No. 8 (SD-8) and a General Plan Designation of Professional and Administrative Office (PAO), which allows a Floor Area Ratio of 0.50. The property is also designated as a Major Development Area in the General Plan. The proj ect site currently consists of three parcels, with the parcel containing an Edison Company utility easement for above transmission towers. The easement is approximately 120 feet wide feet long and runs north and south through the project site. The parcel is vacant and was the former location of the Crazy Restaurant, which was demolished in 2005. The third parcel is undeveloped land. Access to the project site is from Brookhollow a private street accessible from Grand and Warner Avenues. middle ground by 278 second Horse vacant Drive, Surrounding land uses include one and two-story office buildings and Warner Avenue to the north; a fast food restaurant and the Newport Costa Mesa (SR-55) freeway to the south; the Newport Costa Mesa (SR-55) Freeway to the east; and a Southern California Edison primary distribution station, Grand Avenue and hotel/motel uses to the west (Exhibits 1 and 2) . Project Description The proposed proj ect requires a zoning ordinance amendment to amend the provisions of Specific Development No. 8 to create a third proj ect area (Zone III) that would allow the development of 20,154 square feet of retail and food uses on the site. Three new buildings will be constructed on the site. The buildings will be limited to one and two stories and a height of 40 feet. Building A consists of a sit-down restaurant with an outdoor dining area containing 8,171 square feet. The applicant does not currently have a tenant for this building and it would be the responsibility of any future restaurant tenant to obtain any necessary entitlements such as a conditional use permit and separate City approvals for an entertainment use or liquor sales. Building B is approximately 5,302 square feet in size. The building would contain 4,315 square feet of food uses, including a 1,486 square foot coffee shop, and 987 square feet of retail uses. Building C consists of 6,681 square feet of area. The building contains 2,500 square feet of food uses and 4,211 square feet within two retail tenant spaces. 75A-3 - Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2006-02 Site Plan Review No. 2006-01 May 22, 2006 Page 3 The three buildings will reflect a modern architecture design. Building exteriors have a smooth troweled plaster, natural concrete and light sand plaster finishes. The finishes are accented with stone veneer, cultured stone veneer, and aluminum storefront systems. A combination of earth tone and metal paint finishes are incorporated into the design of the buildings (Exhibit 3). A total of 174 parking spaces are required for the proj ect, with 175 spaces provided. The property owner has entered into a long term lease agreement with Southern California Edison to use the adjacent Edison easement to park 63 vehicles. The landscape palette for the proj ect has been designed to complement the landscaping within the Brookhollow Office Park. A total of 113 trees are proposed on the finished site including 13 Canary Island Pine trees along Grand Avenue and the Newport Costa Mesa (SR-55) freeway frontage. Existing trees will be maintained where possible; however, 44 trees will be removed to facilitate construction (Exhibit 4) . Analysis of the Issues The Brookhollow Office Park is governed by uses and standards outlined in Specific Development No. 8 and by Covenant, Conditions and Restrictions controlled by a Master Association. For zoning purposes, the office park is currently divided into two project areas. Zone I is the largest portion of the office park and primarily allows professional and administrative office uses. Zone II allows the same uses permitted in Zone I, but also allows retail, furniture and bulk merchandise stores wi th a maximum of two tenants per building. Nei ther proj ect area permits multi-tenant retail uses. Zoning Ordinance Amendment A zoning ordinance amendment is proposed that will amend Specific Development No. 8 to create a third project area (Zone III) that will permit multi-tenant retail and food uses (excluding drive through facilities) within Zone III. This will permit the multi-tenant retail component of the proposed project which is currently not permitted within the Brookhollow Office Park (Exhibit 5). 75A-4 Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2006-02 Site Plan Review No. 2006-01 May 22, 2006 Page 4 Various standards are proposed to be added or amended to the SD-8 zoning district. First, the minimum lot size of a parcel in Zone III needs to be 2.8 acres, which is the lot size of the proposed project. Second, other standards and uses would match those permitted in Zones I and II. Dancing and indoor entertainment uses in conjunction with a bona fide restaurant would be permitted with an approved conditional use permit. Dancing, concerts or other types of indoor entertainment are not proposed as part of this approval and would require separate permits and approvals. Due to the zoning ordinance amendment associated with this proj ect, a consistency determination is required from the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). The proj ect is located wi thin one of the 60 CNEL noise contours for John Wayne Airport. It is anticipated that the ALUC hearing will take place on June 15, 2006. Southern California Edison Easement Although no formal action is required by the Planning Commission pertaining to the Southern California Edison (SCE) easement, the project will be constructed on the east and west side of an existing easement for transmission lines that will remain in place, with 63 of the required 174 parking spaces provided within the easement area. The property owner has entered into a long term lease agreement with SCE to utilize the Edison easement for required project parking. The lease has been executed for a period of 20 years with two 10 year right of extensions. The applicant has in good faith tried to secure this easement area to satisfy City parking requirements for the life of the project. Staff is comfortable with this lease arrangement; however, the possibility exists that the lease agreement could be revoked or terminated which could result in a reduction of available parking. Should this worst case scenario occur, the property would become legally non-conforming, which means the property could not be added on to, expanded or uses intensified without curing the parking deficiency. With the easement agreement in place, the proj ect complies with City parking requirements. A parking variance was not required because city parking requirements are satisfied by parking on the Edison easement. A parking variance would have long term implications that would affect the future development of the property since it would run with the land and 75A-5 Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2006-02 Site Plan Review No. 2006-01 May 22, 2006 Page 5 transfer to future property owners. particular case, the lease agreement easement seems a better long term granting a parking variance. Given the circumstances of this that allows parking on the Edison solution for the property than Site Plan Review Section 41-593.5(c) of the Santa Ana Municipal Code requires a review by the Planning Commission of all projects proposed within a specific development zone to ensure the project is in conformance with the specific development plan. Specific Development No. B will be amended to create a third project area that will permit multi-tenant retail uses which are not currently permitted within SD-B. The project will comply with design and development standards outlined within Zone III of the specific development plan. The property complies with the landscape standards adopted for the Brookhollow Office Park. A 10-foot landscape setback is provided along the Newport Costa Mesa (SR-55) Freeway. In addition, approximately 19 percent of the site will be landscaped while only 15 percent is required. Based upon the above analysis of the project, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2006-02 and Site Plan Review No. 2006-01. CEQA Compliance In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2004-109, has been prepared for this project (Exhibit 6). J3 ..t.-l.L /L1~.~. ~ Bill Apple .,- F-r ~ Associate Planner /J"7J,' ~ i/~ Vince Fregoso, AICP Senior Planner BA:jm ba/reports200S/Crazy Horse Square OS-22-06,pc 75A-6 Ml Ml 5D-43 A1 -B C-SM C1 C1-MD C2 C3 C3-A C4 CS GENERAL AGRICULTURAL PARKING MODIFICATION COMMERCIAL SOUTH MAIN COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL COMM. COMMERCIAL-MUSEUM DISTRICT GENERAL COMMERCIAL CENTRAL BUSINESS CENTRAL BUSINESS-ARTIST VILLAGE PLANNED SHOPPING CENTER ARTERIAL COMMERCIAL City of Tustin p CR GC M1 M2 MO o P PCD PRO COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL GOVERNMENT CENTER LIGHT INDUSTRIAL HEAVY INDUSTRIAL MILITARY OPERATIONS OPEN SPACE PROFESSIONAL PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT R1 R2 R3 R4 RE SO SP SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE TWO-FAMILY RESIDENCE MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE SUBURBAN APARTMENTS RESIDENTIAL ESTATE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT SPECIFIC PLAN A ZOA 06-2JSPR 06-1 CRAZY HORSE SQUARE 1580 EAST WARNER AVENUE A cW' l' = 1000 FEET - = 500 FEET P LAN N N G AGE N C Y AND BUILD EXHIBIT 1 75A-7 N G ~~O I --=-.J HERITAGE PAPER PIONEER PACKING S. CE R. V. STORAGE SPOONS RESTAURANT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ~ ~ ABBOTT AWNING ci u ~ ~ ~ '--- COUNTYSOC~LSERWCES Iii RITCHEY ST. I- J: Cl a: LIG T IN == US TRIAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL WARNER AVENUE W ::J Z W ~ D o n [J D c Z <C a: CJ BRISTOL PARK MEDICAL OFFICE ZOA 06-2JSPR 06-1 CRAZY HORSE SQUARE 1580 EAST WARNER AVENUE A ,g(' P LAN N AGE N C Y N G AND B U L D N G EXHIBIT 2 75A-8 ~ ;1;;1 UI Pi!; I > ; I ~ ; i, i id ~ . ~ i ~i i ~i . S ~ II ~ il ~ ill du I .i'~ ~~~ ~~~~ ~ ; i 81 P! !'!~ l!!i;;qu !! mIdI ;~Ii hu j n U j un ~ , - ~. ! U' " I 111~n ~~ ~ ' ~ I ~ ~""! ~ ~;~;~; ! ~ ! ! ii I 95.11... e lee ~~ ~ ; nHi! II as'j! ~ n ~ d i a ;1 U~;~;~; Ii !! ~ ~';!;e;~ I ~i -to!! ~ I I ! ~ w . co:!iIl! ~~ ~ ... ~~ ~ .. w... ""... It Iii?;:"'", I~' ~ ~ " .~ e ~ g ~ " i ,.~ . I.- , ~ ~! I .g e~' ~ S, H,. .~ ~ ~ ~ ' e~, ':~.,..~ 2~ ~ ; ~.. ~~ ~ ~ ~! ~ ~ I ad tl ~ !! ~ i ~ ~e ~ i~:gi ~hp~ ~ ~ ~~,~ l ~ ~. ! 0.. '0 ~ > ,~ ~i .. 0 .. ~ ~~ Ih ~~ ISj ;~ i! ~ i nn~ ~~h ~!!~ ~~ i~;B ~I !~!P~ !hl ~,-, e ~. ~~ t~ "lo. ~ ~ · ~, ~. i'l ~! t~ "., ~.,~; ~t .,t ~i!8 .- ~e!e ~ ~~ ~~ .. ;.;~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~l ~~l ~e "~ ~hm ~H ~. i;~; ~,In~ ~lliJ~~~0@]@]0[[]0lliJ0~ I!JI!J@]@]@]@][!]@]I!J I!J[!]@] .< ~ . w, . . " .~ i '. < .1 i .~ , ~ "I! . '.~ t. '" l ~1 " i " ~ ~, . '"' !~; w <" S. ':~, ~~~< oj .' .. ~ " l " ,<< ,. i"!"~'~" ! ,,~>" ,. ii ~l ii~' ~;~!~i i ~ i:1 i I .11, ~ ~~ i ~;:' ! ~~i~;fi ~;o ~i ~~ !~ ~i !,i:l. ~ ~ !9. i " ~ d'; ~ !I : d ~~ i i ..i~ a~. !.~ ~~ ~h~ ~h"~~ ~< ~ na~i ! . !~ i, ~ OJ, ~n~ > , ~<~.~ h~ ;~ ~~ ~z ~~ ~l~.hi ! ~ ,~g~ ~ ; ii ~~ ~ !i i .~ li ~ l ~;~~!~~ ~~~ 0~~0[!]0~rnrn0~~0~~~0~~OO0lliJ~ @]OO ::...:;".. i g.... .... ~:: :: ~:~':: 'l""" I :,: ;; ! m. ~~ i ".0.. ! I -.- - - - - ;;: ~ , ( Iii I ! I , ~ :s i~ ~r.; ~:lI , x I... L, . ! -, '! i' ql" 1'1111,1 i! i p. i i iil ~I~l ~L/ II '!!~ i~! ~i'I!:I!~ in!!!, IiI 4' .. 01 ~ ;;; ii I': ii I; 69~~ C ell c:: Q) ..... i:i5 c. :E ; i a. i E c co c:: - o o a: <{ 0) c :Q :J III ~ . . ~ ~;~ ~ ~~~ ~f~a i .~. ~~ ; ..t5~ ~~ ~ e ~ ..... ~. t . ~ d ~I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ 'I e r~ ae i1lie !Ill;! ~ ill! I B hh ~! ~ -.~ ~ - - - ;;: ~ , ( ~~~':: i !::- ..... ~;: q :: """ .. C\J I -." .. I :;c .. i ~~~. :: :::0:: I ~ . ::i ~ ~ i~ ~ ~ ~ i " " : !S ~ I ;1 i : ~ i ~ ! h sH = ;~ s ~~! i ' .ii!g;!!~nWli H ~L~b~h~.dn~ hi >< -' '" ~.. .n":"': ...,; so =!:! ~ ~~ c CO c:: .... o o IT: <{ 0) c :Q :J III ~~ s ,;l<l;;;~~ ~l!:i~ ~ ~ , , ~~ -ex: I! '1'.--1 . i ---1 (j ~ i ~Ni w.... J------ ____~ ~ w a: f <{ ~ :J~ Oe C/): ~ w ~~ . . C/)a: ~ ~i l!~ o i~6 I iJf ~ I i.~j ~ I~ a: I X ad 75k.2fO 5 ! .~ ~ ~i ~i .~i ! ;; ~I~h ~ ~. ~. P~II~! ~~ .,~ "I~.d.~; "'.u S~~.~~ 83JP'. r nL. 1....,., .... ...:",..51 ! 9. · i~'. . ~I ~ ~i~;! ~: ~I~'~l; =.. S~. ~~q. ~vi~~1 ;.~ ~~i~!!~! q~~.. !!I e~~~'''~ ;!Zl!~~' R....iU. i ~ ~~;i ~ ; i~ B U ! iU! 2. ~ 5Il a ~ii:d ~ I ~!;I~~~~ , h~~ll!~~' ~~"Zi.~lid ~~.: .~!a,;u :~~ !~~~ ~~ ~~:jg;;~:j~:!t~ ~ ~;! Ii iii t:::!Ii 9i li:l ~ ::: ~ -= :j . , ~ . - ~ r d i ~;; ~. I ~ · ~~i~:lllnfi~i ~~; ~ .~.~.~ ~ .~.~~~ .~~! i;~!:! ~!h~~n ~.'. . ~ ~ . ~ . i i ~.,.. @ ~a~bd;:~~~~.~.1 ~. ~ ~ ilh ..01 '" <> ci ,.; "':..:1'-,->,", .,j;l € o Z !mum ~" 6;} 19J(~f1 8: -.-- - - ~ - - ;:;: , < ~ o ii ~ jjj 'ii ~ ~":g .. m.;; _". .. (Y) :~. ;; ! ~~:e:: " ..:;: ..... ~::O:: i () ~ <( (/) 0) :Q 1Il (/) c o ~ > Q) W ... o .;:: Q) ~ ill a: .Q. <( 1 :J ~ 01 C/)~ E ,g ill ~~ C/) : ~ta a: -'.~m o g~ I ii~ = ..~ G !i.u <{ I ~ a: II () ! ~ I I I I I I i ! I , I I i i . I I i ~ I i ~~ fa a: "8 a: ~ . " . ;. " ~ i ~ ~ ~ :~ ~ ~ i ~:. ~. ~ ~ ".".. e .1 !ii ~ :'iil ~ ~ ~ ft !I~ ~ i ~I ~i ~ ; q ~~ : 1lI t: ~~ ~ ~ ~ !II ~~ ~ , ,,2;:; $:j ;:i ~ ~~~ a~~ . "I"; hi. ~! H ~ p~ ~ · i! ! ~ h ~ 5 ="~ e ~ s a h ~ . d ~. 9 ~ ' ~ I ~ ~ . . . ~ ; ~ Ii ~ t S I ; ~ ." ~ ~ ~ ~ . - ~~ . . ~ ..,"...:::..~~a ;1 '" !:!:l i \!i @ ~~ c:: a:l a: o o u: P1SA-12 . ~ ~~5g:: III ::::: ~.~ ;;: ~;:':: 't ~ - ,;." I _ c ~ ~~:e:: ~~L:: ! UJ a: ~ <{! :J i a~ (j)~ ~ UJh (j) : ~.~ a: ..i:! 1-.lI o 'l I iif ~ !~ij ~I~ a: I} uh I , ~ . i I . I ! I ; I I I . I ~ I I I -. @ ~ II: 9 lL ~ :;;.-~ - ::: ::: ~ , - ( ! i " ""< *~ ~I 'I i'~ t ~ ~ .p !! i i;; ~; q ! !~~ ~ ~ . ...,~h!"" ,,-! ,Ilal' i ..:-, . !! iiil~lil;,!!I!'! '!l :li'd ; !,r,!~ i .! r::b~!i,Hne~~~~.'ir~~!J~1 H~L.~! ~,h'~~~ U l,J)" ...Ljlb~~ '"'a~'~~'. ~"..-'. ~i, ~.~. -e L " ... 0 ~.. i1 ~ .OJ! gi' ", ~,. q ~ ~. ; PI' ~ ~ ~b i1 :i' .~ i' !i do.'" ."_.~.' ..'~ ..~-- ' ".".' .b....~. ,"> "'. ..".".... ~B - .~ ~ ~ .. '" ~ III ~::: ~ ~ :. ~~. ~ ~ ~ ~_.! I 5, j ~ *.~j i ~ ~ li~~Uil ~n;' ~ ~, ~ .~. m~ m. ' ~~. n ~~= 1.~i~I;;1 il!!~;1 ~ ! a~.h; ~~~i; il; : ~ . ! .~ ~: d ou :.. adH*I~ ... ":..:r _ ..,,, .....:i ~~~q :: llijj ~ :~L:: I III 0) '0 in (/J c o ~ > Q) ill .... o .;:: Q) ~ UJ ~ a: 0. i <1: I , I :J I 1 0 ~ I E (f) ::J I .!! I ~ ] E .Q g j ~ UJh t I1J (f) : ~! I i " ! .Q j a: ..Joi -ll z I1J o i~ ~ ii I ..~~ i ~ ~J~ . ~!hj I ~ I~ a: I~ I 75A~,~f5 U I~ ~ I i f I ,i I I I I I I! I I I I i I Iii I ! I , I ,I I I' l l I I I I 'i~!i!IF!~!~ 'I i 'I'! jl ,I il bllbGGGl1 ! ! ! I I I I I I eo }' 11 : : I I I . , , I , ! i ' , · I I I ! ! I I I ! ~ ~ I l. ,. II H ..-.7~ (If :'~ r/f ~~ \\.~ ~,,-../I) ~\...:l 1/) ~: d~":::::'~ ..o::.~ (,r:~ ((t~'*" .--& ~~i-') ,*,:/-1) ~:#q 114-.. ."'- ~. .. ~tll~ ~. o 7r;r~11l co f- o W :~ g ,.. =~E : ~~ ~:.~. ~ ~~ ~~~: ( ~i ~ Iii ".-0 ~ I C9 ~~ z ~ a. w w a: l- t!) Z ~ Ul X w w a: <( J o 00 w 00 a: o I f )-1 N I" ! Sl. <( ! ,tlS a: i lit () I J :;; ; . ~ .. l d I I II I i I I ! II' I l III II l I'! I I i I I I I I I! I ! j 1;1 L II ! i ! i Iii I i ~ ! ! I I I' i I i II Ii IIII i 1.61000.@~ Ii. I ! Illjllldlld,lllll I . ! I !! 11 i I I 1 Ii I ! 61 &~... ..*"..0@e.@~ 0 III to ~ ~~: I .. ~~5 f .- ~ ~~:." IC:I lII:aoll' ~ _-=<1. CD' ~~: ;:= ( %:5 ~ Iii ~-ol- ;: Q9 ~~ z ~ a. m :l It I r.o 0 > l[ ( Z ~ J w It a. W a: <( J 0 (j) I w (j) a: 0 I J >- J N i~ I ~.I <( ! l!lS a: I IU () ! J f . ~ .. 75A~15 i! i! I I! i ! ! ' I I I I I · I .' I I II H I Ii' i ill I ,I I i I ! I>> ' I ~ I I W$~OGO I ,'I i ! I I i I I ; ! II! . I I i t ~ I wnl 0 75A316 Ol ~ o W :!~..." ~ :.- ..... i~= :; - ::~: ~~ g:. yo !:~ ~:~:... ( ~ii~ I Q0 ~~ z ~ Q. W W a: I- >- a: I( z ~ j w a: Q. ill a: <( J a (fJ ill (fJ a: o I i )-1 N I~ <( l,~h , llll a: I dl I a- t) ! I b . . ~ .. ~AEO I -=-.J HERITAGE PAPER PIONEER PACKING S. C.E. R. V. STORAGE SPOONS RESTAURANT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL m ~ ABBOTT AWNING 8 ~ :!; Ql aJ '--- WEETLIFE TEAM SURGICAL A #{' P LAN N Iii RITCHEY ST. I- :t " ii: L I G :: LIGHT INDUSTRIAL COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES USTRIAL N G N G AGE N C Y EXHIB1T~ 75A~1 ( WARNER AVENUE w ::) Z W ~ o D c z <C a: " ZOA 06-2/SPR 06-1 CRAZY HORSE SQUARE 1580 EAST WARNER AVENUE AND B U L D SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT #8 Plan (Redline Draft) Additions General Notes 1. Water within the district will be by private water facilities served by the City of Santa Ana facilities within adjacent public streets. 2. Sewage disposal will be by private sewers and appurtenances connected to City of Santa Ana facilities within adjacent public streets. 3. Easements shall be created for all private and public utilities which cross over, along, under or through any parcels which may be created within this district and are intended to serve other parcels within the district. 4. The development and management of Brookhollow will be subject to the supervIsIOn of the Brookhollow Office Park Association, a non-profit corporation, and to the terms and conditions of the recorded Declaration of Establishment of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) of Brookhollow Office Park to insure continued maintenance of utilities, private streets, landscaping and general appearance of the development within the district. Any amendments to the CC&Rs, which affect these regulations, shall require approval of the City Attorney and Planning Department. 5. Existing private streets and driveway access to adjacent public streets shall be maintained. Additional access to adjacent public streets proposed after adoption of this ordinance shall meet the requirements and approval ofthe Director of Public Works. Intent and Purpose It is the intent of this district to allow a combination of multi-tenant leasehold professional and business office uses, single parcel professional and business offices uses, and single parcel retail, commercial and minimal impact industrial activity uses (as specified in this ordinance). Specific plan review shall be required for all development within this district. Site Requirements A. Site Coverage 1) Structure shall not cover more than 55 percent of the total net site area. (Net area shall be the gross area less any area used for public or private street purposes.) 2) Each parcel to be created within this district shall have a minimum average width of 1 foot for each 2.5 feet of average depth. 3) The minimum lot size for parcels within Zone III shall be 2.8 acres (121.968 square feet). 75A~18 B. Permitted Uses The following uses shall be permitted in Zone I: 1) Professional Offices a. Accountants b. Attorneys c. Dentist, doctors and related professions d. Engineers, architects and planners e. Research and development facilities f. Private trade, vocational or professional schools 2) Business offices, including but not limited to: a. Advertising agencies b. Banks or other financial offices c. Employment agencies d. Escrow and real estate companies e. Insurance companies f. Corporate headquarters g. Photographers, artist, etc. h. Travel agencies 1. Computer or computer training centers 3) Laboratories except those, which emit offensive odors, vibrations, or may be hazardous to the public. 4) Political, CIVIC and charitable organization uses, which shall not include bingo or other gaming activities. 5) Restaurants. 6) Union Halls 7) Museums, art galleries and libraries. 8) Religious meeting halls 9) Day care and child care facilities, nurseries, etc. The following uses shall be permitted in Zone II: 1) All uses within Zone I. 2) Minimal impact light industry. 75A~19 3) Hotels, motels and associated shops and services related to the hotel or motel uses. 4) Retail, with a maximum of two tenants per building. 5) Furniture and bulk merchandise stores with a maximum of two tenants building. The following uses shall be permitted in Zone III: I) Professional Offices a. Accountants b. Attornevs c. Dentist. doctors and related professions d. Engineers. architects and planners e. Research and development facilities 2) Business offices. including but not limited to: a. Advertising agencies b. Banks or other financial offices c. Employment agencies d. Escrow and real estate companies e. Insurance companies f. Corporate headquarters g. Photographers. artist. etc. h. Travel agencies 3) Commercial uses. including: a. Food and retail uses excluding drive through facilities The following uses shall be permitted in Zone III with a Conditional Use Permit: a. Dancing or entertainment ancillary to a permitted restaurant use. b. The serving of alcohol in coni unction with a permitted food/restaurant use. C. Any use permitted herein may be prohibited by reason of noise, odor, dust or electrical interference or adverse environmental impact on adjacent uses. D. Setbacks: I) Front setback along public street frontage shall be 20 feet minimum. 2) Front setback along private street frontage shall be: a) 10 feet within Zone I. b) 20 feet within Zone II. c) 10 feet within Zone III 75A.aO Side yard setbacks shall be 10 feet. 3) Rear yard setback shall be 10 feet. E. Building Heights: 1) Structures shall be limited to four stories and not exceed 70 feet in height in Zone I. 2) Structures shall be limited to four stories and not exceed 70 feet in height in Zone II. 3) Structures shall be limited to two stories and shall not exceed 40 feet in height in Zone III. F. Landscaping: 1) All sites shall have a minimum landscape coverage of 15 percent. 2) The landscape setback along public streets shall be 20 feet. 3) The landscape setback along private streets shall be 20 feet fully landscaped or a minimum of 10 feet parallel with and along the private street line landscaped. The remainder of the required setback area shall be used for parking and/or vehicular circulation, provided a matching square footage of such area used for parking and/or vehicular circulation, is provided on the site and is visible from either public streets, freeways or private streets. 4) Side yard landscape shall be a minimum of five feet. (This requirement applies to new construction. An area equal to this five-foot requirement may be proposed at another location on the parcel. 5) A minimum landscape setback of 10 feet is to be maintained along the frontage; and, in addition, there shall be a IS-foot wide planter island, fully landscaped, placed an average 160 feet apart and extending into the paved area the depth of the parking spaces along said freeway frontage. No curb and gutter shall be permitted along the edge of paving parallel to the Newport Freeway right-of-way to allow for sheet flow of drainage from the rear portion of any parcels created along the frontage in accordance with the approved drainage plan on file with the City of Santa Ana. However, parking bumpers shall be required in lieu of the curb and gutter. 6) A landscape plan shall be approved by the appropriate City agency prior to issuance of building permits. 7) Landscaping shall include trees, and at least 50 percent of the trees shall be within the parking area itself so as to give visual relief to rows of parked vehicles. 8) Landscaping shall be installed prior to occupancy or utility release and permanently maintained. 9) Landscape plan shall include an irrigation system to be installed and maintained. 7 5A~21 G. Parking Requirements: The parking requirements in this district shall conform to the requirements of Article IV, Sections 41- 614,41-615,41-616, and 41-617, except that there shall be no requirement that one-third (113) of the total lot be devoted to off street parking. Zone III. The City recognizes that a lease agreement has been entered into between the property owner and Southern California Edison to utilize the Transmission right-of-way easement to provide 63 parking spaces to satisfy City of Santa Ana parking requirements for the proiect. Should this lease be revoked or terminated resulting in the loss of parking spaces or the loss of continuous and uninterrupted circulation and access to these spaces the following remedies shall be used to cure the parking deficit: a. A parking study shall be provided by the City at the property owner's expense that determines if a parking deficiency has been created and examines ways the parking deficit can be cured. b. Should the parking study determine that a parking deficiency exists. replacement parking necessary to cure the deficiency shall be provided within 100 feet of the proiect site. H. Signs shall be subjeet to site plan review. All signage within Proiect Area III shall comply with the City sign code. Division 2. Sign standards and regulations amended from time to time. 1. Storage and Refuse Collection Areas: All storage and refuse areas shall be enclosed by a minimum six-foot block walls and solid gates so as to eliminate unsightliness. No open outside storage shall be permitted. 75A1r22 CRAZY HORSE SQUARE Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration ER-2004-109 Prepared By City of Santa Ana Planning & Building Agency 20 Civic Center Plaza M-20 Santa Ana, CA 92702 April 2006 ZOA 06-21SPR 06-1 ~~~3 MAYOR Miguel A. Pulido MAYOR PRO TEM Lisa Bist COUNCIL MEMBERS Claudia C. Alvarez Carlos Bustamante 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-20l P.O. BOX 1988. Santa Ana, California 92702 (714) 667-2700. Fax (714) 973-1461 www.santa-ana.org NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED 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: Crazy Horse Square Project Description: The proposed project consists of the following: The proposed project would require a zoning ordinance amendment (ZOA) to amend the provisions of Specific Development No.8 to create a third project area (Area III) that would allow the development of 20,154 square feet of retail and food uses on the project site; and Site Plan Review (SPR) approval to construct the project within a specific development zone (SD-8). Three separate parcels will be consolidated into one parcel and three new buildings would be constructed on the site. Access to the project site would be from Brookhollow Drive, a private street accessible from Grand and Warner Avenues. Project Location: 1580 East Warner Avenue Project Number: DP 04-32; ER 04-109; ZOA 06-2; SPR 06-1 Public Review Period: 4-21-06 to 5-22-06 Hearing Date: 5-22-06 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 5-22-06. Please direct your comments to: Bill Apple, Associate Planner, 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 Bill Apple, Associate Planner at (714) 667- 2747. 7 5A3~4 CS_ 60&-2 MAYOR Miguel A. Pulido MAYOR PRO TEM Lisa Bist COUNCIL MEMBERS Claudia C. Alvarez Carlos Bustamante 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-20) P.O. BOX 1988 . Santa Ana, California 92702 (714) 667-2700. Fax (714) 973-1461 www.santa-ana.org MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 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: DP 04-32, lOA 06-2, SPR 06-1, ER 04-109 Applicant: Dyerhollow Partners, L.P., a California Limited Partnership clo Dan Hunter Project Location I Address: 1580 East Warner Avenue. Project Title I Description: Crazy Horse Square I The proposed project would require a zoning ordinance amendment (ZOA) to amend the provisions of Specific Development No.8 to create a third project area (Area III) that would allow the development of20,154 square feet of retail and food uses on the project site and Site Plan Review (SPR) approval to construct the project within a specific development zone (SD-8). Three separate parcels will be consolidated into one parcel and three new buildings will be constructed on the site. Access to the project site is from Brookhollow Drive, a private street accessible from Grand and Warner Avenues. 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: ~CJ- ~ Date: April 18, 2006 Case Planner This determination is not final until adopted by the decision-making body or administrative official, and a Notice of Determination is filed. 75A~25 CS 606-2 SECTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION PURPOSE OF THE INITIAL STUDY The purpose of this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration is to describe the proposed project and provide an evaluation of potential environmental effects associated with the short-term construction and long-term operation of the proposed Crazy Horse Square Food, Retail and Office Center. The Initial Study has been prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), State CEQA Guidelines and the City of Santa Ana CEQA Environmental Procedures. Pursuant to Section 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Santa Ana is the Lead Agency for the proposed proj ect. The Lead Agency is the public agency that has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving the proposed project. PROJECT APPROVAL PROCESS The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration has been submitted to potentially affected agencies and individuals. In accordance with Section 15072 (b) (1) of the CEQA Guidelines a Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the project area. There will be a 30-day public review period for the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration in accordance with Section 15073 of the CEQA Guidelines. In reviewing the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, affected public agencies and the interested public should focus on the sufficiency of the document in identifying and analyzing the potential impacts on the environment and ways in which the potentially significant effects of the proj ect are avoided or mitigated through the design of the project. Comments on the Initial Study can be sent to the following: Mr. Bill Apple, Associate Planner City of Santa Ana PO Box 1988, M-20 Santa Ana, California 92702 75A~6 SECTION 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROPOSED PROJECT The proposed project is a request for approval of a zoning ordinance amendment to amend provisions of Specific Development No.8, conditional use permit to allow development of retail and restaurant uses within the Specific Development Area, and to allow parking on an Edison easement, and site plan review approval for development within a specific development zone. Additionally, a lot merger is necessary to consolidate parcels. SETTING The proj ect site is a 2.82 -acre parcel located Warner Avenue. The project site is located within Brookhollow Office Park. The Brookhollow Office of 34.7 acres and contains 25 buildings with a square feet of office area. at 1580 East the Park consists total 399,516 The Brookhollow Office Park has a zoning designation of Specific Development No. 8 (SD-8) and a General Plan Designation of Professional and Administrative Office (PAO), which allows a Floor Area Ratio of 0.50. As shown on Exhibit 1, the proj ect site is located near the intersection of Brookhollow Drive and Grand Avenue. The site is generally bounded by one and two story office buildings, Brookhollow Drive and Warner Avenue to the north; a fast food restaurant and the Costa Mesa (SR-55) freeway to the south; the Costa Mesa (SR-55) freeway to the east; and a Southern California Edison primary distribution station, vacant land and hotel/motel uses to the west The project site is composed of three parcels. One parcel contains a Southern California Edison Easement with an above ground transmission tower. The second parcel is vacant and was the former location of the Crazy Horse Restaurant, which has been demolished. The third parcel is vacant undeveloped land. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project would amend the provisions of Specific Development No. 8 to create a third project area (Area III) that would allow the development of 20,154 square feet of retail, and food uses on the project site. The three separate parcels would be consolidated into one parcel and three new buildings would be constructed on the site. Access to the proj ect site would be from Brookhollow Drive, a private street accessible from Grand and Warner Avenues. 2 7SA~2.7 The three proposed buildings are referred to as Building A, Building B and Building C. Building A consists of 8,171 square feet of area. The building would contain a 8, 171 square foot sit down restaurant with an outdoor dinning area. In the future, this restaurant may include a concert venue and/or nightclub within existing square footages which would operate exclusively during the evening hours when other uses wi thin the office park are closed. A nightclub/concert venue would require separate City approvals. Building B would consist of 5,302 square feet building would contain 4,315 square feet of food a 1,486 square foot coffee shop. In addition, 987 retail uses are proposed. of area. The uses including square feet of Building C would consist of building would contain 2,500 retail tenant spaces totaling 6,681 square feet of area. The square feet of food uses and two 4,211 square feet. As shown on Exhibit 3 the three buildings reflect a modern architecture design. The exterior of the buildings would have a smooth troweled plaster finish, natural concrete finish and a light sand plaster finish. The exterior building finish would be accented with stone veneer, cultured stone veneer, and aluminum storefront systems. A combination of tans and metal paint finishes would be incorporated into the design of the buildings. Parking A total of 174 parking spaces are required for the project while 175 parking spaces are provided on site. In the future, the 8,060 square foot restaurant may include a concert venue and/or nightclub which would operate exclusively during the evening hours when other uses within the office park are closed. Should this occur at some future date, parking could be shared between uses within the office park since they would operate at different times. Phasing/Construction Operations The proposed Construction clearing of buildings. project operations the proj ect would be developed in one phase. for the project would involve the si te and construction of the three new 3 75A~28 R2 80-12 , R2 '9..""' M1 /ffJ - R2 If!j ~ "'/ M1 00 M1 \:iil g 'bl ~ 80-63 1'1 ~ II / / M1 M1 II II r / / { I I \ I II II II IL__ I r--..... I..! M1 Ml M2 M1 M1 80-43 Al -B C-SM Cl Cl-MD C2 C3 C3-A C4 CS GENERAL AGRICULTURAL PARKING MODIFICATION COMMERCIAL SOUTH MAIN COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL COMM. COMMERCIAL.MUSEUM DISTRICT GENERAL COMMERCIAL CENTRAL BUSINESS CENTRAL BUSINESS-ARTIST' VILLAGE PLANNED SHOPPING CENTER ARTERIAL COMMERCIAL A City of Tustin p CR GC Ml M2 MO o P PCD PRD COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL GOVERNMENT CENTER LIGHT INDUSTRIAL HEAVY INDUSTRIAL MILITARY OPERATIONS OPEN SPACE PROFESSIONAL PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Rl R2 R3 R4 RE SD SP SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE TWO-FAMILY RESIDENCE MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE SUBURBAN APARTMENTS RESIDENTIAL ESTATE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT SPECIFIC PLAN CRAZY HORSE SQUARE 1580 EAST WARNER AVENUE A rPf' 1" = 1000 FEET - = 500 FEET P LAN N N G AGE N C Y AND BU LD EXHIBIT 1 75A~29 N G .g V1 ~ .a: OQ _. CI1 ~ -< ~ _. I en ~ ~ en en cr" '"1 -- CI1 ~ OQ _. CI1 0- 0 g en c:t CI1 ~ OQ _. CI1 0- 0 g en ;+- ~ ~ :>< .j:::.. -- ...... -......l N o o 0'\ "'t:I ~ OQ en ...... o ...., ...... -r5'11~30 ~:Iiilibi;ii; c: ::Ii ~ . I' i I ~ ; if i id g . ~ i ~i Ii ~i . S ~ I! ~ ~I HI h h ~ ! .I'~ ~~~ ~~~~ ~ ; i l~ P! !.!~ . ~ ~I! .~' li!ll!! ! II h," ~iU~~d~i =..2 ~ n u ~ ;,ot~'! nn !,- " I;n ~p h~: ~en I II n-~;~; III ".h.~. ;< i ;< 9~.1l".1i I Ii ; ~ nu I If as'P! U :~ n ~ ~ I ~ I i~ ; N~;~H ~! ~ ~ J;!;2; ~ I ~~ ~, .. " . I .' ~. i ~ ~i ~ ! ~~! .. I l~, '., ~~.! ~ , , , ~~ ' , " , '"~ . ~.' , I !~ o ..g ".. ~ 5~ , .~, t~ l ~ ~ : ,~~ "~' '..;.l , ~ ,.. ~~! ~ :! , ~ i H : P 815 ~ ~ .=, Ii ;~~ 8~' II ~~"! t ~.;~ I ~ II ~ ' ! .i" :5. ~ ~i!,! , ~~ ~ :< <10 . :~ ~ ., Ig h ~ ~a~ i :d; 1 i ! ~q. l'n Sf ~3 ~d! fB II}~ ~~ l~ i~ . ., . ~ o. .. _ . >. ~ . 0".'" ;" ~,', , ~"~ ,".. o! ~ ~ . ~, .~ I' .. .b. lo~'~! ; ~l'~~l ~. ~ ': 'Ii! it i ~ !~ .a.i!l !(I !II ~ ~ ll... l!l .r~!! ~ '"' 1lI~ 0.:.. 'ot..... i!l n I ! g,., . .n .. ..., . . . gJ ,. !,~ .. ...1 I. 'u" i g, LJ" g. U JJ ! .~ [!][g[!][!]~0@]@]01!J0[g0[!] @J@J@]@][!]. @][!]@]@] [!]~ 0 ~ ~ .~ ~ · u. . ~ - ,~ ~ s" , ! 'ill ei ~ .. , . h . ~I, f.. :~ < ~ ~g .~. i. fli ,. ~ i~ I !~,~l . ~~~ ~ ! ~~ p. ; I?; · ,:~~ i~~. ! i iJ ~~.~ ~i d'!l:i ~ n!h I . i ~h ~~ i I; i! ~ "~~:!rlo Ii ~ ~i ~~!~ ~~ ~~i:I!. ~ ~ ~~.' R ~ HI ~~ ~ ~h d gq · ~;i~ i~: ~~! ! ~ ~ ~. ~~ h z. i. i '~~ .R! - _ , 0 .~ ..~ . !~ ,~, , <<.' ~ . -,.. ! .. g~ !dhdin~ g h~g ~ ~ I ~h~ ~ ~. ~ ,~ ia ~ ~;~~ g~~ ~~~ : ~ : 00~~1!J[!]~~~~~~00~~~~~~0~~ [!]~ l~~, :":;41'" ! ~;; :: I ::;':: ,.... I :,: ;; I ~~~: ~~ I -.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ( ( . I, . ! I' ,I i I 'II_I i III q" i I L:i ~ilt. , . E1li; 'i ~ ' j. I I ~I ~.l '!~ ill" f! ~'tl!! IU!l!~iln; It .. ii ~ :0 0; ;; ;:;; ;; @~~ c en 0: Q) .'!:: CJ) 0- J: ! ~ Q. ~ ~ :J J!I ~ ~l2 . . .: ~t:l ...J c1e ~~'" h~ !.I .i~. . s ~ ~~ i~~ e~: ~i ~ ~~~ a .1 .:1 i q~~! ~~ .11.h. ~is:=~!j ~ h ~~j E :.... ~i' I'g~li~;' U'I~~' . p ~~Pl i u'i~H U~ e~e. I ."~ .. g ~e h ~i!U;II~!~!!i~~:.!i; nB~~i h~;~1 !~,~: ~~'i "I.h!~..d~9~"~.e h...",~= ~~..~. ~!q~ $ ! ~ : : : ~ :i ~ : : ~ ~ : ~ ~,~ :i: ~ !~ ! ! ! ! HI !! . ! ;~ 0.; ~ ~~ ~ ~ n .., -, -,., ~ ~ :l: h! ~c a! ~ I I ~ ~ q~ q .!: I ~~'..' ; ~~.; ; i B! i~ ~ ~ ~~. ~ e~'~n ~ ;~~~~~ i~~. ~~ !~= ~. ~ n ~ ~ ~ ~ n .a~;;li!.~~HI~! ~ i I nil I ~~ . '" <.> ci u.i ..:...:i --' -, '" --' 'Ii -iE- .,..~~ , ( () c6 <{ en 0) :Q CO en c 0 :s > Q) ill ~ 0 'C Q) .a-.a ~ .~ E:~" :: ;~: :: ~..: I .> .-' ;;; :: (Y) i ;:: :: I !:-..e...... i m :: : '''0..1 I w j a: 0. j :c I <{ i ~ I :J I a ~ I E I (f) :J I . E ,Q ! W ~~ I , (f) :~~ I I ~ a: I 0 .... 1 ":!l I 0 !< J: ~ ~~ :s ill I ~ "" * 'iO I iif w ~ , :a 0..<<1 I ~!m a I~ I I a: II I O!~ I I 75Ar32 @ ~ ~ ... ~ ~ - ~ ~~ i ~I!i jig; ~ . ~. .p ~ fi~~ I~" ~!. ~ I'~~~~ ~ . ~~-~Iil~ ~ ~~..: ~d ~;~a~~; ~ I:~ ~ - ~ ~. B ! u~ h ~ ~ U I~f ~ U ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ m ~ U: I iq. J h ,~.~~~h.~~ -i'e" Ii" ..u~~P ,,~. .." ~e r:i,~~Hss.g~~~~.~~~i;!i ;;~~ e~~~~"~ ~U'_Sa ~.; '--J).....~~. .d _.".~",._u ;....-11' u..llt~'o LN.' " · < . . H 2 ~di" ~ l. I ~ h ; ~l'.~ .~.~ .~~ I ~~"~ ;i. ; !: .. _..., d . .' ~ ,. ~ n ~ . ~ ~~: ~;. -'2!~' ..,. '''"00' :,hB.~ !.lwi ... '" liE: ~ 1il ~:;i ;:; ::i::l i~~ ~".i ! .!~*~'!' !' . ~ii~~!:~~ ~~t~> ~ ~.. _ "~'m~m. .~~~q~ ~~? ~ -i~!'! i~~1~2~.~ t ~~~a ~H~i -l.1 P ~ . ~ ~~ ~ : d .u :.. adu*h "'" ..:,,;,: ~ ..; '" ...;:li 7SA~3 ~~ c .Q j w iJ ~ =.-- - ::: ;;: ~ , - ( ((l 0> :Q ((l en c o ~ ~ ill ... o ".:: Q) X w UJ a: ~ ~ i o I C/) ~ E g UJ ~o C/) .'": o:~ a: ~ ~i o !<: I ~~~ ! i~ ~ l~i5 ! ~N~ I~ a: 11 ol~ i ~ " I I i I I I ~ I I I I I . I I I I I. Discretionary Approvals · Zoning ordinance amendment (ZOA) to amend provisions and uses within SD-8. · Site Plan Review to construct three new buildings wi thin SD-8. SECTION 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS The following is an environmental analysis on proj ect based on the City of Santa Ana's CEQA Checklist Form. The analysis incorporates by analysis and findings in the City of Santa Ana Plan Land Use Element FEIR. Additionally, a report has been prepared for the project incorporated into the environmental analysis. the proposed Environmental reference the Updated General traffic impact and has been For each environmental issue, the analysis identifies the level of impact that is anticipated to occur. Where applicable, mi tigation 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 wi thin 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 wi thin the immediate vicinity of the proj ect site. The project site is adjacent to State Route 55 (SR-55). However, SR-55 is not a designated scenic highway, nor does it contain any scenic resources within or adjacent to its right-of- way. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in adverse impacts to any scenic vista or scenic resources. 4 75A,.,34 c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and it's surrounding? Less Than Significant The City of Santa Ana has an adopted Urban Design Element that establishes policies, programs and design elements to enhance the aesthetic environment of the City. The design elements that are relevant to the project site include; Districts, Paths, Landmarks, and the SR-55 Scenic Corridor. Districts The Urban Design Element identifies that the project site is located within the Freeway Window North Main Street Design District. The Urban Design Element establishes goals and policies to help guide the design of land uses proposed within a Design District. Specifically, land uses proposed within a Design District should exhibit high quality design and should incorporate design elements that are proportional and aesthetically related to the District setting. The proposed project has a modern architecture design that incorporates a number of building elements into its design to reflect a high quality project. The design of the project would be different from existing buildings in the area, but would still be aesthetically related to the existing setting. Implementation of the proposed proj ect would not degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site or the surrounding area. Paths Paths are means by which people travel throughout the City and serve as the framework for the City's urban form. Within the project area, the Urban Design Element identifies Grand Avenue as a Path. The proposed project would be consistent with the Path design element in that a twenty foot landscape setback would be provided along Grand Avenue to enhance the streetscape. Landmarks Landmarks are elements of the urban form containing design features that reinforce uniqueness and memorability. Within the project area, the Urban Design Element identifies Hotel Terrace as a landmark. The proposed project would be consistent with the landmark design element in that it would provide uses that would compliment the Hotel Terrace Specific Development area. Additionally, the design of the proposed 5 75A~35 project would not be inconsistent with the high quality aesthetic environment of the Hotel Terrace area. SR-55 Scenic Corridor Scenic Corridors provide views of the City and largely influence the public's aesthetic and visual experience. The Urban Design Element identifies State Route 55 as a scenic corridor. The proposed project would be consistent with the Scenic Corridor Element in that the proposed project's view from the SR-55 would reflect high quality design, landscape treatment and lighting treatment that enhance the project site's aesthetic appearance. 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 project 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. II. AGRICULTURE A. Convert Prime Far.mland, Unique Far.mland or Far.mland of Statewide Importance to non-agriculture use? B. Conflict with existing zoning for agriculture 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 Far.mland, to non-agriculture use? No Impact According to the California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, the project site does not contain Unique Farmlands, Prime Farmlands or Farmlands of Statewide Importance. Additionally, based on a site visit conducted by the City's Environmental Coordinator, the proj ect site is currently not in agricultural production. Implementation of the proposed proj ect would not result in the loss of any farmlands. 6 75A~6 III. AIR QUALITY A. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of applicable Air Quality Attainment Plan or congestion Management Plan? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed 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 (SCAQMD). 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. The proposed project would be consistent with the City's General Plan and the growth projection for the project area. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not be in conflict with the Air Quality Management Plan. B. Violate any contribute violation? stationary source to an existing air quality or proposed standard or air quality c. Result in a cwnulatively considerable net increase of any cri teria pollutant for which the proj ect region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? D. Expose Sensitive concentrations? receptors to substantial pollutant 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 considers an air quality impact to be significant if it exceeds the criteria pollutant thresholds identified in the Table A-l. 7 7 5A~7 Table A-I 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 primary source of operational emissions by vehicle travel to and from the proj ect minor amount of gaseous emissions would also gas and electricity usage. would be generated site. A relatively occur from natural Long-term air quality impacts associated with the build out of the City's General plan was analyzed in FEIR 97-01. FEIR 97-01 determined that build out of the General Plan would result in unavoidable adverse air quality impacts. A Statement of Overriding Consideration was adopted by the City of Santa Ana to address long-term unavoidable air quality impacts associated within implementation and build out of the General Plan. The proposed proj ect would be developed at a lower level of intensity permitted under the General Plan. The long-term air quality impacts associated with the proposed project would be less than the air quality emissions proj ected in General Plan Land Use Element Update Environmental Impact report FEIR 97-1. No mitigation measures are necessary. Short-ter.m construction 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. The proposed project would require earthwork activity to provide for the construction of building slabs and onsite access ways. Using the South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook as a guideline, the threshold of potentially significant short-term air quality impacts would involve the 8 75ArJ8 grading of 1,309,000 square feet of area. Assuming grading of the entire project site, approximately 130,680 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 construction, the proposed project would be subject SCAQMD Fugitive Dust Rule 403. To insure compliance with Fugitive Dust Rule 403 the following mitigation measure shall be implemented. Mitigation Measure . During construction, the contractor would be required to comply with SCAQMD Fugitive Dust Rule 403 to suppress dust generated by construction operations. To ensure compliance with SCAQMD Fugitive Dust Rule 403, grading plans and construction plans for the proposed proj ect 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, 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 9 7SA,.,39 E. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial nwnber of people? Less Than Significant Impact The long-term operation of the proposed project would not emit objectionable odors. Construction operations for the project could emit objectionable odors. However, the odors would be short-term and would not be considered significant. IV. 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 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 ei ther 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 vicinity of the proj ect site. Therefore, implementation of the proposed proj ect would not result in any adverse impacts to any biological resources. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES A. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? 10 7 SArA 0 Less Than Significant Impact According to the National Register of Historical Resources and the City of Santa Ana Local Register of Historical Resources, there are no historical structures on the project site or within the Brookhollow Office Park. B. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? D. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of for.mal cemeteries. C. Directly or indirectly disturb or destroy a unique paleontogical resource or site? Less Than Significant The proposed project would be constructed on an improved building site. According to the General Plan Land Use Element EIR, there are no known cultural resources on the project site. Given the fact that the site is improved, the probability for the discovery of unknown cultural resources would be low. VI. GEOLOGY/SOILS A-I. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? 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 potential seismic impacts on the proj ect site. 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 11 76A~1 hazard. Additionally, 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 proj ect 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/lnglewood Fault located approximately 13 miles south from the City of Santa Ana is considered to be one of the most dominant faults in regard to potential seismic shaking impacts. The project site could potentially be subject to a maximum credible horizontal ground acceleration of O. 30g from a magnitude 6.9 earthquake along the Newport/lnglewood 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. Through the City's development review process, the proposed project would be required to prepare geotechnical study to evaluate seismic constraints and to identify design recommendations to minimize potential seismic shaking impacts. Additionally, the proposed project would be subject to the Seismic Safety Standards of the Uniform Building Code. Preparation and implementation of a geotechnical report and 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 subjected to large ground accelerations generated from seismic events. Liquefaction is generally known to occur in saturated cohesionless soils at depths shallower than about 50-feet. According to the General Plan Land Use Element EIR, the project site has high to very high potential for liquefaction impacts. Through the City's development review process, the proposed proj ect would be required to prepare a geotechnical study to evaluate liquefaction constraints and to identify design recommendations to minimize potential liquefaction impacts. Additionally, the proposed project would 12 7fiA~2 be subject to seismic safety standards of the Uniform Building Code. Compliance with the Uniform Building Code along with the incorporation of the design recommendations identified in the project geotechnical investigation would reduce potential seismically induced liquefaction and settlement impacts to a level considered less than significant. A-4. Landslides No Impact The project area is flat without any topographical relief. According to General Plan Land Use Element EIR, there are no landslide planes or slopes within the project area. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in adverse impacts in regards to landslides. 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 clearing, excavation, and grading of onsite soils. 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 grading permits, the project developer shall provide proof of coverage under NPDES General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit that includes; (a) A copy of the proj ect' s permit issued by the State Water Resource Control Board that identifies the permit number, (B) Two copies of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. c. Would the project result in the loss of a unique geological feature? 13 7 6A~3 No Impact According to 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. 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? Less Than Significant Impact According to the General Plan Land Use Element EIR, the project site contains Chino Silty Loam Drained Soils that have moderate shrink/swell potential, high potential for corrosion of uncoated steel and low potential for corrosion of concrete. Based on the soil conditions on the project site the proposed project would be geotechnically feasible. Through the City's Development review process, the proposed project would be required to prepare a site-specific geotechnical to address the geologic conditions on the project site, building loads of the project and the identification of design recommendations to ensure the long-term geotechnically stability of the proposed project. 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 proj ect site is located wi thin urban setting where sewer service is available. The proposed proj ect would not require septic tanks or alternative disposal systems. VI I. 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 14 7 fiArA4 The long-term operation of the proposed project would not involve activities that would emit hazardous emissions or involve the routine handling of large quantities of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials. However, construction operations and the long-term operation of the proposed project could potentially involve the handling and storage of incidental amounts of hazardous substances, such as paints, oils and solvents. 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. 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 City of Santa Ana Fire Department and the State Regional Water Quality Control Board, 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 project located within an airport land use plan or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles where a public airport or public use airport, would the proj ect result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? Less Than Significant Impact According to the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission Airports Environs Land Use Plan, the project site is not located within an Accident Potential Zone or Clear Zone. However, the proj ect site is located wi thin Airports Environs Land Use Plan Planning Area, and will require coordination and review by the Airport Land Use Commission. The proj ect is not located in an accident potential zone and the structures on the project site would not exceed two stories in height. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in safety hazards for people residing in or working within the project area. VIII. HYDROLOGY/WATER QUALITY 15 7SA~5 A. Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? E. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? I. Resulting an increase in pollutant discharges to receiving waters? J. Result in significant alteration of receiving water quality during or following construction. K. Could the proposed project result in increased erosion downstream? L. Result in increased impervious surfaces and associated increased runoff? M. Create a significant adverse environmental impact to drainage patterns due to changes in runoff flow rates and volumes? N. Tribu tary to an already impaired water body, as 1 i s ted on the Clean Water Act Section 303 (d) list. If so, can it result in an increase in any pollutant of which the body is already impaired? o. Tributary to other environmentally sensitive areas? If so, can it exacerbate already existing sensitive conditions? P. Have a potentially significant surface water quality to either waters? environmental impact or marine, fresh or wetland Q. Have a potentially significant adverse impact ground water quality? R. Cause or contribute to an exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses? s. Impact aquatic, wetland or riparian habitat? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated The City of Santa Ana is included within four watersheds, San Diego Creek, Santa Ana River, Talbert and Westminster. Each of these watershed areas are under the jurisdiction of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board and subject to the objectives, water quality standards and Best Management Practice requirements established in the Santa Ana River Basin Plan and 16 75A~6 Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan. The City of Santa Ana implements the goals, obj ecti ves and requirements of the Basin Plan and Drainage Area Management Plan through the City's Local Implementation Plan. Storm water flows from the project site would be conveyed to an underground storm drain and Lane Channel before ultimately discharging into Reach 1 of San Diego Creek. The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board has identified San Diego Creek as impaired by nutrients, sediments, metals and pesticides. The primary source of potential adverse water quality impacts associated with the construction and operation of the proposed project would be 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. Additionally, surface water runoff generated from the proj ect site during construction operations could be degraded potentially resulting in adverse water quality impacts to downstream receiving waters. Additionally, the proposed project includes food preparation uses. Commercial kitchens could potentially produce grease as a by-product of their operation. If not properly disposed of, the grease could potentially create blockage of sewer lines, which could result in damages to both public and private property and potentially resulting in adverse water quality impacts. The long-term operation and short-term construction activities associated with the proposed proj ect could potentially result adverse water quality impacts that could be in conflict with water quality standards established by the State Regional Water Quality Control Board. To reduce potential water quality impacts to a level considered less than significant the following mitigation measure shall be implemented. Mitigation Measures · Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project developer shall provide proof of coverage under NPDES General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit that includes; (a) A copy of the proj ect' s permit issued by the State Water Resource Control Board that identifies the permit number, (B) Two copies of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. 17 7 5At4 7 . Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project developer shall submit and have approved a surface drainage/utility plan that depicts all applicable Site Design, Structural Source Control and Treatment Control Best Management Practices in accordance with the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan and the City of Santa Ana Local Implementation Plan. . Provide two copies of the Water Quality Management plan that would include the following: a. Site Assessment b. Site design Best Management Practices (BMP) c. Applicable Routine Source Control BMP d. Selecting and sizing the Treatment Control BMP e. Mechanisms by which funding for long-term operation and maintenance of all structural BMP will be provided f. Operation and Maintenance Plan to describe the long- term operation and maintenance requirements of all applicable structural BMP and to identify the entity in charge of implementation . Building plans for the proposed proj ect shall reflect that all restaurant uses be fitted with a grease interceptor to the size and capacity as designated by the Building Safety Division of the City of Santa Ana to mitigate impacts on the local sanitary sewer system and regional water quality. Such grease interceptor shall be regularly maintained so as to remain fully functional. · The proposed proj ect would be subj ect 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 proposed project would 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. Additionally, construction operations for the proposed project would not 18 75~348 involve dewatering activities. Implementation project would not result in significant underground water supplies. of the impacts proposed to any 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 stor.m water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted run-off? Potentially Significant Impact 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 proj ect applicant shall submit a final surface water runoff evaluation for review and approval showing existing and proposed facilities and methods of draining the site wi thout exceeding the capacity of any street or adj acent storm drain facility. F. Place housing within a lOO-year floodplain, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? G. Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? H. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? No Impact The City of Santa Ana is Insurance Program (NFIP). 19 a participant in the National Flood Communities participating in the NFIP 7 SArA 9 must adopt and enforce minimum floodplain management standards, including identification of flood hazards and flood risks. Participation in the NFIP allows communi ties 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. 0602320278H. The project site is located entirely in Zone X, which is defined as areas beyond the limits of the 100-year flood and SOO-year flood. Implementation of the proposed project would not significantly increase the potential for flood risks. IX. LAND USE/PLANNING A. Physically divide an established community? Less Than Significant Impact The project site is located within an existing office park and would not physically divide any established communities. B. Conflict with regulation of adopted for environmental any applicable land use plan, policy, or an agency with jurisdiction over the project the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an effect? Less Than Significant General Plan The General Plan designation for the proj ect site is Professional and Administrative Office with a Far 0.5-1.0. The Professional/Administrative Office designation applies to those areas where professional and/or administrative offices are predominant, or where such development is being encouraged. The types of land use typically located in the Professional/Administrative Office designation include, professional and administrative offices, restaurants when uses are an integral component of a planned office development and professional uses such as medical doctors. The proposed project would be consistent with the intent of the professional/administrative office designation for the following reasons: · The proposed project would have a FAR of approximately .20. . The proposed restaurant, retail and incorporated into and would support uses in the Brookhollow office park. food uses would be the existing office 20 7SA~0 . The proposed office uses are allowed. Therefore, the proposed project would not be in conflict with the General Plan. Zoning The zoning for the project site is Specific Development SD-8. Presently, SD-8 does not allow general retail uses on the proj ect site. The proposed proj ect would amend Specific Development No. 8 to create a third project area (Area III) that would allow retail, food and office uses on the project site. Indoor entertainment uses would be allowed with an approved conditional use permit. With approval of the amendment the proposed project would not be in conflict with the zoning. c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community plan? No Impact According to the City's General Plan, the proj ect site included within any habitat conservation plan or any communi ty conservation plan. Therefore, implementation proposed project would not be in conflict with any conservation plan. is not natural of the habitat X. MINERAL RESOURCES A. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? 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 Setting The proj ect site is located wi thin the City of Santa Ana and subject to noise standards and guidelines in the General Plan Noise Element and Municipal Code Noise Ordinance. The primary purpose of the City of Santa Ana Noise Element is to "Prevent significant increases in noise levels in the community and 21 75A~1 minimize the adverse effects of currently-existing noise sources." In accordance with the Noise Element, the City has adopted noise standards and guidelines for land use planning. These guidelines for exterior noise levels as presented in Table N-l. City Of Santa Ana Land Use Table N-1 Land Use Guidelines For Exterior Noise Noise Level (dBA CNEL 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 City also regulates stationary noise impacts on residential land uses and construction noise though Chapter 18, Article VI of the Municipal Code. The noise ordinance recognizes that some forms of noise are required for urban development and maintenance and are difficult to control. Section 18-314, "Special provisions," provides for these exemptions. Those applicable to the project include: · Section 18-314(e) which 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 Saturday, or any time on Sunday or a federal holiday, and A significant noise impact would occur if a proposed land uses does not comply with the General Plan noise standards identified in Table N -1, or when a proposed land use resul ts in an 3dB increase to existing noise levels when the existing noise level is at least 65 dB CNEL. A. 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. C. A substantial per.manent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. 22 75A~2 Less Than Significant The project site is located in an area characterized with commercial land uses. There are no sensitive receptors within the vicinity of proj ect site. The existing noise environment surrounding the project site is primarily influenced by traffic noise from the SR-55 Freeway. The proposed project involves the construction of commercial land uses, which is allowed in areas that experience increased levels of noise. The project has been designed to minimize interior noise impacts through a combination of setbacks and conventional building practices. It is anticipated that interior noise levels would realize a 20 dB reduction. The operation of the proposed proj ect would not significantly increase noise levels within the project site. A significant increase in noise would be a 3dB increase over existing noise levels. Typically, a 3db increase in noise levels occurs when existing traffic volumes are doubled. The proposed project would not double existing traffic volumes within the proj ect area. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in a 3db increase to existing noise levels within the project area. B. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. D. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without project. Less Than Significant The construction of the structure would involve conventional construction equipment resulting in less than significant ground borne vibration impacts. No mitigation measures are necessary. Implementation of the proposed project would result in short- term construction related noise impacts. Short-term noise impacts would result from site preparation, excavation, grading, and other construction operations. The construction-related short-term noise levels would be higher than the existing or ambient noise levels in the proj ect area today, but would no longer occur once construction of the project is complete. The Municipal Code recognizes required for urban development to control. Section 18-314 (e) that some forms of noise are and maintenance and are difficult exempts noise sources associated 23 75Ar.53 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 Saturday, or any time on Sunday or a federal holiday. Compliance with Noise Ordinance would reduce construction noise impacts to a level considered less than significant. 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? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated The Airport Environs Land Use Plan for Orange County establishes policies and standards to protect the public from the adverse effects of aircraft noise. The Airport Environs Land Use Plan establishes two Noise Impact Zones around the vicinity of John Wayne Airport. Noise Impact Zone 1 is areas where the CNEL is greater than 65db CNEL. Noise Impact Zone 2 is areas where the CNEL is 60 dB or greater, but less than 65dB. The project is subject to Uniform Building Code requirements which would include California Noise Insulation Standards to achieve appropriate interior noise levels for the mix of land uses proposed for the project. According to the John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan the project site is located within the Noise Impact Zone 2 and would require coordination and review by the Airport Land Use Commission. According to the Airport Environs Land Use Plan, the proposed project is permitted in Noise Impact Zone 2. However, coordination with the Airport land use commission would still be required. Mitigation Measure · Prior to the issuance of Building Permits, the project developer shall coordinate with the John Wayne Airport Land Use Commission on the land use/noise compatibility of the proposed project. XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING A. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly through extension of roads or other infrastructure. 24 75Ar.54 B. Displace substantial numbers necessitating the construction elsewhere. of of existing replacement housing, housing C. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan and would not induce substantial amounts of population growth within the project area and would not displace existing households or create need for the construction of substantial amounts of new housing. The proposed proj ect does not include any major roadway or infrastructure improvements that would indirectly facilitate growth within the project area. 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 site. 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. 6 located at 950 W. MacArthur Boulevard is the closest fire station to the project site. Presently, a shift at Fire Station No. 1 consists of six fire fighters, 1 fire truck, and 1 fire engine. The proposed proj ect would result in an increased demand for fire protection and emergency services within the project area. According to the Santa Ana Fire Department 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- related demand for fire and emergency services. Additionally, through the City's development review process, the Santa Ana Fire Department has reviewed the proposed project for 25 76ArS5 compliance with the City's Fire Code and emergency access requirements. Based on comments from the Fire Department, the project has incorporated fire/life safety systems such as automatic fire sprinkler systems, and fire alarms into the design of the project. Additionally, emergency access has been provided in accordance with Fire Department standards. The Fire Department has determined that the proposed project is in compliance with the City's Fire Code. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in significant long-term impacts on the ability of the Fire Department to provide adequate fire protection services. Additionally, there would be no construction-related impacts on fire protection/emergency services since most construction activities would occur on site. The project area would be temporarily fenced during construction operations to restrict public access to the project site. Construction related impacts on fire protection services would not be significant. 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 proj ect is located wi thin the Southeast District. The District is considered to be an average crime area, compared to other areas in the City. Implementation of the proposed project would increase the demand for police protection services over current level of demand. The Santa Ana Police Department has indicated that under existing levels of manpower and equipment, they would have the ability to provide adequate police protection services. Through the City's development review process, the Santa Ana Police Department has reviewed the proposed proj ect for compliance with the City's Building Security Ordinance. The project is required to submit a plan indicating all structures and parking lots comply with the provisions of Building Security Ordinance. With compliance with the Building Security Ordinance implementation of the proposed project would not result in significant impacts on the ability of the Santa Ana Police Department to provide adequate police protection services. School Facilities: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated 26 7 ~'1~6 The project site is within the boundaries of the Santa Ana Unified School District (SAUSD). Presently, overcrowding exists at nearly all schools within the SAUSD. The proposed project would not directly generate additional school service demand within the SAUSD. However, it is possible that future employees associated with the proposed proj ect could locate into Santa Ana. Therefore, the proposed proj ect could indirectly generate additional students and cumulative impacts to schools within SAUSD. To help fund new construction of school facilities, SAUSD levies the maximum State approved impact fee of $0.33 per square feet of commercial area. The paYment of fees to the district would mitigate impacts on school services to a level considered less than significant. To insure paYment of school services, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented. Mitigation Measure . Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall submit evidence to the City of Santa Ana Building and Planning Department that appropriate school impact fees have been paid. Parks, Other Facilities: Less Than Significant Impacts 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 land, 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 2.0 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 and recreation needs of the community. Implementation of the proposed proj ect would not increase the population in the City and would not contribute to the imbalance of the parkland/population ratio in the City. Therefore, implementation of the propose project would result in less than significant impacts to park services and other facilities within the community. 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? 27 75ArS7 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 Implementation of the proposed project would not generate additional demands on existing recreation facilities or require the construction of new recreation facilities. xv. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC The following analysis is based on a traffic impact study prepared for the proposed project by Kimley Horn and Associates. The traffic impact study is presented in its entirety in Appendix A Analysis Methodology The traffic study includes documentation of Existing Conditions, analysis of cumulative traffic conditions and identification of project-related impacts at the following eight study area intersections: . Grand Avenue and Warner Avenue . Grand Avenue and Brookhollow Drive . Grand Avenue and Dyer Road . Dyer Road and Main Street . Red hill Avenue and Dyer / Barranca Parkway . Grand Avenue and SR-55 SB off-ramp · Dyer Road and SR-55 SB off/on-ramp/Hotel Terrace Drive . Dyer Road and SR-55 NB off/on-ramp Level of Service The City of Santa Ana has established LOS D or better as the acceptable LOS for intersections in the proj ect area. Cal trans Level of Service standard is the threshold between LOS C and D. A proj ect is considered to have a significant adverse traffic impact at locations that would operate at acceptable LOS without the project but which would operate at an unacceptable LOS with the proj ect. For locations that are forecast to operate worse than the acceptable LOS standard even without the proj ect, a project is considered to have a significant adverse traffic impact if it results in an increase in intersection ICU of 0.01 at signalized intersections or an increase in roadway segment 28 75A~8 V/C of 0.01.1 For unsignalized intersections, the City of Santa Ana does not specifically define significance criteria. Signalized Intersections- (ICU) Methodology Intersection Capacity Utilization In accordance with the City of Santa Ana and the County of Orange Congestion Management Program (CMP) requirements, peak hour operating conditions at the signalized intersections were evaluated using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology. The ICU methodology provides a comparison of the theoretical hourly vehicular capacity of an intersection to the number of vehicles actually passing through that intersection during a given hour. The ICU calculation generates a volume-to-capacity (V /C) ratio that translates into a corresponding Level of Service (LOS) measure, ranging from LOS "A", representing uncongested, free- flowing conditions, to LOS "F", representing over-capacity conditions. A summary description of each Level of Service and the corresponding V/C ratio is provided on the following chart: LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTIONS SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Level of ICU Value Service A 0.00 - 0.60 B 0.61 - 0.70 C 0.71 - 0.80 D 0.81 - 0.90 E 0.91 - 1.00 F > 1.00 Description EXCELLENT - No vehicle waits longer than one red light and no approach phase is full used. VERY GOOD - An occasional approach phase is fully utilized; many drivers begin to feel somewhat restricted within ou s of vehicles. GOOD - Occasionally drivers may have to wait through more than one red light; back-u s ma develo behind tumin vehicles FAIR - Delays may be substantial during portions of the rush hours, but enough lower volume periods occur to permit clearing of developing lines, preventing excessive back-u s. POOR - Represents the most vehicles that the intersection approaches can accommodate; ma be Ion lines of waitin vehicles throu h several si al c cles. FAILURE - Back-ups from nearby locations or on cross streets may restrict or prevent movement of vehicles out of the intersection approaches. Tremendous dela s with continuous I increasin ueue len hs. The following intersections will be analyzed using the ICU methodology: . Grand Avenue and Warner Avenue . Grand Avenue and Brookhollow Drive . Grand Avenue and Dyer Road . Dyer Road and Main Street I City of Santa Ana. 29 75A~9 . Red Hill Avenue and Dyer /Barranca Parkway Signalized Intersections Methodology Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) The following study intersections are Caltrans intersections and will therefore be analyzed using the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2000 methodology for signalized intersections. . Grand Avenue and SR-55 SB off-ramp . Dyer Avenue and SR-55 SB off/on-ramp/Hotel Terrace Drive . Dyer Avenue and SR-55 NB off/on-ramp This methodology estimates the average total delay (in average seconds per vehicle) for each of the movements to or from the minor street, and determines the level of service for each movement. Just as with the ICU methodology, the HCM delay forecast translates to a Level of Service designation, ranging from LOS "A" to LOS "F". The descriptions of operating conditions for each Level of Service are very similar to the LOS descriptions for signalized intersections. A summary description of each Level of Service for signalized intersections, and the corresponding delay, expressed in seconds per vehicle, is provided on the following chart: LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTIONS SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Level of Delay Description Service (seconds/vehicle) A :S 10.0 Little or no delay B > 10.0 - 20 Short traffic delays C > 20 - 35 Average traffic delays D > 35 - 50 Long traffic delays E > 50 - 80 Very long traffic delays F > 80 Severe congestion Setting Existing Roadway and Intersection Conditions Existing lane configurations at the study intersections are shown on Exhibit T-1. Existing peak hour operations were evaluated and the results are summarized on Table T-1. As shown 30 7 SAr.i 0 on Table 1 all study intersections are currently operating at an acceptable Level of Service in both peak hours. TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION OPERATION EXISTING CONDITIONS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Signalized Intersection (City) 1 ICU LOS ICU LOS 1 Grand Ave @ Warner Ave 0.457 A 0.730 C 2 Grand Ave @ Brookhollow Dr 0.347 A 0.424 A 3 Grand Ave @ Dyer Rd 0.624 B 0.828 D 4 Main St @ Dyer Rd 0.515 A 0.726 C 5 Redhill Ave @ Dyer/Barranca 0.849 D 0.723 C AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Signalized Intersection (Caltrans) 1 Delay LOS Delay LOS 6 Grand Ave @ SR-55 SB Ramp 16.8 B 15.8 B 7 SR-55 SB Ramp @ Dyer Rd 28.5 C 26.6 C 8 SR-55 NB Ramp @ Dyer Rd 17..9 B 14.3 B Intersections under the control of Caltrans are evaluated using the Highway Capacity Manual methodology. All others are evaluated using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method. Project Build-Out Conditions The Project Build-Out Traffic Condition consists of existing peak hour traffic with an annual growth rate applied for each year between existing condition and the anticipated Build-out year for the proj ect . The Crazy Horse Square proj ect would be completed in 2007, so a 1% growth was applied to existing traffic to account for ambient growth in the area. Peak hour operating conditions for Project Build-out Year without the proj ect are summarized on Table 2. As shown on Table 2, all study area intersections are forecasted to continue to operate at an acceptable Level of Service in the Project Build-out year. 31 7 SAr.i 1 TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION OPERATION PROJECT OPENING YEAR WITHOUT PROJECT CONDITIONS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Signalized Intersection (City) 1 ICU LOS ICU LOS 1 Grand Ave @ Warner Ave 0.470 A 0.750 C 2 Grand Ave @ Brookhollow Dr 0.356 A 0.435 A 3 Grand Ave @ Dyer Rd 0.642 B 0.851 D 4 Main St @ Dyer Rd 0.529 A 0.746 C 5 Redhill Ave @ Dyer/Barranca 0.873 D 0.744 C AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Signalized Intersection (Caltrans) 1 Delay LOS Delay LOS 6 Grand Ave @ SR-55 SB Ramp 16.9 B 16.0 B 7 SR-55 SB Ramp @ Dyer Rd 29.1 C 27.5 C 8 SR-55 NB Ramp @ Dyer Rd 18.4 B 14.5 B Intersections under the control of Caltrans are evaluated using the Highway Capacity Manual methodology. All others are evaluated using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method. Project Impacts A. Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system? B. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Less than significant impact Project Traffic Generation Trip generation estimates for the proposed Crazy Horse Square food and retail center were derived from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) publication Trip Generation, 7th Edi tion. Trip generation rates for restaurant, retail, fast food, and coffee house uses and the resulting trip generation for each component of the proj ect are summarized on Table 3. Reductions for pass-by traffic for the food and retail uses were taken, based on ITE standards. Table 3 indicates that the Crazy Horse Square food and retail center would generate about 2,696 trips per day, with 96 inbound trips and 86 outbound trips in 32 75ArJ2 the morning peak hour, and 60 inbound and 41 outbound trips in the evening peak hour. Table 3 Crazy Horse Square Summary of Project Trip Generation Land Use Trip Generation Project Trip Generation Rates ITE Unit Quantit Daily AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak Code y In Out In Out Daily In Out In Out Lot 1 Restaurant 931 KSF 8.171 89.95 0.66 0.15 5.02 2.47 735 5 1 41 20 TTE Pass-By Reduction (PM-44%) 0 0 0 -18 -9 Sub-Total Restaurant 735 5 1 23 11 Retail 820 KSF 4.211 42.94 0.63 0.40 1.80 1.95 181 3 2 8 8 'TE Pass-By Reduction (PM-50%) 0 0 0 -4 -4 Sub-Total Retail 181 3 2 4 4 Food 1932 KSF 2.47 127.15 5.99 5.53 6.66 4.26 314 15 14 16 11 TTE Pass-By Reduction (PM-43%) 0 0 0 -7 -5 Sub-Total Food 314 15 14 9 6 Total New Traffic - Lot 1 1,230 23 17 36 21 Lot 2 Coffee 933-2 KSF 1.486 716.00 37.25 35.78 14.97 13.82 1,040 55 53 22 21 Food 932 KSF 2.829 127.15 5.99 5.53 6.66 4.26 360 17 16 19 12 TTE Pass-By Reduction (PM-43%) 0 0 0 -18 -14 Sub-Total Coffee / Food 1,424 72 69 23 19 Retail 820 KSF 0.987 42.94 0.63 0.40 1.80 1.95 42 1 0 2 2 ITE Pass-By Reduction (PM-50%) 0 0 0 -1 -1 Sub-Total Retail 42 1 0 1 1 Total New Traffic - Lot 2 1,466 73 69 24 20 ToQrINew Trafl'ie 2,696 96 8Ci 60 41 Project Traffic Trip Distribution Project trip distribution assumptions for the project site were developed, taking into account the site uses and the location of area trip producers, such as emplOYment centers. Trip distribution assumptions are shown on Figure 6 of the traffic analysis. The trip distribution assumptions focus on the project's use of arterials and major intersections in the vicinity of the project. While some drivers may find their way to the site through the Brookhollow development via Brookhollow Drive at Warner Avenue, the trip distribution shown assumes that 33 75A~63 all project traffic will use the arterials, conservative approach. for a more Traffic Impacts Project Opening Year Conditions proj ect traffic was added to the proj ect Opening Year traffic volumes, and the study intersections were re-analyzed for Project Build-out year plus Project peak hour operations. The results are summarized on table T-4. As shown on Table T-4 with the addition of project-related traffic, all study intersections would continue to operate at an acceptable Level of Service in both peak hours. The project would not generate a significant impact, and no off-site mitigation of project impacts would be required for the project. TABLE 4 SUMMARY OF PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION OPERATION PROJECT OPENING YEAR WITH PROJECT CONDITIONS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Signalized Intersection (City) 1 ICU LOS ICU LOS 1 Grand Ave @ Warner Ave 0.479 A 0.756 C 12 Grand Ave @ Brookhollow Dr 0.384 A 0.448 A 3 Grand Ave @ Dyer Rd 0.655 B 0.864 D 14 Main St @ Dyer Rd 0.537 A 0.748 C 5 Redhill Ave @ Dyer/Barranca 0.880 D 0.745 C AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour f-- Signalized Intersection (Caltrans) 1 INo. Delay LOS Delay LOS 6 Grand Ave @ SR-55 SB Ramp 17.0 B 16.0 B 7 SR-55 SB Ramp @ Dyer Rd 29.2 C 27.6 C 8 SR-55 NB Ramp @ Dyer Rd 18.5 B 14.6 B Intersections under the control of Caltrans are evaluated using the Highway Capacity Manual methodology. All others are evaluated using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method. 2025 General Plan Build Out Conditions An analysis of Santa Ana General Plan Build-out Year 2025 was conducted for this project. Forecast peak hour volumes for the 2025 Build-out condition were developed using the Orange County Traffic Analysis Model (OCTAM) , which is developed and maintained by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). The 2025 General Plan Build-out conditions assume build-out of all land uses as well as the implementation of transportation infrastructure improvements identified in the City's Circulation Element. Intersection operations for the 2025 General Plan Build-out Condition were evaluated and the results are 34 75A~4 summarized in Table 5. As shown in Table T-5 all study intersections are forecasted to continue to operate at an acceptable Level of Service in the 2025 General Plan Build-out year. TABLE 5 SUMMARY OF PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION OPERATION 2025 GENERAL PLAN BUILD OUT WITHOUT PROJECT CONDITIONS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Signalized Intersection (City) 1 ICU LOS ICU LOS 1 Grand Ave @ Warner Ave 0.575 A 0.814 D 2 Grand Ave @ Brookhollow Dr 0.374 A 0.403 A 3 Grand Ave @ Dyer Rd 0.648 B 0.857 D 4 Main St @ Dyer Rd 0.658 B 0.853 D 5 Redhill Ave @ Dyer/Barranca 0.784 C 0.729 C AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Signalized Intersection (Caltrans) 1 Delay LOS Delay LOS 6 Grand Ave @ SR-55 SB Ramp 16.7 B 15.6 B 7 SR-55 SB Ramp @ Dyer Rd 29.6 C 27.9 C 8 SR-55 NB Ramp @ Dyer Rd 20.0 B 15.3 B Intersections under the control of Caltrans are evaluated using the Highway Capacity Manual methodology. All others are evaluated using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method. Traffic Impacts 2025 General Plan Build Out Condition Project traffic was added to the 2025 General Plan Build-out Condition traffic volumes, and the study intersections were re- analyzed. The intersection analysis results are summarized in Table 6. As shown in Table 6 with the addition of project- related traffic, all study intersections would continue to operate at an acceptable Level of Service in both peak hours. The project would not generate a significant impact, and no off- si te mitigation of proj ect impacts would be required for the project. 35 75A~65 TABLE 6 SUMMARY OF PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION OPERATION GENERAL PLAN BUILD-OUT WITH PROJECT CONDITIONS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ~ Signalized Intersection (City) 1 No. ICU LOS ICU LOS 1 Grand Ave @ Warner Ave 0.578 A 0.820 D 2 Grand Ave @ Brookhollow Dr 0.401 A 0.416 A 3 Grand Ave @ Dyer Rd 0.655 B 0.870 D 4 Main St @ Dyer Rd 0.665 B 0.858 D 5 Redhill Ave @ Dyer/Barranca 0.789 C 0.732 C AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ~ Signalized Intersection (Caltrans) 1 No. Delay LOS Delay LOS 6 Grand Ave @ SR-55 SB Ramp 16.8 B 15.6 B 7 SR-55 SB Ramp @ Dyer Rd 29.7 C 28.0 C 8 SR-55 NB Ramp @ Dyer Rd 20.1 C 15.4 B Intersections under the control of Caltrans are evaluated using the Highway Capacity Manual methodology. All others are evaluated using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology. 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? Less Than Significant According to the Orange County Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport the proj ect site is not located wi thin clear zone or accident potential zone. The maximum height of the project is approximately 25-feet. The height of the project would not interfere with air traffic patterns within the area or create substantial safety risks. Implementation of the proposed project would also not increase the level of air traffic within the project area. D. Substantially increase hazards to a design feature Less Than Significant Impact Through the City's development review process, the City's Public Works Department has determined that implementation of the proposed project would not increase traffic hazards within the project area. 36 75A~66 E. Result in inadequate emergency access Less Than Significant Impact As part of the City's development review process, the proposed project was reviewed by the Police Department and the Fire Department to ensure adequate emergency access. Recommendations provided through the development process have been incorporated into the proposed proj ect. No adverse emergency access impacts would be associated with the proposed project. F. Result in inadequate parking capacity Less Than Significant Impact The proj ect' s parking requirements, based on the City of Santa Ana parking code, are summarized in Table 7. The total parking requirement for the three buildings would be 174 parking spaces. This total parking is the sum of the peak parking requirements for each of the uses proposed on the project site. The project site plan shows that 175 parking spaces would be provided. This amount of parking is 1 parking space greater than City of Santa Ana code-required parking and therefore the project complies with City parking requirements. Table 7 Crazy Horse Square Food and Retail Center Parking Requirements Site Use Parking Requirements Site Qty Parking Required Lot 1 Food 1 space / 100 square feet 10,520 SF 105.2 Retail 1 space / 200 square feet 4,120 SF 20.6 Electrical 1 space / 330 square feet 212 SF .6 Sub- Total Parking Requirement - Lot 1 138 Lot 2 Food 1 space / 100 square feet 4,235 SF 42.4 Electrical 1 Space / 330 square feet 78 SF .2 Sub-Total Parking Requirement - Lot 2 47.5 Total Parking Requirement 174 37 75A~67 Shared Parking for Potential Alternative Site Use An alternative site use for club/concert venue component of in the main restaurant. This proposal, but a discussion of the venue on parking requirements is Lot 1 could include a night approximately 1,900 square feet is not part of the current effect of a night club/concert provided here for information purposes. Parking for a night club / concert venue use would have a higher parking requirement than regular restaurant use - 1 space per 28 square feet of entertainment area (including bar, dance floor area, assembly area) compared to 1 space per 100 square feet of restaurant area. For 1,900 square feet, this represents an increase in parking of 49 spaces. A summary of the parking requirements for this night club site use is provided on Table 8. With the entertainment use, the site would have a parking requirement of 223 spaces, compared to the 175 spaces provided. Although the Crazy Horse Square site would have a parking shortage compared to the City of Santa Ana parking code, the mixed-use nature of the site (a combination of retail, night club and food uses) makes it a good candidate for shared parking relationships amongst the uses. The Urban Land Institute (ULI) has developed a methodology for estimating the reduction in peak parking demand a mixed-use site can experience due to its mixed- use make-up. Table 1 Crazy Horse Square With Night Club Parking Requirements Site Use Parking Requirements Site Qty Parking Required Lot 1 Restaurant 1 space / 100 square feet 8,620 SF 86.2 Night Club 1 space / 28 square feet 1,900 SF 67.9 Retail 1 space / 200 square feet 4,120 SF 20.6 Electrical 1 space /330 square feet 212 SF .6 Sub- Total Parkinf( Requirement - Lot 1 175.3 Lot 2 Food 1 space / 100 square feet 4,235 SF 42.4 Retail 1 space / 200 square feet 987 SF 4.9 Electrical 1 space /330 square feet 78 SF .2 Sub- Total Parking Requirement - Lot 2 47.5 Total Parkin2 Requirement 222.8 = 223 38 75ArJ8 The ULI Shared Parking (Second Edition, 2005) publication sets forth a methodology for evaluating shared parking relationships on a mixed-use site. The process is a multi - step process that first establishes the stand-alone peak parking requirements for the site uses, as summarized on Table 8 above. The methodology then applies a percentage to the peak requirement for each use, for each hour of the day between the hours of 6: 00 AM and midnight, reflecting the fact that the parking demand for each use varies throughout the course of the day. Beneficial shared parking synergies exist between different uses whose peak operating times occur at different times of the day. Examples of complementary uses for the Crazy Horse development would be the retail, fast food, and full-service restaurant with bar and dance floor. When the retail parking demand is at 100% of its peak (at 1: 00 PM on a weekday), full-service restaurant uses are at 75% and bar and night club uses are nominal, according to the ULI document, Table 2 - 5. At the same time, retail and fast food uses are at 50% and less when the restaurant and night club parking demand is at 100%, after 9:00 at night on a weeknight. These uses, then, can share a portion of the same parking supply without detriment to the other, rather than each providing their own distinct and complete parking supply. ULI hour-by-hour usage factors, seasonal factors, and weekday and weekend parking ratios are incorporated into a Shared Parking spreadsheet, and applied to the proposed mix of uses and square footages for the Crazy Horse Square proj ect . Applying these factors to a particular mix of integrated land uses yields a projected peak parking requirement at a particular time of day (weekday and weekend) and season. In theory, the actual parking needs for that mix of uses will not exceed the projected peak, due to the interrelationships and benefits of shared parking synergies. Copies of the Shared Parking spreadsheets based on the ULI Shared Parking manual (Second Edition, 2005) developed for the Crazy Horse Square proj ect are provided in Appendix c. The worksheets indicate that based on shared parking arrangements, the Crazy Horse Square proj ect would require a maximum of 163 spaces at 7:00 PM on a typical weekday (a parking demand reduction of 62 spaces due to shared parking) and 164 spaces at 8:00 PM on the weekend (a parking demand reduction of 61 spaces due to shared parking) . Based on this shared parking analysis, the proposed site parking supply of 175 spaces would be adequate to meet the peak parking needs of the Crazy Horse Square mixed-use development, including a night cl ubi concert venue use in the main restaurant, 39 7SA~9 throughout the day and evening, on both weekdays and weekends. In addition parking would be available on adj acent sites since office uses within the Brookhollow Office Park would not be operating in the evening hours and on week-ends when the nightclub/concert venue use is likely to occur. G. Conflict with transportation adopted policies supporting alternative Less Than Significant Impact The Orange County Transportation Authority operates a fixed route bus service within the project area, along Grand Avenue. Other alternative modes of transportation such as 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 policies regarding alternative modes of transportation. would implementation of the proposed project displace existing modes of public transportation provided within project area. City Nor any the XVI UTILITIES/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. The project area is improved water distribution facilities. The City's Water Department utilizes a generation rate of 100 gallons per day for each two square feet of retail and restaurant area to determine water and wastewater demands. The proposed project would have a water demand of 12,100 gallons per day. The proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan and Urban Water Management Plan. No adverse impacts in 40 7 5A1"J7 0 regards to water service would be associated with the proposed project. A. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? B. Require or wastewater facilities, significant result in the construction of new water or treatment facilities or expansion of existing the construction of which could cause 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 serve the project's projected demand in addition to the providers existing commitments. Less Than Significant Impact The City of Santa Ana and the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) would provide wastewater service to the proposed project. The proj ect area is currently improved with wastewater sewer facilities. A combination of City of Santa Ana local sewer lines and OCSD trunk sewer lines would service the project site. Wastewater generated from the site would be treated at Orange County Sanitation District Reclamation Plant NO.1. in the City of Fountain Valley. The treatment plan treats approximately 90 million gallons per day. As mentioned previously, the City of Santa Ana utilizes a water demand rate of 100 gallons per day for each 200 square feet of retail and restaurant area to calculate both water and wastewater demand. The wastewater demands of the proj ect are accounted for in the City's Urban Water Management Plan. The wastewater flows generated from the proposed proj ect would provide an incidental increase in the amount of wastewater flows to the Reclamation Plant No. 1 and would not have less than a significant impact on wastewater treatment facilities. To address cumulative wastewater service impacts within the project area the project area the proposed project would be subject to sewer connection fees with the City of Santa Ana and OCSD. C. 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 Implementation of the increase the amount of from the project site. proposed project would not significant surface water runoff currently generated Onsite drainage improvements would needed 41 75Ar11 for the project. However, these drainage improvements would not cause significant impacts to the environment. F. Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? G. Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Less Than Significant Impact 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. As a worst case, a solid waste generation rate of .059 pounds per day for each square feet of restaurant uses was used to determine the solid waste disposal demand for the proposed proj ect. The proposed proj ect would generate 1,428 pounds per day of solid waste. 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 waste reduction programs 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 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 42 7 SA1'"J72 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, in that no fish, wildlife populations 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. C. Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly? Less Than Significant Impact 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. 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 would 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. 43 7~A1373 City of Santa Ana Updated General Plan Land Use Element Environmental Impact, January, 1998, SCH 97071058 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 National Register of Historic Structures Flood Insurance Rate Map Community Panel No. 0602320278H Santa Ana Unified School District Student Generation Factor Personal Communication Santa Ana Water Division City of Santa Ana Development Review Committee, March 2005 South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook, 1993 California Environmental Quality Act Statues and Guidelines, January 1999 Crazy Horse Square Food and retail Center Traffic Impact Analysis Study, Kimley-Horn and Associates, April 2006 Site Visit by Bill Apple, Associate Planner, March 2006 Integrated Waste Management Solid Waste Generation Rate City of Santa Ana 2000 Urban Water Management Plan xx. PREPARERS Dan Bott, City of Santa Ana Environmental Coordinator, Bill Apple, Case Planner. 44 7 SA137 4 mt~~ANTA ANA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance PLANNING DIVISION I. Project Title: Crazy Horse Square II. Project Numbers: ER 2004-109 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: Bill Apple, Associate Planner (714) 667-2747 V. Location: 1580 East Warner Avenue VI. Environmental Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation, I find that: A. D The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. B. X 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. D 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. D Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR (EIR No. - ) has been prepared earlier; however, subsequent proposed changes in the project and/or new information of substantial importance will cause one or more significant effects no previously discussed. A SUBSEQUENT EIR shall be prepared. LO'~ Signature L.f - 17- 00 Date ""B1U- A-PPcG Printed Name db\forms\environmental checklist Page 1 of 1 75AT'375 mY(I~ANTA ANA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Dan Hunter, Dyer Hollow Partners, L.P., 35 Argonaut, Suite B-2, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 General Plan Designation: Professional and Administrative Office (PAD) Description of Project: See attachment for project description. Surrounding land Uses Surrounding land uses include one and two-story office buildings and Warner Avenue to the north; a fast food restaurant and the Costa Mesa SR-55) freeway to the south; the Costa Mesa (SR-55) Freeway to the east; and a Southern California Edison primary distribution station, Grand A venue and hotel/motel uses to the west. Zoning: SD-8 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected: The environmental factors checked below reflects potentially significant impacts associated with the proposed project, as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. 0 Aesthetics 0 Historic Demolition 0 Agricultural Resources 0 Historic Project Review X Air Quality X Noise 0 Biological Resources 0 Population / Housing 0 Cultural Resources X Public Services X Geology / Soils 0 Recreation 0 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 0 Transportation / Traffic X Hydrology / Water Quality 0 Utilities / Service Systems 0 Mineral Resources 0 Mandatory Findings of Significance 0 General Plan Amendment db\forms\environmental checklist Page 1 of 1 7SAf'376 ~~fA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: I. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impacf' 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 Impacf' 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 Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impacf' 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 Impacf' to a "Less than Significant Impact". The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. 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 D ~ D B. Damage scenic resources, including but not limited D D ~ D to, trees, rock outpourings and historic buildings within a state highway? C. Substantially degrade the existing visual character ~ or quality of the site and its surroundings? D D D D. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views ~ in the area? D D D db\forms\environmental checklist Page 1 of 11 7SArr17 an~~ANTA ANA 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 if if' ~ 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: ~ 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? db\forms\environmental checklist 75A~8 D D D D D ~ ~ ~ D D D D D D D Page2of11 anf^ 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? db\forms\environmental checklist 75Ai'379 Potentially Significant Impact o o o o o o o o Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated o o o o o o o o Less Than Significant Impact ~ o o o o ~ ~ ~ No Impact o ~ ~ ~ ~ o o o Page 3 of 11 ~~fA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues & Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact D. Disturb any human remains, including those D D ~ D interred outside of formal cemeteries? VI. Geology and Soils - Would the project: A. Expose people or structures to potential substantial D D D D adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 1. Rupture of an known earthquake fault, as D D D ~ 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? D D ~ D 3. Seismic-related ground failure, including D D ~ D liquefaction? 4. Landslides? D D D ~ B. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion D ~ D D or the loss of topsoil? C. Would the project result in the loss of a unique D D D ~ geologic feature? D. Is the project located on strata or soil that is D D ~ D 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 D D D ~ wastewater, is the soil capable of supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems? db\forms\environmental checklist Page 4 of 11 75ArBO an~~ANTA ANA 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 (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? db\forms\environmental checklist 75ArB 1 Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D D Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D D D D ~ D Less Than Significant Impact ~ ~ D ~ D D No Impact D D ~ D D ~ Page 5 of 11 mY(I~ANTA ANA 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 storm water 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? H. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam. I. Result in an increase in pollutant discharge to receiving waters? Consider water quality parameters such as temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity and other typical storm water pollutants (e.g. heavy metals, pathogens, petroleum derivatives, synthetic organics, sediment, nutrients, oxygen-demanding substances, and trash). J. Result in significant alterations of receiving water quality during or following construction? K. Could the proposed project result in increased erosion downstream? L. Result in increased impervious surfaces and associated increased runoff? db\forms\environmental checklist 75~82 Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D D D D D D Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated cif if ~ D D D ~ if ~ ~ Less Than Significant Impact D D D D D D D D D D No Impact D D D ~ ~ ~ D D D D Page 6 of 11 rnt~~ANTA ANA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues & Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact M. Create a significant adverse environmental impact 0 ~ 0 0 to drainage patterns due to changes in runoff flow rates or volumes? N. Tributary to an already impaired water body, as 0 ~ 0 0 listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list: If so, can it result in an increase in any pollutant of which the water body is already impaired? O. Tributary to other environmentally sensitive areas? 0 ~ 0 0 If so, can it exacerbate already existing sensitive conditions? P. Have a potentially significant environmentally 0 ~ 0 0 impact on surface water quality to either marine, fresh, or wetland waters? Q. Have a potentially significant adverse impact on 0 r/ 0 0 ground water quality? R. Cause or contribute to an exceedance of applicable 0 ~ 0 0 surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses? ~/ S. Impact aquatic, wetland, or riparian habitat? 0 0 0 X Land Use Planning - Would the project: A. Physically divide an established community? 0 0 ~ 0 B. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or 0 0 ~ 0 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? C. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation 0 0 0 if plan or natural community conservation plan? db\forms\environmental checklist Page 7 of 11 7~'r>>3 ml~~A ANA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources X. Mineral Resources - Would the project: A. Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? 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 ground borne 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 noise 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? db\forms\environmental checklist 7 SArB4 Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D D D D Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D D D D D ~ D D Less Than Significant Impact D ~ ~ ~ ~ D g ~ No Impact ~ D D D D D D D Page 8 of 11 rnl(t~ANTA ANA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 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? db\forms\environmental checklist 75ArB5 Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D D D D D Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D D D D ~ D D D D Less Than Significant Impact ~ D ~ ~ D ~ ~ ~ ~ No Impact D D D D D D D D D Page 9 of 11 arr~AfTA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources 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 substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ration on roads, or congestion at intersections?) 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? db\forms\environmental checklist 7 5~r>>6 Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D D D D D D Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D D D D D D D D D D Less Than Significant Impact if ~ ~ cif ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ No Impact D D D D D D D D D D Page 10 of 11 arr~fA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources 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? 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? db\forms\environmental checklist 7 SArB7 Potentially Significant Impact o o o o o o o Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated o o o o o o o Less Than Significant Impact ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ No Impact o o o o o o o Page 11 of 11 CRAZY HORSE SQUARE 1580 E. WARNER AVENUE / ER 2004-109 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM MITIGATION MEASURE To ensure compliance with SCAQMD Fugitive Dust Rule 403, building, grading, and demolition plans for the proposed project shall reflect the following notes: All material excavated or graded will be sufficiently watered to prevent excessive amount of dust. 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 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 TIMING Prior to Demolition, Grading, Building Permits 7 SArB 8 RESPONSIBLE VERIFICATION AGENCY Building/Planning Agency Public Works 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 onsite and offsite construction activities. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project developer shall provide proof of coverage under NPDES General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit that includes; (a) A copy of the project's permit issued by the State Water Resource Control Board that identifies the permit number, (B) Two copies of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project developer shall provide proof of coverage under NPDES General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit that includes; (a) A copy of the project's permit issued by the State Water Prior to Public Works issuance of a Grading Permit Prior to Public Works issuance of a Grading Permit 75A1389 Resource Control Board that identifies the permit number, (B) Two copies of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project developer shall submit and have approved a surface drainage/utility plan that depicts all applicable Site Design, Structural Source Control and Treatment Control Best Management Practices in accordance with the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan and the City of Santa Ana Local Implementation Plan. Provide two copies of the Water Quality Management Plan that would include the following: a. Site Assessment b. Site design Best Management Practices (BMP) c. Applicable Routine Source Control BMP d. Selecting and sizing the Treatment Control BMP e. Mechanisms by which funding for long-term operation and 75A~O maintenance of all structural BMP will be provided f. Operation and Maintenance Plan to describe the long- term operation and maintenance requirements of all applicable structural BMP and to identify the entity in charge of implementation Prior to issuance of a grading permi t, the proj ect applicant shall submit a final surface water runoff evaluation for review and approval showing existing and proposed facilities and methods of draining the site without exceeding the capacity of any street or adjacent storm drain facility. Building plans for the proposed project shall reflect that all restaurant uses be fitted with a grease interceptor to the size and capacity as designated by the Building Safety Division of the City of Santa Ana to mitigate impacts on the local sanitary sewer system and regional water quality. Such grease interceptor shall be regularly maintained so as to remain fully Prior to issuance of a Building Permit 75ArS1 BuildinglPlanning Agency functional. The proposed project would be subject to City of Santa Ana Federal Clean Water Protection Enterprise Fees. Prior to the issuance of Building Permits, the project developer shall coordinate with the John Wayne Airport Land Use Commission on the land use/noise compatibility of the proposed project. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall submit evidence to the City of Santa Ana Building and Planning Department that appropriate school impact fees have been paid. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit 7 SA,..B 2 11~k93 . Traffic Impact Analysis for Proposed Crazy Horse Square Food and Retail Center Prepared for: City of Santa Ana ~-r1I Kimley-Horn 11I.......I- ~ and Associates, Inc. April,2006 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. TRAFFIC IMP ACT AND PARKING ANALYSIS FOR THE CRAZY HORSE SQUARE FOOD AND RETAIL CENTER IN THE CITY OF SANTA ANA Prepared for: City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, California 92701 Prepared by: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 21 00 West Orangewood Avenue Suite 140 Orange, California 92868 April, 2006 75A~94 CRAZY HORSE SQUARE TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY T ABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... ............. 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION......................................................................................................................... 1 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGy............................................................ ..................................................... 4 Signalized Intersections - Intersection Capacity Utilization (leU) Methodology .................................. 4 Signalized Intersections - Highway Capacity Manual (HeM) Methodology ......................................... 5 LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARD................... ............................. .......................................................... 6 EXISTING PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC CONDITIONS ................................................................................ 6 PROJECT OPENING YEAR CONDITIONS........ .......... ........................ ......... ..... ............ .............. .......... 6 PROJECT TRAFFIC.......................................................................................................... ...................... 12 TRIP DISTRIBUTION....................................................................................... ...................................... 12 PROJECT IMPACT - PROJECT OPENING YEAR CONDITIONS ..................................................... 12 2025 GENERAL PLAN BUILD-OUT CONDITIONS............................................................................ 12 PROJECT IMPACT - 2025 GENERAL PLAN BUILD-OUT CONDITIONS ....................................... 12 PROJECT PARKING REQUIREMENTS.......................................... .......... ........................................... 22 Shared Parking for Potential Alternative Site Use ................................................................................ 22 PROJECT ACCESS ....................................................... ..................... ..................................................... 24 CMP ANALySIS..................................................................................................................................... 25 SUMMARy....................................................................................................... .............. ......................... 25 APPENDICES APPENDIX A - TRAFFIC COUNT SHEETS APPENDIX B - INTERSECTION ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS APPENDIX C - SHARED P ARKING ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS 7 SArS 5 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 - Project Vicinity Map ......................................................................... ....................... .................. 2 Figure 2 - Project Site Plan................................................................... ...................................................... 3 Figure 3 - Existing Lane Configurations....... ..... ............. ............................................................ ............... 7 Figure 4 - Existing Peak Hour Traffic V olumes ......................................................................................... 8 Figure 5 - Project Opening Year Peak Hour Volumes.............................................................................. 10 Figure 6 - Project Trip Distribution....... ............................... ........................ .............................. .............. 14 Figure 7 - Project Peak Hour Volumes .......... ............................................... ........ ......... ........................... 15 Figure 8 - Project Opening Year plus Project Peak Hour Volumes.......................................................... 16 Figure 9 - 2025 General Plan Build-Out Peak Hour Volumes ................................................................. 18 Figure 10 - 2025 General Plan Build-Out plus Project Peak Hour Volumes............................................ 20 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 - Summary of Intersection Operations, Existing Conditions ......................................................... 9 Table 2 - Summary of Intersection Operations, Project Opening Year Conditions .................................. 11 Table 3 - Summary of Trip Generation .................................................... ................................................ 13 Table 4 - Summary of Intersection Operations, Project Opening Year plus Project Conditions .............. 17 Table 5 - Summary of Intersection Operations, 2025 General Plan Build-Out Conditions ...................... 19 Table 6 - Summary of Intersection Operations, 2025 General Plan Build-Out plus Project Conditions.. 21 Table 7 - Crazy Horse Square Food and Retail Center Parking Requirements......................................... 22 Table 8 - Crazy Horse Square With Night Club Parking Requirements................................................... 23 7~1~6 TRAFFIC IMPACT AND PARKING ANALYSIS FOR THE CRAZY HORSE SQUARE FOOD AND RETAIL CENTER IN THE CITY OF SANTA ANA INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to address the traffic impacts associated with the proposed Crazy Horse Square food and retail center located on the site of the former Crazy Horse Saloon at Grand Avenue and Brookhollow Drive in the City of Santa Ana. The adjacent vacant lot, which contains a Southern California Edison tower with a no-build easement under the transmission lines, has been made part of the proposed Crazy Horse Square development. The Project will consist of development on the two lots, with combined parking and shared access. The site will provide a total of 20, 154 square feet of food and retail uses in three separate buildings. The scope of the analysis in this letter report is in accordance with direction provided by the City of Santa Ana Planning Department staff. This report will satisfy the Traffic Impact requirements of the County of Orange Congestion Management Program (CMP). The analysis will focus on off-site traffic impacts, on-site circulation, and will address the project impact on eight area intersections. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project site is located at Grand Avenue and Brookhollow Drive in the City of Santa Ana, the site of the former Crazy Horse Saloon, and an adjacent vacant lot with a transmission line tower. The site is bounded by Brookhollow Drive on the north, an existing office development on the east, SR-55 ramp on the south, and Grand Avenue on the west. A regional vicinity map is provided on Figure 1. The applicant proposes to develop the site with three buildings on two lots. Buildings A and C, on Lot 1, the site of the former Crazy Horse Saloon, is to consist of a full-service restaurant, and some retail and high turnover sit-down food space. Building B, on Lot 2, the Edison tower site, is to consist of in-line shops with a coffee house, high turnover food, and retail uses. The building on Lot 2 will be located at the far south comer of the lot, outside of the no-build easement under the power lines. The Crazy Horse Square project site will take access via two full-movement driveways on Brookhollow Drive. The two lots will share parking and common access across both sites. A copy of the proposed site plan is provided on Figure 2. Figure 2 shows a total of 175 parking spaces, including 7 handicapped spaces to support the proposed Crazy Horse Square food and retail center. An evaluation of the site plan from a parking and traffic circulation standpoint and a summary of the off-site traffic-related impacts of this proposed project are provided in the following sections. Crazy Horse Square Food and Retail Center - 1 - April, 2006 75ArS7 / @ NOT TO SCALE PROJECT In LOCATION EDINGER AVE l- V) 0::: .... ~ o ...J "- .... > <l: o Z <l: 0::: <..:> WARNER AVE z <{ ~ OYER RD MACARTHUR BLVD FIGURE 1 PROJECT AREA VICINITY MAP ~=~ 76A~8 Kimley-Horn ond Associates. Inc. o z <( ---I a.... w .- (J) <:\1'- wO o:w =>J (JO -0: LLa.... - _____0 ~ " " @P~ z 7 SA,:s 9 .; '" ~~ Iii ~~ o I I '" '" -~ ~ o '" >- '" o '" ~ '" z '" -' i:: '- ~ u '" 3 '" 0- W ~ '" g i:: ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY This traffic study includes documentation of Existing Conditions, analyses of cumulative traffic conditions and identification of project-related impacts at the following eight study intersections: · Grand Avenue and Warner Avenue · Grand Avenue and Brookhollow Drive · Grand A venue and Dyer Road · Dyer Road and Main Street · Red Hill A venue and Dyer I Barranca Parkway · Grand Avenue and SR-55 SB off-ramp (Caltrans) · Dyer Avenue and SR-55 SB off/on-ramp/Hotel Terrace Drive (Caltrans) · Dyer Avenue and SR-55 NB off/on-ramp (Caltrans) The three intersections identified as Caltrans intersections will be evaluated using the Highway Capacity Manual (HeM) methodology for signalized intersections, as required by the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (June 2001). The remaining intersections will be evaluated using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (leU) methodology, as specified by the City of Santa Ana and the Orange County Congestion Management Program (CMP). For each ofthe three study intersections, five analysis scenarios will be analyzed for the morning and evening peak hours: · Existing Conditions · Project completion year (Year 2007) without project · Project completion year (Year 2007)with project · 2025 General Plan Build-Out Conditions without project · 2025 General Plan Build-Out Conditions with project Signalized Intersections - Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Methodology In accordance with the City of Santa Ana and the County of Orange Congestion Management Program (CMP) requirements, peak hour operating conditions at the signalized intersections were evaluated using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (leU) methodology. The leu methodology provides a comparison of the theoretical hourly vehicular capacity of an intersection to the number of vehicles actually passing through that intersection during a given hour. Based on City of Santa Ana and County of Orange analysis criteria, the leu calculation assumes a per-lane capacity of 1,700 vehicles per hour (vph) for each travel lane (through or turning lane) through the intersection. Where there is no separately striped right-turn lane, ifthe width of the outside through lane is 19 feet or more, and parking is prohibited during the peak period, a separate right-turn lane is assumed. A clearance factor of 0.05 (5%) of the total intersection capacity is included in the leu calculation, to account for the effect of the red and yellow signal phases at a signalized intersection. The leu calculation generates a volume-to-capacity (VIe) ratio that translates into a corresponding Level of Service (LOS) measure, ranging from LOS" A", representing uncongested, free-flowing conditions, to LOS "F", representing over-capacity conditions. A summary description of each Level of Service and the corresponding vie ratio is provided on the following chart: Crazy Horse Square Food and Retail Center -4- April, 2006 7 5Ai!3~ 00 Level of ICU Value Service A 0.00 - 0.60 B 0.61 - 0.70 C 0.71 - 0.80 D 0.81 - 0.90 E 0.91 - 1.00 F > 1.00 LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTIONS SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Description EXCELLENT - No vehicle waits longer than one red light and no approach phase is full used. VERY GOOD - An occasional approach phase is fully utilized; many drivers begin to feel somewhat restricted within ou s of vehicles. GOOD - Occasionally drivers may have to wait through more than one red light; back- u s ma develo behind turnin vehicles FAIR - Delays may be substantial during portions of the rush hours, but enough lower volume periods occur to permit clearing of developing lines, preventing excessive back-u s. POOR - Represents the most vehicles that the intersection approaches can accommodate; ma be Ion lines of waitin vehicles throu h several si al c cles. FAILURE - Back-ups from nearby locations or on cross streets may restrict or prevent movement of vehicles out of the intersection approaches. Tremendous dela s with continuousl increasin ueue len ths. The following intersections will be analyzed using the leu methodology: · Grand A venue and Avenue · Grand Avenue and Brookhollow Drive · Grand A venue and Dyer Road · Dyer Road and Main Street · Red Hill A venue and Dyer /Barranca Parkway Signalized Intersections - Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Methodology The following study intersections are Caltrans intersections and will therefore be analyzed using the Highway Capacity Manual (HeM) 2000 methodology for signalized intersections. · Grand Avenue and SR-55 SB off-ramp · Dyer Avenue and SR-55 SB off/on-ramp/Hotel Terrace Drive · Dyer Avenue and SR-55 NB off/on-ramp This methodology estimates the average total delay (in average seconds per vehicle) for each of the movements to or from the minor street, and determines the level of service for each movement. Just as with the leu methodology, the HeM delay forecast translates to a Level of Service designation, ranging from LOS "A" to LOS "F". The descriptions of operating conditions for each Level of Service are very similar to the LOS descriptions for signalized intersections. A summary description of each Level of Service for signalized intersections, and the corresponding delay, expressed in seconds per vehicle, is provided on the following chart: Crazy Horse Square Food and Retail Center April, 2006 - 5 - 75~13~ 01 LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTIONS SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Level of Delay Description Service (seconds/vehicle) A :S 10.0 Little or no delay B > 10.0 -20 Short traffic delays C > 20 - 35 Average traffic delays D > 35 - 50 Long traffic delays E > 50 - 80 Very long traffic delays F >80 Severe congestion LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARD The City's Level of Service standard for intersection operation is Level of Service "D". Caltrans Level of Service standard is the threshold between LOS "c" and "D". A project impact would be considered to be significant if it causes an intersection that is operating at an acceptable Level of Service to worsen to an unacceptable Level of Service. EXISTING PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Existing morning and evening peak hour turning movement counts were made at the study intersections during the morning (7:00 to 9:00 AM) and evening (4:00 to 6:00 PM) peak periods. Existing lane configurations at the study intersections are shown on Figure 3. Existing peak hour traffic volumes are shown on Figure 4. Copies of the count data forms are provided in the Appendix A to this report. Existing peak hour operations were evaluated and the results are summarized on Table 1. All study intersections are currently operating at an acceptable Level of Service in both peak hours. Copies of the leu and HCS sheets for the Existing Conditions analysis are provided in Appendix B of this report. PROJECT OPENING YEAR CONDITIONS A short-term future analysis will evaluate traffic conditions in the Opening Year of the project. Short-term future traffic consists of existing peak hour traffic with an annual growth rate of 1 % per year, based on direction from City staff, applied for each year between existing conditions and the Opening Year for the project. In addition, traffic from any approved projects in the vicinity of the project is added to the peak hour volumes. The Crazy Horse Square project is anticipated to be completed in 2007. A traffic growth rate of 1.0% per year was applied to existing traffic to account for ambient growth in the area. No other approved projects in the vicinity of the project site were identified by City staff. Opening Year peak hour traffic volumes at the study intersections are shown on Figure 5. Peak hour operating conditions for the Project Opening Year without the project are summarized on Table 2. All study intersections are forecasted to continue to operate at an acceptable Level of Service in the Project Opening Year. Crazy Horse Square Food and Retail Center - 6 - April, 2006 7SA~~02 @~ z \ " \ " " " \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 3A V ONVClD \ ~ ..... J III~ t II ( ----------- / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / ..... " \ \ \ \ \ \ \ " " \ \ \ \ " \ \ \ " J II ~i ~ JI',- --'it( ~ '---- '---- w > -<{ 0 j l- a:: a:: w z a:: a:: w -<{ >- ~ 3: 0 1S NIV~ '---- " " " " "\ " " \ " " " "\ , JIIl;= ~i t t ( - 7 - 7 SA1'"J~ 03 U .E iii 2 c ~'i '- :J I- :;: Iii 01 ii2 ., ~~ ., '- 0 ..... I I >. ..... ~ E ~ '---- ..... z 0 r- <( a: :::> CJ LL Z 0 0 W Z ... >- .. <( 0 -1 ... (Y)CJ ~ .. ~ WZ ~ "" a:- >- u :::>r- !o! 0 CJCJ) '" "'- w _X ~ LLW .. ~ G: ..." "'''''' ...10", ~m~ '-tL/6l~ ,,"'- -rS,/tl9 ) , l ,-t8Z/rSl LLl!r81-'"1 t ( 8L9/tZ,- 0>" '" ZSl!,LI-, ~;:!:~ ", "",0> ",",0 N,,,," , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 3^\f aN\f~8 '" 0> ",,-I" ~;;;. '-tL/ZS _",N -LI8/0,8 ) , l,-lL/ZOL LL/OL-' ') t ( S8,/t,9- ...,"'" 9sr/8IZ-, ~,,~ ''''0> Ie ... @~ z "" CI ~ o -' -' o :I: "" o o "" m /" / I / I I / /// ////' ////// // // 0>'" ,,'" "'" "" "..., "'''' "'" ) , ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~ ~~/ "'~ "'N ...- " 0..., "'''' "'10 ) , 99t/OS9 -'"1 t ""0 Lr,/9It-, ~;:j ~ 0>- <Xl <0 / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , w > 4: a:: w Z a:: 4: :;: o a:: a:: w >- o '" 0>0> _0<0 10-"' ", ~~~ '-o8~/c;69 _10'" -Z/ZZ ) I l ,-80Z/ZLZ OZl!S8-'"1 t ( ZLv/lOZ- 0'1... 0'1 osl!r,L-, ::~~ :ri-,~ "N'" <0'" o 1S NI\f~ " , "- "- , "- " " " " "- "- "''''''' 0><0" ~~, ~~~ '-69r/SM )- , -l-L,II/89r ,-9tZ/" ,11/r91-'"1 t ( 1,9/rZS- "' "'''' r6L/86~ ~!;;:~ ""' N<oo> "'en -... - 8 - 7 iA~~ 04 I ..><c: 0" ..E a... > 010 .<::E c: "'01 >c: 4).- '-..c: 01'- c:~ 'Clr.. '-:J 00 E.<:: II >- >- '-.. x x '-10 l! LZ, ,-tIZ/ZlL !( 10" "'"' ~ ",,, ",,, -'" 00 W ~ ::) -I o > a: ::) o I ~ <( W a.... ~O wz a:- ::)1- 000 _x lLW ci E <Ii '" ~1 Iii ~~ o :I: I >, '" ~ ~ w >- "" o w ,. "" ~ G: "- "" >- u ~ o '" "- w ,. "" ~ G: TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION OPERATION EXISTING CONDITIONS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Signalized Intersection (City) 1 ICU LOS ICU LOS 1 Grand Ave @ Warner Ave 0.457 A 0.730 C 2 Grand Ave @ Brookhollow Dr 0.347 A 0.424 A 3 Grand Ave @ Dyer Rd 0.624 B 0.828 D 4 Main St @ Dyer Rd 0.515 A 0.726 C 5 Redhill Ave @ Dyer/Barranca 0.849 D 0.723 C AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Signalized Intersection (Caltrans) 1 Delay LOS Delay LOS 6 Grand Ave @ SR-55 SB Ramp 16.8 B 15.8 B 7 SR-55 SB Ramp @ Dyer Rd 28.5 C 26.6 C 8 SR-55 NB Ramp @ Dyer Rd 17.9 B 14.4 B I Intersections under the control of Caltrans are evaluated using the Highway Capacity Manual methodology. All others are evaluated using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Crazy Horse Square Food and Retail Center - 9 - April, 2006 7iAT'3105 0", ",00> 000>", ~~~ '-9L/rrl ....."'- -ll9/\:\:9 ) I l ,-\:6~/66l 9Ll/681-' I t ( L\:9/0v.- "'.....00 86l/081-" ::l~S' "-'..:--" ",,,,00 .....0- "'<DN 3AV aNV~~ '" - ",va:> ~;:;- '-9L1.6 -a:>'" -~v8/9L8 ) I l,-vL/.OI 8l/0l-' II ( L09/VL9- ....."'00 80v/.~~-" ~.:::..~ "-000 ~ 00 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , --- .............- -- --- --- ................... / I I I / / / I / I I / / / I I / / I / / I / '" UJ v '" > ;::;- <l: V '" 0:: ) UJ Z .99/1.9- 0:: <l: 3: @P~ Z 1S NIVI"l <>:: C> ~ o -' -' o :r: "" o o <>:: <D /" / I / I I / / / / // / / // / // // / // , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , o 0:: 0:: W >- o 00...... p.r')~r-- ",_N ,,-,,-,,- ~~~ '-g8~/9LL _a:>N _~/\:~ ) I l ,-vl~/09~ Vll/~6-' I I ( tZio/LOZ- t'")Oll') 96l/9.l-" ~~N "-'"'''- 0"-- "'v'" o>N o , " , , , , , , , , , , 8~~ Z:?,- 8",;;; '-09\:/vO~ -"'- -~6lt!6L\: ) I l ,-\:.~/L. 9lt!99l-' II ( lL9/l.6- 0> "'- 66l/l0l-" ~..z~ ~;:~ _00 - 10 - 7SAT'3106 0::1 "'N v_ "-"- <D'" "'a:> 00'" ) I 09v/l1L -' I I 0>0 LV./6~v--... ~::; ~ 0>'" '" ..... ~ -"c 0" ..E D-.. > 0>0 .!:E C "'0> >c "'.- "c 0>'- .~~ c,- '-" 00 E.c: II >- >- " x x CJ) W ~ :::> ..J o > a: :::> o I ~ <( W a.... a: <( w >- o z z w a.... o l()..... wO a:W :::>J 00 -a: LLa.... o c en 2 ~H Iii ~~ o I I >.. .. .~ :>::: w >- <( o w ::; <( z ~ r;: "- ~ u \!j o 0: "- w ::; <( z ~ r;: TABLE 2 'SUMMARY OF PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION OPERATION PROJECT OPENING YEAR WITHOUT PROJECT CONDITIONS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Signalized Intersection (City) 1 ICU LOS ICU LOS 1 Grand Ave @ Warner Ave 0.470 A 0.750 C 2 Grand Ave @ Brookhollow Dr 0.356 A 0.435 A 3 Grand Ave @ Dyer Rd 0.642 B 0.851 D 4 Main St @ Dyer Rd 0.529 A 0.746 C 5 Redhill Ave @ Dyer/Barranca 0.873 D 0.744 C AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Signalized Intersection (Caltrans) 1 Delay LOS Delay LOS 6 Grand Ave @ SR-55 SB Ramp 16.9 B 16.0 B 7 SR-55 SB Ramp @ Dyer Rd 29.1 C 27.5 C 8 SR-55 NB Ramp @ Dyer Rd 18.4 B 14.5 B 1 Intersections under the control of Caltrans are evaluated using the Highway Capacity Manual methodology. All others are evaluated using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology. Crazy Horse Square Food and Retail Center - 11 - April, 2006 76A~~07 PROJECT TRAFFIC Trip generation estimates for the proposed Crazy Horse Square project were derived from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) publication Trip Generation, 7th Edition. Trip generation rates for restaurant, retail, fast food, and coffee house uses; and the resulting trip generation for each component ofthe project are summarized on Table 3. Reductions for pass-by traffic were taken, based on ITE standards. Table 3 indicates that the Crazy Horse Square food and retail center will generate about 2,696 trips per day, with 96 inbound and 86 outbound trips in the morning peak hour, and 60 inbound and 41 outbound trips in the evening peak hour. TRIP DISTRIBUTION Project trip distribution assumptions for the project site were developed, taking into account the site uses and the location of area trip producers, such as employment centers. Trip distribution assumptions are shown on Figure 6. The trip distribution assumptions focus on the project's use of arterials and major intersections in the vicinity of the project. While some drivers may find their way to the site through the Brookhollow development via Wright Street at Warner Avenue, the trip distribution shown assumes that all project traffic will use the arterials, for a more conservative approach. Based on these trip distribution patterns, the new trips to be added to the street system by the proposed project were calculated, and are shown on Figure 7. PROJECT IMPACT - PROJECT OPENING YEAR CONDITIONS Project traffic was added to the Project Opening Year traffic volumes, and the resulting peak hour traffic volumes are shown on Figure 8. The study intersections were re-analyzed for Project Opening Year plus Project conditions, and the results are summarized on Table 4. With the addition of project-related traffic, all study intersections will continue to operate at an acceptable Level of Service in both peak hours. The project will not generate a significant impact, and no off-site mitigation of project impacts will be required of the project. Copies of the leu and worksheets are provided in Appendix B of this report. 2025 GENERAL PLAN BUILD-OUT CONDITIONS The City of Santa Ana also required that an analysis of General Plan Build-out Year 2025 be conducted for this project. Forecast peak hour volumes for the Build-out condition were developed using the Orange County Traffic Analysis Model (OCTAM), which is developed and maintained by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCT A). General Plan Build-out conditions assume build-out of all land uses as well as the transportation infrastructure assumed in each city's General Plan. General Plan Build-out peak hour volumes at the study intersections are shown on Figure 9. Intersection operations for General Plan Build-out conditions were evaluated and the results are summarized on Table 5. All study intersections are forecasted to continue to operate at an acceptable Level of Service in the 2025 General Plan Build-out year. Copies of the leu and worksheets are provided in Appendix B of this report. PROJECT IMP ACT - 2025 GENERAL PLAN BUILD-OUT CONDITIONS Project traffic was added to the 2025 General Plan Build-out traffic volumes, and the study intersections were re-analyzed. General Plan Build-out Plus Project peak hour traffic volumes are shown on Figure 10. The intersection analysis results are summarized on Table 6. With the addition ofproject-related traffic, all study intersections will continue to operate at an acceptable Level of Service in both peak hours. The project will not generate a significant impact, and no off-site mitigation of project impacts will be required ofthe project. Copies of the leu and worksheets are provided in Appendix B of this report. Crazy Horse Square Food and Retail Center - 12 - April, 2006 7SA~~08 Table 3 Crazy Horse Square Summary of Project Trip Generation Trip Generation Rates Project Trip Generation ITE AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak Land Use Code KSF Daily In Out In Out Daily In Out In Out I Lot 1 I Restaurant 931 8.171 89.95 0.66 0.15 5.02 2.47 735 5 1 41 20 ITE Pass-By Reduction (PM-44%) 0 0 0 -18 -9 Sub-Total Restaurant 735 5 1 23 11 Retail 820 4.211 42.94 0.63 0.40 1.80 1.95 181 3 2 8 8 ITE Pass-By Reduction (PM-50%) 0 0 0 -4 -4 Sub-Total Retail 181 3 2 4 4 Food 932 2.47 127.15 5.99 5.53 6.66 4.26 314 15 14 16 11 ITE Pass-By Reduction (PM-43%) 0 0 0 -7 -5 Sub-Total Food 314 15 14 9 6 Total New Traffic - Lot 1 1,230 23 17 36 21 Lot 2 Coffee 933-2 1.486 716.00 37.25 35.78 14.97 13.82 1,064 55 53 22 21 Food 932 2.829 127.15 5.99 5.53 6.66 4.26 360 17 16 19 12 ITE Pass-By Reduction (PM-43%) 0 0 0 -18 -14 Sub-Total Coffee/Food 1,424 72 69 23 19 Retail 820 0.987 42.94 0.63 0.40 1.80 1.95 42 1 0 2 2 ITE Pass-By Reduction (PM-50%) 0 0 0 -1 -1 Sub-Total Retail 42 1 0 1 1 Total New Traffic - Lot 2 1,466 73 69 24 20 Crazy Horse Square Food and Retail Center - 13 - April, 2006 75ArJ109 ~ '-%Ol - -%Ol l,-%oz: %Ol- ( l<: o '" l<: l<: o U"l "" U"l ) l '-%~~ %OV-----" @~ z \ " \ " \ \ \ \ \ \ ~\ o \\ 3AV aNV~~ - \ l<: o ) -%~v ~ 10 ~-11>- /~ 'YO :)0- a:: o ~ =:1 -' o :I: "" o o a:: m .//1 / / / /".,,',// ///// // / // / // _........- /// / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / \ \ " " " \ " \ \ " " " " " \ " " \ " \ \ \ \ " w', ~ ~ 10 lk: W Z lk: <l: 3: l<: 01<: "'U"l I l o lk: lk: W >- o 1S NIV~ ~ o " " " " " " " " " " " " l<:l<: 00 ~ o ~ o - 14 - 7 SAr.3~ 1 0 - U .xC 0'" S liE "-", vi > ",0 2 .~E ~li C "'''' >c 11.- .......c Iii "'.... .~.2 C... ....::1 ~~ 00 E.c ~ II 0 I >- I >- ....... >. x ~ X .~ ~ l<: 0 '" I ,-%~ , ( l<:1<: 00 "'- I<: '" '" ) %0>:-----"') I<: %~z:__ ~ , I<: o '" l '-%Ol , I<: o z o I- ::> CD 0: I- CfJ o (L 0: I- <.01- wO o:w ::>J ,,0 -0: LL(L W I- <( D w ::; <( ~ ~ "- "" I- U '=J o '" "- w ::; <( ~ ~ <D d ~v/6 - -v/6 l ,.9/ LL 9/01- ( '" "- ol \ \ \ , \ \ , \ , \ \ \ \ \ 3^V aNV~8 ..., "- ~ ~ r-- "., ~ j l ~l\:/\:C; vl/9\:---" @~ z .)'" p. /~ Jy, 0.)& ////////// ///// / // /// /// ................... /// /// / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / , \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ , \ \ \ \ \ \ w > <{ 0:: w Z 0:: <{ 3: I l 00 ~ ~" o 0:: 0:: w >- o 1S NIV~ , \ \ , \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ,,~ " " OlOl I l ~9/0l I <D " o - 15 - 75AT3111 '" "- ol oil "- " '" j ll/9l---" 'I '" ollu" "- ol I '" "- ol ! -"c 0" .,E a.., > ",0 .!:E c .,'" >c a).- '-,c ","- .~.2 c,,- "-::J 00 E..c: II >- >- '-, )( )( ,.\:/C; I ( 00" "" r--Ol en a.... a: .- a: ::J o I ~ <( W a.... ~.- wO a:W ::JJ ,,0 -a: LLa.... U E <Ii 2 ~H Iii ~~ o I !., ~ E ~ W t- <( o w ,. <( ~ c: ~ u w (3 '" 0- W ,. <( ~ c: 0", ",00 ",0>", ~~~ '-OQ/lt~ ,,"'- -<;L9/~v9 j I l ,-1Or/9L~ 9LL/611L-' I t ( rV9/0<;<;- 0>"" 116L/01l1-, :::l;e::: ..................... "'<0" "0'" N<O'" @ ~..,.~ ~;:::- '--IlOL/llvL j'" 0), "l-~Vll/9Lll ,-vL/<;01 ~v/llv-' II ( L09/i>L9- f'-NIf) 1l0v/<;~~-, ~,~ ......."'0 ~ '" ~ ~ S S '" '" '" " j l -vL9/ LOL IlOL/1l69- w -' <l; u (J) o l- l- o z \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ " \ " 3AV aNVCI~ / / / / / / / / / -- --- -............. --- --- ....-.....- / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / w > <( a:: w z a:: <( ~ 15 NIV~ '" C> 3: o -' -' o I "'" o o '" <Il /-1 / I / I I ~-\ <<~ c,'r- ~ <<:-Q;- ~'r- / / / / / // /// ///// / // \ \ " " \ \ " " " \ \ " \ " \ " \ " " '" "'''' "'" "-- .............. 00> .,0) "'0) j , ~6v/ LrL -' '1 I -0 L<;<;/l<;v" ~:::; .......- "....... ::~ Cl a:: a:: w >- Cl '" ",0> "'-" 0)_'" ..................... ~::Qj L~9L/9LL _0)'" -~/r~ j , l ,-vL~/OIl~ m/~6-' I I ( vlv/LOl- t"lNl/') 96L/ll<;L., ~:qN ......."....... 0.......- a)~~ " " , " " " " , " , " " ""'" 00000 ,z~" b~ ~ "-99~/vLl j-"'I-l-~6LL/6Lr ,-r<;~/ L<; llLL/1l9L-' I t ( LL9!L<;6- 0>"'- 66L/LOL-, ~~S' ......." ~N~ -'" - 16 - 7iA~~ 12 .,'" 0>0) "'" " 00'" "0> ..-., j , ~ -"'c 0" "'E a.'" > 010 .~E C "'01 >c "'.- ........c 01'- .~~ c,- '-" 00 E.c II >- >- ........ x x '-- voL/n<; ,-rZZ/6vL I ( "'''' 00> ~ ",,,, "" -'" CJ) w ~ :::::> -1 o > 0: :::::> 0:0 <(I W~ >-<( OW Za... Zt- Wo a...W OJ rot-O WOO: o:Wa... :::::>JCJ) 00:::::> -0:-1 LLa...a... u s !Ii ~ ~'i Iii ~~ o I I >- ., .~ ~ .., >- <( o .., ~ <( ~ ;;:: ";;;; >- () "'l o '" ll. W ~ <( z 'j ;;:: TABLE 4 SUMMARY OF PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION OPERATION PROJECT OPENING YEAR WITH PROJECT CONDITIONS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Signalized Intersection (City) 1 ICU LOS ICU LOS 1 Grand Ave @ Warner Ave 0.479 A 0.756 C 2 Grand Ave @ Brookhollow Dr 0.384 A 0.448 A 3 Grand Ave @ Dyer Rd 0.655 B 0.864 D 4 Main St @ Dyer Rd 0.537 A 0.748 C 5 Redhill Ave @ Dyer/Barranca 0.880 0 0.745 C AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Signalized Intersection (CaItrans) 1 Delay LOS Delay LOS 6 Grand Ave @ SR-55 SB Ramp 17.0 B 16.0 B 7 SR-55 SB Ramp @ Dyer Rd 29.2 C 27.6 C 8 SR-55 NB Ramp @ Dyer Rd 18.5 B 14.6 B 1 Intersections under the control of Caltrans are evaluated using the Highway Capacity Manual methodology. All others are evaluated using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Crazy Horse Square Food and Retail Center - 17- April, 2006 7SA~~ 13 ~~g ,............... c;~~ "-C;9/90l -"'" -LO~/~9~ ) I l,-Z9Z/6t( 0IZ/t61-' '1 I ( a9/0r~- ,,"'..., Lrl/gLL~ ~~~ ,-,-,- ...,"'- NVO v"''''' , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 3^,,/ aNV'Cl~ ~N~ ~'" '-19/~9 -"'..., -tU/t~L ) I l ,-19/rS 6(/S-' '1 I ( ~r9/09S- -"'0 LSr/60Z., ~~ '" '" '" '" @P o ..., '- ;;; t -09~/tL~ w --' <( U (f1 o t- t- O Z "0 "'''' v", ~5- 0_ v", ) I / / / / / / / ;// / / // / / / / --- --- --- ................--- ~~ v_ '-'- "'" "'a v'" ) I rLv/ L6S-' '1 t "''' vv~/~Vr., ~~ ~ ",..., o " /-- / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , w > <{ e:: w z e:: <{ 3: Cl e:: e:: w >- Cl :<'" ""..., ,,-'" ,-,-,- ~~~ '-6Ll/S99 -"'" -6/a ) I l ,-O~Z/VS~ ZO(/L9-' '1 t ( 09r/LlZ- va;;; OLL/Oll~ S~~ 0'-.,. '-6f"l o 1S NIV'f'l , , " , , , , , , , , (7'l~an .,.,," ............~ ci'2;: '-t9t/SSr ".,." -019(/1:69 ) I l ,-t~r/rSl L6/001-' '1 t ( I:r6/611(- "':Ov I:L(/S6., ~"'2 ;:::-:;;.;:::- ~~(7'l - 18 - 75A13~ 14 -"'c u 0'" .E "'E en a.'" > .2 0>0 .!::E ~H c 4>0> >c 4>.- .......c Iii 0>'- .=.2 c,- ~~ '-" 00 E..c: 0 II I >- I >- >- ....... ~ x .~ )( :>:: '-9n/zv~ ,-99(/S~9 t ( "'..., ...,,, ~ ...,,,, ",0 -'" (f.) W ~ ::) ..J o > a: ::) o I ~ <( W a... ..... ::) o I o ..J ::) (D Z <( ..J a... ..J <( a: w 0)2 WW a:0 ::)LO 0<:\1 -0 ll.<:\I W I- <( o w :> <( z 'j G: '- ~ (J '=J o <>: 0- w :> <( ~ G: TABLE 5 SUMMARY OF PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION OPERATION GENERAL PLAN BUILD-OUT WITHOUT PROJECT CONDITIONS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Signalized Intersection (City) 1 ICU LOS ICU LOS 1 Grand Ave @ Warner Ave 0.575 A 0.814 D 2 Grand Ave @ Brookhollow Dr 0.374 A 0.403 A 3 Grand Ave @ Dyer Rd 0.648 B 0.857 D 4 Main St @ Dyer Rd 0.658 B 0.853 D 5 Redhill Ave @ Dyer/Barranca 0.784 C 0.729 C AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Signalized Intersection (Caltrans) 1 Delay LOS Delay LOS 6 Grand Ave @ SR-55 SB Ramp 16.7 B 15.6 B 7 SR-55 SB Ramp @ Dyer Rd 29.6 C 27.9 C 8 SR-55 NB Ramp @ Dyer Rd 20.0 B 15.3 B 1 Intersections under the control of Caltrans are evaluated using the Highway Capacity Manual methodology. All others are evaluated using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology. Crazy Horse Square Food and Retail Center - 19 - April, 2006 7SA1'"3115 ~;:~ ,,-"-~ m~~ ~69/gU -"'''' -LL<;/vL<; ) I l,-Oa/99L OlZ/vSL--''1 t ( rr9/0v<;- ,,"'''' LrZ/9LL-, ~:;:;: ", "'<00 Nv'" ...,'" ~ ., "''''''' ~;:;- '-rS/elL )'" "'I "'l-VZL/v<;L ,-L9/re rv/9v--''1 I ( <;r9/098- -0>0 Ler/SOZ-. .:::.~ ., <0 <0 '" @t z \ \ , \ , \ \ , \ \ , , , \ 3^V aNV~W 5 '" , ;0 .. l -L8<;/09 ~ .,....,....,......-"'- <0 0'" ...'" ...- ,'- ~'" _0 "'., ) I <;ev/rzs--''1 I " " v<;<;/v9r-. ;!~ ~ ",,,, o " ~~~ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / , , \ , \ \ \ \ \ , , \ \ , , , , , \ w > <{ 0:: W Z 0:: <{ :;: 0> ..- "",.. ,,_<0 ,-,-,- ~~~ '-6L~/699 _<0'" -6/a ) I l,-ozz/vez lOV L9--''1 I ( 09r/oz- v"'~ OLL/OZL-. ~:g~ ~,:o- -~~ o a 0:: 0:: W r a 1S NIV~ , , , , , , , , , , , , oa> a> '" '" ..,,'" .." ~~~ L-OLt/86r ) vI l-OL9VrS9 ;-v<;r/rel LS/OOL--' '1 t ( rrS/SllL- "'''.. rLl/96~ ~:g~ '-'-'- ""''' N_a> -"'~ - 20 - 7 5Af'J~ 16 "'''' "'<0 "<0 "" "'0 0'" ..'" ) I ~ ..l<C 0" .,E 0.., > 010 .!:'E c 0>0l >c 0>.- '-.c Ol'- .~.2 c'- '-" 00 E.<: II >- >- '-. x x U E oj 2 ~Ji Iii ~~ o :r: I >- ., ~ ~ '-9rl/zv<; ;-s9l/r99 !( a>~ ",,,, ",0 ';;:-"- ..<0 a>'" -'" co w ~ J-=> =>....J 00 I> 00: ....J=> -0 ffiI z~ <(<( ....JW a.... a.... ....JJ- <(0 o:W w-, ozo ~wo: woa.... 0: =>l()CO OC\l=> -O....J LLC\la.... w >- <( o w ::> .. 3 -' ~ , ~ u l!J o '" 0- W ::> <( ~ ~ TABLE 6 SUMMARY OF PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION OPERATION GENERAL PLAN BUILD-OUT WITH PROJECT CONDITIONS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Signalized Intersection (City) I ICU LOS ICU LOS 1 Grand Ave @ Warner Ave 0.578 A 0.820 D 2 Grand Ave @ Brookhollow Dr 0.401 A 0.416 A 3 Grand Ave @ Dyer Rd 0.655 B 0.870 D 4 Main St @ Dyer Rd 0.665 B 0.858 D 5 Redhill Ave @ Dyer/Barranca 0.789 C 0.732 C AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Signalized Intersection (Caltrans) I Delay LOS Delay LOS 6 Grand Ave @ SR-55 SB Ramp 16.8 B 15.6 B 7 SR-55 SB Ramp @ Dyer Rd 29.7 C 28.0 C 8 SR-55 NB Ramp @ Dyer Rd 20.1 C 15.4 B I Intersections under the control of Caltrans are evaluated using the Highway Capacity Manual methodology. All others are evaluated using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Crazy Horse Square Food and Retail Center - 21 - April, 2006 7 SA1'"3117 PROJECT PARKING REQUIREMENTS The project's parking requirements, based on the City of Santa Ana parking code, are summarized on Table 7. The total parking requirement for the two lots will be 174 parking spaces. This total parking is the sum of the peak parking requirements for each of the site uses. Table 7 Crazy Horse Square Foo<i and Retail Center Parking Requirements Site Use Parking Requirements Site Qty Parking Required Lot 1 Food 1 space / 100 square feet 10,520 SF 105.2 Retail 1 space / 200 square feet 4,120 SF 20.6 Electrical 1 space /330 square feet 212 SF .6 Sub- Total Parkin~ Requirement - Lot 1 126.4 Lot 2 Food 1 space / 100 square feet 4,235 SF 42.4 Retail 1 space / 200 square feet 987 SF 4.9 Electrical I space /330 square feet 78 SF .2 Sub-Total Parkin~ Requirement - Lot 2 47.5 Total Parkin2 Requirement 173.9 = 174 The project site plan shows 175 parking spaces, including 7 handicapped stalls. Therefore, the proposed parking supply will meet the code-required parking for the combined center. Shared Parking for Potential Alternative Site Use An alternative site use for Lot 1 could include a night club component of approximately 1,900 square feet in the main restaurant. This is not part of the current proposal, but a discussion of the effect of a night club on parking requirements is provided here for information purposes. The night club use would have a higher parking requirement than regular restaurant use - 1 space per 28 square feet of night club use (including bar and dance floor area) compared to 1 space per 100 square feet of restaurant area. For 1,900 square feet, this represents an increase in parking of 4 9 spaces. A summary of the parking requirements for this night club site use is provided on Table 8. With the night club use, the site would have a parking requirement of223 spaces, compared to the 175 spaces provided. Although the Crazy Horse Square site would have a parking shortage compared to the City of Santa Ana parking code, the mixed-use nature of the site (a combination of retail, night club and food uses) makes it a good candidate for shared parking relationships amongst the uses. The Urban Land Institute (ULI) has developed a methodology for estimating the reduction in peak parking demand a mixed-use site can experience due to its mixed-use make-up. Crazy Horse Square Food and Retail Center - 22- April, 2006 7 SA1"J~ 18 Table 8 Crazy Horse Square With Night Club Parking Requirements Site Use Parking Requirements Site Qty Parking Required Lot 1 Restaurant 1 space / 100 square feet 8,620 SF 86.2 Night Club 1 space / 28 square feet 1,900 SF 67.9 Retail 1 space / 200 square feet 4,120 SF 20.6 Electrical 1 space /330 square feet 212 SF .6 Sub- Total Parkinf! Reauirement - Lot 1 175.3 Lot 2 Food 1 space / 100 square feet 4,235 SF 42.4 Retail 1 space / 200 square feet 987 SF 4.9 Electrical 1 space /330 square feet 78 SF .2 Sub- Total Parkinf! Reauirement - Lot 2 47.5 Total Parkinl! Reauirement 222.8 = 223 The ULI Shared Parking (Second Edition, 2005) publication sets forth a methodology for evaluating shared parking relationships on a mixed-use site. The process is a multi-step process that first establishes the stand- alone peak parking requirements for the site uses, as summarized on Table 8 above. The methodology then applies a percentage to the peak requirement for each use, for each hour of the day between the hours of6:00 AM and midnight, reflecting the fact that the parking demand for each use varies throughout the course of the day. Beneficial shared parking synergies exist between different uses whose peak operating times occur at different times of the day. Examples of complementary uses for the Crazy Horse development would be the retail, fast food, and full-service restaurant with bar and dance floor. When the retail parking demand is at 100% of its peak (at 1 :00 PM on a weekday), full-service restaurant uses are at 75% and bar and night club uses are nominal, according to the ULI document, Table 2-5. At the same time, retail and fast food uses are at 50% and less when the restaurant and night club parking demand is at 100%, after 9:00 at night on a weeknight. These uses, then, can share a portion of the same parking supply without detriment to the other, rather than each providing their own distinct and complete parking supply. ULI hour-by-hour usage factors, seasonal factors, and weekday and weekend parking ratios are incorporated into a Shared Parking spreadsheet, and applied to the proposed mix of uses and square footages for the Crazy Horse Square project. Applying these factors to a particular mix of integrated land uses yields a projected peak parking requirement at a particular time of day (weekday and weekend) and season. In theory, the actual parking needs for that mix of uses will not exceed the projected peak, due to the interrelationships and benefits of shared parking synergies. Copies of the Shared Parking spreadsheets based on the ULI Shared Parking manual (Second Edition, 2005) developed for the Crazy Horse Square project are provided in Appendix C. The worksheets indicate that based on shared parking arrangements, the Crazy Horse Square project would require a maximum of 163 spaces at 7 :00 PM on a typical weekday (a parking demand reduction of 62 spaces due to shared parking) and 164 spaces at 8:00 PM on the weekend (a parking demand reduction of61 spaces due to shared parking). Crazy Horse Square Food and Retail Center - 23 - April, 2006 7 5A1'S~ 19 Based on this shared parking analysis, the proposed site parking supply of 175 spaces would be adequate to meet the peak parking needs of the Crazy Horse Square mixed-use development, including a night club use in the main restaurant, throughout the day and evening, on both weekdays and weekends. PROJECT ACCESS The Crazy Horse Square project is located on the site of the former Crazy Horse Saloon. The site is located adjacent to and immediately south of a two-story office building that is part of the Brookhollow development. The Crazy Horse Square site plan proposes to retain access to the site as it existed when the Crazy Horse Saloon was in operation. Access A is a shared access to Brookhollow Drive with the adjacent Brookhollow office. This driveway is located 260 feet north of Grand Avenue, and allows all turning movements. From this driveway, the driver can enter either the Crazy Horse site (by driving straight ahead) or the Brookhollow office site (by making a left tum). A reciprocal access across the parking areas between the Crazy Horse and Brookhollow sites makes it easy to move from one site to the other, by vehicle or by foot. Access A leads to the parking area located along the north side of the Building 1. The northernmost row of parking on the Crazy Horse Square site directly faces and is adjacent to the southernmost row of parking in the Brookhollow parking lot that will be the subject of the reciprocal parking agreement between the two property owners. A second entrance, to the Crazy Horse site Access B, is located at roughly the middle of the site, on the outside of the bend in Brookhollow Drive, 150 feet north of Grand Avenue. This driveway is currently closed off by fencing around the site. The Crazy Horse Square project will retain this driveway, with some modifications to the internal circulation. All turning movements to and from Brookhollow Drive will be allowed. This driveway will lead to a parking aisle that runs the length of the site and serves both sides of the development. The two parcels within the Crazy Horse Square project will have reciprocal access across both lots, with all parking areas available to customers of either lot. A sight distance check was conducted at Access B, to ensure that a driver will be able to see far enough in either direction on Brookhollow to safely exit the site. Because the driveway is on the outside of the curve, sight distance is facilitated in both directions. Looking to the south (looking left), the driver has a clear view of the road all the way to the signal (approximately 150 feet) and can easily see cars turning from Grand A venue onto Brookhollow from either direction. Looking to north (looking right) the driver has clear line of sight for approximately 310 feet before the curve takes the oncoming car out of view. The trees and hedge along the project edge should be maintained so as to not encroach into the line of sight along the road. Both driveways were evaluated for stacking capacity. Access A is located 360 feet and Access B is located 150 feet north of Grand Avenue. The distance on Brookhollow between the Grand Avenue signal and the site driveways would provide stacking at the signal for approximately 4 in either lane before the queue would reach Access B, and 12 vehicles before the queue would reach Access a. An HCS analysis shows that the average westbound queue at the intersection ofBrookhollow and Grand in the evening peak hour (the highest westbound demand) would be 3.4 vehicles, indicating that the westbound queue would rarely extend far enough to block Access B. If this were to occur, only vehicles exiting Access B and turning left would be affected, and these vehicles would simply need to wait for the queue to clear on the westbound green, or would have the option to go to Access A, which is 200 feet further east. The queuing analysis indicates that the westbound demand is not likely ever to extend far enough to reach Access A. Crazy Horse Square Food and Retail Center - 24- April, 2006 7SAT3120 CMP ANALYSIS The Orange County Congestion Management Program (CMP) was established in 1991, to reduce traffic congestion and to provide a mechanism for coordinating land use and development decisions. Compliance with the CMP requirements ensures a city's eligibility to compete for State gas tax funds for local transportation projects. Within the City of Santa Ana, the CMP Highway System includes three arterials: Harbor Boulevard, Edinger A venue, and 1 st Street. The following intersections are CMP intersections within the City of Santa Ana: . Harbor Boulevard and 1 st Street · Harbor Boulevard and Warner Avenue . 1-5 SB Ramps and 1 st Street · SR-55 SB Ramp and Edinger Avenue · SR-55 SB Ramps and Irvine Boulevard These intersections are all distant from the project site, and are not on the list of study intersections included in this traffic analysis. Therefore, there are no impacts to CMP facilities. SUMMARY · The Crazy Horse Square project is to consist of 20, 154 square feet of retail and food uses. The project site is located at Grand A venue and Brookhollow Drive in the City of Santa Ana, on the site of the former Crazy Horse Saloon night club. · The proposed project is estimated to generate 2,700 trips per day, with 182 trips in the morning peak hour, and 102 trips in the evening peak hour. · Eight area intersections were analyzed to determine the project's off-site traffic impacts. All study intersections are currently operating at an acceptable Level of Service. · The project will not cause a significant impact at any study intersection. · The Crazy Horse Square project site will provide 175 parking spaces. Based on the City of Santa Ana parking code, the parking requirement for the project will be 174 parking spaces. Therefore, the proposed parking supply will meet the code-required parking for the combined center. · An alternative site use for Lot 1 could include a night club component of approximately 1,900 square feet in the main restaurant. This would result in a parking requirement of223 spaces, 48 more spaces than the site will provide. A shared parking analysis was conducted to demonstrate that the parking supply will accommodate the peak parking demands of the site for weekday and weekend operations, due to shared parking synergies. · The project site will be served by two full-access driveways on Brookhollow Drive. Each access was evaluated for sight distance and stacking, and both were found to satisfy operational requirements. Crazy Horse Square Food and Retail Center - 25 - April, 2006 75A-121 99 of 139 APPENDIX A TRAFFIC COUNTS 71~A13122 APPENDIX B INTERSECTION ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS 75AT;l23 ... w W J: I/) ~ a:: o :: z o ~ :J i= :J >- ... o c( a.. c( () z o i= () w I/) a:: w ... ~ CD > c( "- CD C "- III :: ~ CD > c( "C C f! C) ~ z ~ ;0:: o i= () w I/) a:: w ... ~ O''EE a:O~ + ~ .. . >- o lD I 00..........00.....0000..... ::E 0 <( ;;; <Xl 0 '" 0> 0 '" o 0 c:i c:i c:i '" E (0 l.O "It ::l CO "- o '" > .... 0 0 g ~ o ci 6 .... CO 0 0> "- .... '" .... <Xl CO ~CO<D o 6 ci '" 0 CO N N .... .... '" <Xl ~ ~ C C ~ ~ IS IS ~m~ii "- N '" "- '" o ci ci ci ~o)OlOO~O~O~OO 00,... ,... 0 0 "' N o N <Xl 0 N <Xl 0 '" o 0 ci ci ci 0> CO '" .... 0 <0 '" ~ o 0 000 "- ;n .... 0 <Xl o '" o ci ci ci .... <0 0 0> "- '" '" o 0 000 ~ ~ ~ 0 0 .... "- <0 N r-- ~ ci ci ci ~ g ~ ~ cnmooCD "It ,..... 0 l.O ,..... N C\I 0 0 It) 00060 ~ . .... e.E::l o CD 2 o g ~ ~ .... '" 0:: U ~ ~ ~ o ci ci ci <D en 0 0 00,,""" ~~~~ ciooo 5i <D > ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 8 ~ ~ (OU)~t-:('Q (J)~zUJii:c1 000000 000000 ~"-;n~"-~ .. '" ~.....Oc?.....OMNT""('f')C\I<r-C\1 --' ~ ~ ..... 'e 0 ::E Q. + ::E U .. <0: ;;; '" >- o lD a:: u :J .9!. o 2 ~C~'2'O ~ a.. 0 ::i: c( "- ci "- 0 .... NO'" o ci ci ci '" 5 <0 C\I N ON;!: :; > ; ~ ~ o 0 00..... 0 0 ~ ~ ~ a 0 ci 0<00> .... .... "- 000 ci ci ci N.<OCOCO,..... ~~gM,....re ~o~o~ 0<00> <Xl N o ci ci ci N '" <0 "- 0 N N <0 o 00..... "- <0 0> '" .... "- 000 coo <0 <Xl "- ~ ,.... ~ 000000000000 o '" g :! cioci 0> 0 0 OJ ~ ~ CD Ol 0 0 o ..... ..... 0 0 ..... 0 o 0 o '" o 6 a o 0.... o ci ci ci m..,.~(oU"J~CO<D~.NCD 0> 0 0 ~ Q) ~ .. '" ~....O("').....O("')N.....MC\I.....N --' .. C g :;; C o o ~ .. ;B .E ~ o::E 00..........00.....0000..... ::EU <0:;;; :! g : ci ci ci <Xl 0 "- e g (I') ci ci ci ~ ~ ~ o ci ci ci ~~re~~~~re~ffi ci.. 0 0 (tl 000 u,..... ~ .. ci ~ ..... Z j o R 0 o '" ~ 0 '" o 000 o 000 U;~,.....U; <0 '" <0 '" .... "- 000 ci ci ci "1<00> N ,..... ~ 000 000 ~ ~ ~ C\I ..... ("') N ..... C\I ch c: > CD ...J a:::: .... ...J a:::: ~ ...J a::: .... ....J a::: t"' ~Ezzzenenenwww:;::;:$ .. . 00)000) oo~U)g~~ cicic:icici - C '" c: CD .? ~ 1'i 2 :s ~ 9 E '" EE88g 8 ~ c e U) t-: m z Ciu o 0 remg~~4: ci ci ci ci ci 5i Q) > ~ ~ ~ ~ E E 0 8 8 8 ~ C ~~~~ ~~g~~< ciciddci i CD > ~~~~:Jen E E 0 8 0 8 8 ~ ~ - 9 f!2 ~ ~ m Z li:J 0:: U <0: g ci en " o !11 --' ~ " .~ ~ a. '" to'" ci :J~ 2--, 0> <0: g ci en " B_ 0 ~ --' .E :J(j) 29 O'.E E a: u > + ::; ~ .. ~:EO o a. ;;; lD c .. a: e .. C . ~ .2' <5 Sa.> N ""'0000""''''''0000''''' 0> 0 .... '" 0 o ci ci ci .. E 0 0 .g~mUlN > .... 0 "10"- ~ 0 o 6 ci ~ ffi ~ o ci 6 ci "- '" '" '" "I co "- '" '" <Xl '" '" 0> o .... "- 0> 0 N o '" ci ci 0 <0 <0 o "- '" Q)~..,.OOCOO~OCDOO 'i ~ ~ 0::; ~ =:EOyt;gN 6n.>ci~o lD C .. a: o 0 o 0 ~ .... 0 0> N g ~ o ci ci '" ~ ~~~IO~~ 'iiN~N<OI.OC\I <; C '" Cl '" N o N c. 0 0 ru 000 o t:: V; o R 0 ~ 0 "It" U; ~ o o ci 0 "- "- '" "I "I "' "- '" '" <Xl 0 '" '" 0> o 0 0 <Xl .... "- <Xl 0 N o '" ci ci ci o <0 o "- '" 000 000 ~ ~ ~ .. '" a...-OM.....O(f) C\l,-M NT'""N --' " .~ ~ a. '0 a: + ~ .. . >- a:: 0 :J lD o J: ~ c( w a.. ::i: a.. 'E E ~ U~ ::EU a. ;;; "- 0 co "- 0 '" o cicio o 0 00,.... ..... .... 0 '" 00<0 o ci ci ci '" ~ooll)<OCOM o",<Xlu;~O>:; > U .!t "e- c5 ~a.> o 000 ~ ~ ~ ~ 00>0 0<0'" o o ci ci 0> "- "- '" <0 '" "- Q)'V'VOOtOo ","E o ~ ::EU a.;;; ~ 0 NOLO 'V f'o-. 0 M 0 o ci ci ci ci '" g '" <0 o g: "- > o 0 0 <0 <Xl "- <<i t:: en fJ g :; o ci ci o N 0 o <0 It) o c:i ci ci re~g~~ M "It" 0 0 co cioocid ~ ai C C ~ 8 IS IS ~ i i ~ . .... e-.s=> o 4) ~ o g ~ ~ .... '" 0:: U <0 o g ci en " o ~ --' .E " ., ~ I-E: 0.... :ga;o ci 0 :? :s :Jen 29 0> 0> It) <Xl <Xl <0 00"1 ci ci ci oo,....~~g~~ug ciadcio ci o 0 "I N 0 o It) 0 '" Ol ~ 0 <000 0> '" "- ~ ~ ~ ~ :; g ..... M ""It 0 ci ci c:i '" '" ~ a g EE88g 8 'C e en ~ I-: ~ ~zwCiu c: 5i ~ ~Sci'C:J ~8.E-;2 E E 0 0 8 8 ~ E en ~ I-: '" - - Q) Z O::u rn~ ~ ~ 5j Q) ;> C ~ Q ~ cicio~EIS~ 8 8 ~ ~ ~f?lg~~~m N OlZWO:::[5 o 0 ~ .. . >- '$ .., Qii.-e-oooooooooooo ~ ~~ lD u ~ o a: ~* ~~OlN~ '" <0 ~ ~ t'? ~ 0) "It ~ co 00 0000000 mooOOoOOOOOOO U"- ;n~ ;n~~;n~~~ .. '" ~""'OM""'OMN""MN""'N --' c '" E '" > o E '" .,.; & .. '" s ~~ .., .., '" .E !S E 5i .;l ~ .c C 0> ., 'C E '" ~ .!2 o .. E '" ~ j '"' C .C '" UI- 'E ~ ..u::E C ~ :;; c o U ~ .. >< w ~ .. .. >- '$ Q! "e ~ ~ Q. lD l~~ Q: c.'5 M 90000000000 ~go~~o~~~~~~~ en " o l! --' .E ~ ~ a. 00 ~ ~ () ci ci :Jen 29 ~~g~~u 00000 c., > ~lO"-~c~-_E ool\l'Q~E cicio'EE88 8 8 C ~ ,....Q)v(J)~l-cu rev~zUJ~O .....0000..... .....00 00..... ::EO a.;;; .. ci ~ ..... Z j ~ g C;; aoo ~ ~ ~ m g g o "- ~ g ffl ci ci ci "I <Xl ,.... ~ u; o o 0 ;n o 0 000 t:: lO "- 0 <0 ~ ~ ;! 000 0> N .... ~ ~ ;! 000 * ~ ~ 000 000 ;Ji t:: :; N ,.... M N ..... N ~~...Ja:::I-....JO::t-...JO::t- ~Ezzzenenenwww 7",.;124 o '" ~ 0 '" ~ ~ 3: :Jen 29 ::; <0: <0 '" a; <0 o o ~ Ie .... c '" E '" > o E '" .,.; ~ '" s ~ .~ .., .., ~ .~ 5i .;l :2 :E E 0> '" 'C E '" ~ ~ E '" ~ j '"' c .C " U I- '" x .. c o '"' o '" f? '" E >. -0 .;l en ::0 2 to- W W J: II) lll:: 0:: o == z o ~ :J i= :J ~ (3 c:( a.. c:( o z o i= o W tn 0:: w to- ~ o It + ~ .. .. >- o ID c .. n: .. i c .. :;: "e- "5 S Cl. > '" 'E! ~ u~ .....0000..........0000..... ::;u <> '" 0 .... 0 o 0 o ci .. ~ '" e'! ';!, o CO ,.... > o ~ 0 'E! ~ ~ U::; ~ .. .. ::; u 6<> ID c .. n: ~ g ~ ci ci 0 ." ~ '" ::l '" ." ';!, ~->oa;)<D,.... ~ .. c .. Cl on '" o '" g u o 0 000 ~ u; ~ g g ~ ci ci ci ci '" '" 0 ~ ~ ~ o '" .... .... '" 0 000 ci ci ci m ffl ,.... ~ooooo o 0 o 0 o M "'It 0 .... C"') 0 0 000 0 ci ci ci ci m ~ ..... IX) g g '" Q) 00000 000000 ...... u; t:: t:: t:: g ;; fri 000 ci ci 0 ~ ~ a) ~ (:l; 0 o 0 0 CIl ~ ~ ~ E E 8 8 ~~Q)~~ o 0 o ~ g tI> CIl fij ..... 0 C"'J ..... 0 M ..... ,.... ..... 0 ..... ..... ...J 0:: :J o J: lll:: ~ a.. ::::ii: c:( "E E ~ '0 u ~ ll: + ~ .. .. >- o ID U .. '0 It 19 ::;u <> ~ g (; 00'" ci ci ci CIl ~ ." (5 ~ > o ~ 0 'E! ~ ~ u~ .. o ~ a .r; ~ o o .. m ::;u <> '" 0 0 ~ g ~ ci ci ci CIl ~ ~ It) ~ ~ (5...-cnco > ~ .. .. >- '5 Q :s! '3 ID U ~ ;f! 'e ~ :;: Cl. ." 0 0 g g N cidci o 0 00..........0000..... Q) 0 '" '" 0 .... o 0 ci ci ci Q) '" :: ro '" '" '" .... '" 0 000 cicio g ~ g 000 ci ci 0 ~~~~~Lt>~~CO ~ooooo~~o o 0 00..... ..... 0 0 '" 0 '" 00.... o 0 ci ci ci '" '" '" .... '" 0 000 cioo ." .... '" .... '" '" ~ g II) o 0 ~ ~~g~~<g dodcid ci ~ ~ ~ C C Q _c o 8. E ~ ~ 8 g 8 0 C e:! U) ~ ~ CQ zwi'i5 o ~ Q) ." 0 ." '" 0 '" 0 0 ddo ." o ~ ci ci Q) '" 0 '" '" 0 '" 0 0 ci ci ci c 5i CIl c, -" ~ ~'E E E 8 g o 8 " ~ ~ ~ ~ (Q zUlii:O 0:)0)00(0 f;3~g:g~<( oodcici o '" g ;; ~ ci d d 5i CD > ~ ~i~ ~ EE88g 8 c: ~ ~~coU)~l-:m zwi'i(3 ~'eooo 000 000 000 ~Cl. ~ (') M re g u o 0 000 .... ;:;; o ,.... ~ o 0 o 0 ~ ~ ." N ..... 0 ..... ..... 0 000 000 t:: t: ,.... o 0 000 .... ~ .. CIl ffi ..... 0 M ..... 0 C"') ..... ..... ..... 0 ..... ..... ...J CII > c:( " c f! C) .~ E .;... ..u~ C .g '5 C o o Cl .= 10 .;( UJ 0000..........0000..... cij z ::;u <> 00." ~ g ~ ci ci ci '" 0 00.... o 0 ci ci ci ci 0 CIl 0 U .... g~s:~~~~ o 0 0 o~go~ N z o i= o W tn 0:: W to- ~ I tI> ci ~ ..... Zj d> 1: >cu-Jc(f- -JCl:1- ...Ja:::1- ~EzzzenenenUJUJw o '" ." '" '" ~ ~ g ci ci ci ~ ~ lO 000 000 0 t:: ,.... t:: fj~g~~<( deioed o '" g ;; ~ ci ci ci 5i CD ;> ~ ~. ~ :€ E E 0 l'l 8 8 ~ ~ cn~a)~~!:gJ '" ZWCk:i3 ..... 0 (") ..... ..... ..... 0 ..... ..... ~ ~ ~ o 0 o 0 .... ~ o ." o ci > ci.1:: E - 8 g c: e I- .. c2[5 :J en U u_ 0 !l! ...J 11 U CIl "2 a. .... ::; < ci :Jl3 2...J 0.... Q) ~~<(~ ci ci ci CIl > ~ en U 13_ 0 ~ ...J .E :Jen 29 :Jen 29 U "~ 2 Cl. E CIl E CIl > o E .c ~ .. .m ~ .~ "0 "0 Q) .E ~ E ill .a :21;: c Cl CIl "C E CIl ~ .E o tI> E CIl ~ ~ '" C "C CIl Ul- o ~ -g It U ~ + ~ .. ~::E u o Cl. > ID C .. n: ~ CIl C CIl C) "'"e 0 Sa..> '" I I .....0000...........0000...... '" 0 0 g g ~ 000 CIl E .g <<i > o ~ 0 ." 0 0 '" 0 0 00'" 000 '" .... '" ~ '" .... ." v ~ ~ tOOOOtO ("') (") 0 U') C\I 0 0 ~ 00000 5i ~ C C o ~ ~ ~ 8 0 .....~cn~~~~~ ." '" ." '" 0 o 0 q ci a 0 o Q) ." g 0 ~ ci ci ci ~OOOOO~~O 1: ~ ~ u~ o 0 00..... ..... 0 0 ~ :~o~g~ 6a..>:;~ci ID C .. n: o 0 ~ 0 0 00'" cicid .,,1 ~.2coco~~ f N ~ r-- ~ g ~ U '" '" o '" o 0 000 ~ u; o 0 ~ 0 ~ ." '" '" ." ~ (; g ci ci ci .... ." Q) '" '" '" ~ 000 000 ~ ~ ,.... o 0 coco 00('1') ..... ~ g~~<c cicicioo .? :€ g ~ U; 000 ci ci ci CIl CIl ~ g ~ E E 0 ~ 8 8 ~ ~ ~~~~~~~ ~ '" o 0 000 ~ ~ tI> CIl ffi ..... 0 (") ..... 0 ('I') ..... ..... ..... 0 ..... ..... ...J 10 ll: + ~ .. .. >- 0:: 0 :J ID o J: lll:: ~ a.. ::::ii: a.. u . fl~ Cl. ~ .. .. >- '5 Q :s! '5 ID U ~ ;f! .!!.o~ ~ C5 ('I') 1: ~ ~ U ~ ::; U Cl. > .... 0 '" .... 0 Q) o 0 cicici lOomU)lO,.... ~8~~og ciciciood CIl ~ .... :g '" 0.... ;1; > o 0 o 0 ..... ..... 0 0 ~~g~~~ o ~ 0 ~OOOOO 1: ~ ~ U ~ ::; U Cl.> .... 0 0 .... 0 ., o 0 o ci 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 g ~ ;X; 000 ci ci ci .... '" .... o '" '" ~ ~ 0 o 0 o 0 (1')(000(0 ..... ~lOg~~ cciood ~ ~ C g ~ E o 8 ~~ (I') C\I 0 0 I,() .....~;!g~~<C cioddd ." ." .... ~ ;; g ci ci ci 5i Q) > 8 8 ~ ~ E ~ 8 g 8 c: ~ ~a;~;1;!!1~~m zW~(3 co r-- ,.... lO ~ ~ N N o .... Q) g 0 ~ ci ci ci "0 ~'ooooooooooooo ~a:. CIl 5v<D~~ <5 ,.... r-- co > N N ~ g g 0 g o ~ ;;; o '" o g m ci ci 0 ..... ~ ~ o 0 000 ~ ;n . ..... 0 N ..... ..... 000 000 ~ ~ r-- 00 000 ~ t: tI> CIl ffi ..... 0 ('I') ..... 0 M ..... ..... ..... 0 ..... ...... ...J 1: ~ .. U ::; C ~ '5 C o o ~ .. j( UJ .....0000..... .....00 00..... ::;U Cl. > '" 0 ." .... 0 .... o 0 ci ci ci OOMNvr-- ogm~og doodae 15 N v...... > ...... ,.... ;; ci. 0 0 ftI 000 u"'" ;D tI> ci :g ..... Z j ~ m ffl o 0 000 .... ;:;; o '" ~ 0 '" ~ ~ ~ ~ 000 ~ g g 0 o '" '" g ;:; ~ odci ..... TO" ..... 0 ..... ..... "c TI >41~ en-JO:::I---JO:::..... ~E enenwww 75AT;l25 ~~~ '" '" '" '" l() CD 0 0 v ~~g~~< o 0 ci ci ci 5i CD ;- ~1~~:€:Jcn E E 0 l'l U 0 8 8 ~ C - ...J ~~~j o 0 o 0 ~ .... ro .i: E..E ::) o CD ~ o g c: e I- CIl ~<3 CIl > ciE ~ ; o g c e I-: m i'ii3 .... < ;; ci ::; < co ." iO '" o o '" Ie .... en U o !l! ...J 11 U CIl 2 ~ :Jen 29 .... < ;; ci :JUJU U_ 0 !l! ...J ~ U CIl '2 Cl. :J en 29 c CIl E CIl > o E CIl .c ~ tI> CIl .m ~ .~ "0 "0 ~ .~ ill .a :2 1: c Ol CIl .C E CIl ~ .; E CIl B ~ '" C .C CIl U I- '" tI> X <Ii C o -g CIl f! CIl c >. "0 .a en ::, 2 I- W W J: I/) ::.::: a:: o ~ z o j:: ~ :J j:: ::> >- I- (3 c( Il. c( (J z o j:: (J w I/) a:: w I- ~ 1J a:: I~ o ~ CD > c( 1J C f o en z M :0=; o j:: (J W I/) a:: w I- ~ '0 ~ ~ ctu~ + 00--0000_"1"""00 ~ .. ~~U o <( :> III C .. a: e .. C .. ;: "2' 0 S CL > N 000 000 000 ci ci ci CD E -Booa > 000 ~ ~ a~ o "<t ~ g N ci 0 ci ~ 0 <b 0> '" ~ g (1; 00'" c:i ci ci '" ~ 0 ~ ~~g~~mg ooccici 0 c C ro ~~cii: 8.[E~ E E 8 0 o 0 C couoc::~ ou;g~~~~ o 0 co o '" '" 00'" ci ci ci ~a~~ooo~o 00-_00 ~ .. .. ::;;: a 6<(> III C .. a: e .. C .. Cl "' N o N 000 000 000 ci ci ci '" E ~ .2 a N~ goo 0 a 00__00 <2i got;; g (1; C\lONO~M cicicicioci o 0 ~ a g '" .... '" '" cno.('I')OO G:) M <0 !;:: o 12 0 o 0 o 0> co o '" '" 00'" cicio .... co o co 0 "<t co o 0 0 o 0 0 ~a~:; <II CD ffiaooC\lo-.....a(l')o~C\I -J ...~ .C>....-aooa..... a::;;: a:: ::> o J: ::.::: c( w Il. :E c( '0 t. + ~ .. .. >- o III U .. o t. fg 000 ::;;: a <(> 000 000 000 coo CD E .... .gooo~ > ~ E ~ a~ ::;;:a <(> 000 000 000 ci ci ci ~ .. .. >- CD E ~ 0 a 0 ,..... > ~ :>"0 " q ~"2 ~ ~ Q. III o ~ ~ ~5~ t. !;:: g ~ '" 0 '" c:i ci ci ~ 0 ~ ~ o 0 o 0 ~ o 0 0> 0 0 ~ g (1; oco 0'" "<t .... '" o '" ~ g ~ CO 00'" ci ci ci o 0> o CD co '" co 00 o~o o '" o '" CD 00'" ci ci ci o ~ m '" co 000 aoo 000 aoo 0> 0 '" 00'" '" 0 '" ci 0 0 o 0 ~ g ~ c:i ci ci 0> o '" "<t '" co 0 '" 0> ~ 000 Na~ MO:O o~re goo 0 a o 0 ~ 0 12 o o 0 ~ o 0 0 ~ 0 g 0 '" ~ (1; <II Ql ffiOOOC\lo..........O(")O~N -J "<! ~ III a ::;;: C :8 '6 C o U tII -= Vi .;( w .....0000"'""00..-.....00 000 000 000 o 0 c:i ::;;:a <(> ~ 0 goo 0 a <II o ~ z~ '" 0 '" o 0 "<t '" 0 '" 000 o 0 o CD m 0 :; ~~g~~CIl cici ci cia CD CD ?' ~~~:s::>(/) 15 15 8 g !,1 9 o 0 C (U ~~~~ o 0 lOOOOU') (") ~~g~~a:Jo cicidcio ci o 0 ~ 0 12 i ~ C ~ ~ E o 8 ~~ '" > ci.1:: ~ B C c: f! .... '" ~B o 0 C\I 0 0 a C\I ~:ig~~al o c:i 0 ci ci C Ql Ql C ~ ~ E E 8 8 !!.1~ zw :;> ~:E ~ (/) o l'l !,1 9 o C C ~ .... '" ~i3 I Lt) 0 00. ~~g~~m ci ci ci ci ci <000 '" 0 '" 00'" ci ci ci O.....UJ;~~.;> gl;l,,!~~~:S oooEEol'l 8 8 ~ e CDo~~~z~r-:m ~ u)cx) UiCi(3 :g 0 o g 0 oaOC\lO..........OM 8: g 0 U; og~ o ~ C\I th E > Q) ....Jec.- ...JI-et:: ...JQ::I- ...JO::t- ~EZZZ(/)(/)(/)www3;3;$ ::> (/) 13 !,1 9 j 13 " 2 CL ::> (/) 13 u_ 0 !l! -J g 13 Ql 2 CL ::>(/) !,1g C Ql E ~ o E Ql ,..:1 <t> .. Ql ~~ "0"0 Q) .5 ~ E 5i .a "0 _ E:g Ql E '" ~ J2 o III E Ql 1j ~ "D C "C " a.... '0 'E ~ ~ U > + ::;;: ~ .. ::~~ o III C .. Ii: "'"] ~..2 0 ~ N ~ .. C .. Cl "' N o N 10 t. + ~ .. .. >- a:: 0 ::> III o U J: -5 ~ t. w Il. :E Il. ~ .. .. >- '5... q ~"e- ~ ~Cl. :> ~~~ ~20 ee>M CL ~OOOO~T'"OOOO'r 000 000 000 cicio Ql E ~ 000 o > ~ E ~ a~ 000 000 000 ci 0 c:i 0. (3000 <II Ql ~ 0 0 -J '" 0 CD :! g ~ ci ci ci CD 0 co 0 '" 00'" ocio '" co 0 "<t ~ ~ 0 ~ o CD co o '" 0 o 0 "<t ddci o CD o "<t co "<t '" o 0 0 o 0 o '" co 0"'0 o 0 "<t ci ci c:i '" CD o '" co "<t '" o 0 0 o~og~ '" .... '" <0.000 NO) 0 1.0"'" M -.:t 0 0 OJ ci ci ci ci ci c c j i'! i'! ci '-' o &. E .!: E E 0 ~ 8 8 ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ 0 0.... 0 """ C\l CD 0 <'1 ~ 0 o 0 d m Q) ]I> C 5< 0._ ~c g 0. E E E 0 l'l 8 8 ~ C (/) 3: I-: ~ ZUl~t5 ~ '" 0.... ~ :g c d ci (') o 0 o ::;;: <( CD '" ci:i CD o o '" co ~ '" :? ~ () o CL > III C .. a: ~ .. C .. Cl ~lgooo~o~~ o N o 0 ~ 0 0 ci ci ci ~ g M 00'" o d ci :) (J'J ~ g g ~ 13 Ql oe ~ ::> (/) !,1g o 0 o 0 T'"~~8~~O~ ci ci ci ci ci ci o coO> o '" CD 00'" ci ci ci '" '" 0....'" "<t '" ~o~~ooo~o .... 0 '" M g M ci d d ~ g ~ ddci o 0 M . ll) ,.... !;;: 0 ~ ~ 0 r-- o 0 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ o "'10 ~ I I I ..... 0 0 00,... ..... ..... 0 en 0 c ~ ~ i'!5g.:5 ~ ~ E EE88g 8 c ~ (I) ?;: ~ ctJ zlnZiO (\f 0 0 0 T'"~~g~:go cioocia o ,.... m ~ ~ .;>> gg~lg~~:s dcioeEo8 8 8 ~ C o '" ~ ~ OCDIDOO I-:cu ~ N Z 0:: G o 0 o 0 ~~ a~ ::;;:a CL> 000 000 000 c:i ci d IDOCOCOOOl :!g~ g~ cidcicicici '" .... 0> 0 '" "<t '" o 00.... '" ~ 000000000000 o 0 0 0 i 8 ~ ci c:i ci o 0> o CD o '" cicid o ::! ~ o 0 o 0 012(1; III Ql ~OOONO""""'OMO~N Ql E -gooo > "2' c5 CL> 000 .... 0> 0 O;X~O~ ;!O~CDO~ o 0 000 (1; ~ o 0 000 .... ;;; ""'00 OOT'" T'"OO 00..... CD CD 0 "<t ~ ~ 0 ~ ~E <t> a ~ C .g '6 C o u I~ III >< W 'E-e~ a~ ::;;:a ll.> 000 000 000 doo o 0 ~ 0 ~ '" o o 0 ~ o CD co o '" '" 00'" o d 0 CD CD o ~ ~ o 0 0 ~ 0 g 0 '" ~ (1; o S?: N ~C-JCX:"" -J....cx: -Jcx:.... s!CX:3;t- oCDZZZWrJ)cnwww:> ~ ::;;: E 76A,;L26 Ql E 0 :::JOOOCD o "<t > 000 0. ~ 000 ::;;:a CL > 000 000 000 d d ci :gooo ci CQ 000 a III ci CD z.3 000 NOT'"" ..... 0 (") C\I Il) 0 0 Q) M~g~~C dciddo 5i Q) > ~ g g :5 E E 0 l'l 8 8 ~ e ~~~~ _ (J) '0 ~ 0 <!! !,1-J ~ 13 .~ CL ::>(/) !,1g ::>1:3 !,1-J <! Ql E CD > o E Ql 1 ~ <II '" J!l ~ "~ ~ -g !Ee 5i .a !2 ::c C 0> Ql 'C E '" ~ o E '" <t> X .,; C o 13 Ql ~ J!l " >. "0 .a (/) :::, !,1 .g III Ql II~~ ~ ~ "D "C I- W W :r: II) ~ It: o ;: z o i= ~ ::::i i= :;) ~ (3 c( ll.. c( U Z o i= u w II) It: W I- 2: O'~~ 0: u ~ + .. ~ ::;: u o <( > III c .. a: f CD c CD ~'e--a ~ Sa.>o N ~ .. CD ::;: U ~<(> III c .. a: on E ~ .2 fN~ CD C CD o on N o N ...-0000..-00........-00 <0 0 ... o g N 600 CI> E M <X) M :Ji CD 0'1 CJ) "0 M (0 > .- E -I:: > ..- 0 0 U::;: <0 0 N o g N ci c:i 0 '" <0 '" <0 <0 '" '" <0 fil U o 0 000 ~ Ul '" 0 '" \0 0 '" o 0 N ci 0 0 0<0'" ~ '" 000000 o 0 T'" 0 0 '" 0 '" on 0 '" o 0 N ci ci ci o <0 '" o '" \0 0 0 ~ g ~ ci ci ci r-. r-. \0 ~ en U) \00<0 ~ g ~ ci ci ci o 0 0 0 ~o~~O~ r-. r-. on NQ)~N '" 0 <0 NO'" o 0 ci ci a 00'" ~ ,.... ~ ~ en 0 en ... 0 CO ~ 8 g ci ci ci o 0 000 r-. u; ., .. ~,.....OMT""O('l'),...OMT"'OM ..J :e~......OOOOT"'OO.....'I"'"" ~u~ 0.. :~(J~~ mg~ ca<(;>o OO~ ~ ci ci ci ci ci 0 >- o III It: u :;) .9! o e :r: 0.. ~ c( W ll.. :::E c( .. g r-. ... '" (5 U') N ~ > ~g 0 ~ ~ E ~ U ~ ::;:U <(> ... 0 g ~ ci a c:i o <0 '" <0 on \0 o 0 ci ci ci m~~~~~ 000000 o 0 0 '" 0 co '" 0 0 o 0 N o ci 0 " It: ~ o ~ .. CD >- .. E 'llt'Q)CO.......- .gro~~~o~ > o ..... 0 0 '3) ~ ~ o 0 ci ci ci or-.", CD ~ ~ ~ en 0 en ..... ..... 0 0 ~~g~~alg aaddo ci c c ~ ~ ~ g ~ ::> o8.E ~ ~ g ~ ~ enz- ~ ':; ::l WO::C} <ONOO 00 ~reg~ ci ci ci ci :? 0.1: ~ a; u g c: ~ I- .. .- CI> O::C} o 0 r-. ~ '" CI> I ~ ~ E E 8 8 (!?~ zw m ~ ~ o 0 o ci ci - Q ~'p -000000000000 ~ ~ CL III u ~ "#- ~2~N<D;::LO(I')re.M~"ItM:: .to ~ w fil g g g u ~ ,..... ~ o R 0 o 0 Or-. 0 ... ... 0 N N 0 00 c:i 0000000 ~g~~~g~ c 5i ~ 5 9 8. ~ E l!l ~ 8 8 c ~ ~ ~ ~ ZUJO::B 00'10001 ~~g~~< ci ci ci ci ci 0<00 <0 \0 \0 o 0 cicio ~ Q) ;> ~.~ ~:E E E 8 g 8 8 c: ~ :;:;n~;:t~~l-:m ~, "'ZW((C} co <0 '" '" ., .. ~"-""'N""'OM""'''-N''''''''''N ..J - II) c Ii :::E III C ~ :0 c o U ~ III X W en z ~E u~ "'-OOOO"-OOT'""T'""CO ::;:U <(> NCO<O g ~ 000 co 0 0 '" 0 0 o 0 N ci ci ci ~~~~~~ dciciricid Ol.OCX)COMCO(")C'\Ilt>tO,.....M >LO~~ <DQ)~ (")CJ')~ v~t; 000 000 ~ t;:: ~ ~ z o i= o w o It: W I- ~ ci.. 0 0 0 <'0 000 u t;:: ,.... ~ o o 0 ~ o 000 o 000 ~ ,.... ,.... ~ '" ~~...........N......OM............N............N d> C >Q)-.Ja:::..... ...Ja:::l- ...Ja:::l- ...Ja:::t- ~Ezzzenenenwww:s::s:$ MNOOIO ~~g~u:;<( o c:i c:i c:i 0 lij CI> l5 c g ~ E E 8 8 (!?~ zw :? ci.'E ~ a; u g c: ~ I-: m ((C} en "0 o ~ ..J .5 j e 0.. <0 18 CD ci :Jen ~g o r-. <0 ~fZ<(g 00 0 OJ :? :E en "0 :J 0 !!1 ~..J ~ :Jen ~g :Jl3 ~ ..J ~ e 0.. c: CI> E CI> > o E .. ~ ~ .. S ~ .~ '0 '0 Q) oS: !E E lij <3 '0 _ E:g .. E OJ ~ ,g ~ ~ 13 ~ 8~ O'.;~ Q: (5 ~ + ~ .. CD >- o III c OJ a: f co c CD o "' N o N ~ OJ >!~~ o III c .. a: 00......<0"""0000...........00 ::;: U 0.. > cooco,.... 000 1.0 N 0 '0::1" 0 0600 .. g '0::1" 0 ~ '0 ~ !:;;: to > 'e- "5 0..> r-. '" '" r-. o r-. g N o 0 r-. 0 '" '" 0 ... o 0 cioci ... 0 r-. '" 0 '" o N ci 0 0 '" '" 0 N ... co '" ... r-. otOooaoootOvo"l#' :CEoa U ~ <0 0 r-. 000 NO... ci ci 0 ~ g ;1; ~ ~ N->O"'''' f CD c CD <:l "' N o N ...... ...... 0 0 r-. 0 r-. ~ g N 000 r-. '" '" en ,.... ~ M l,{) ~ ..... ~ ~ ~ ~ o 0 <r- ..... 0 0 r-. 0 <0 ~ g ~ acio 0. 0 0 ~ 0 a 0 ()..... u:; o a 0 0 ~o~~o~ on ... co 0 on Non 0; 8 ~ o N cicio \0 '" CO N ... 10 '" ... r-. o 0 ~ 0 ~ ., CI> ~"""OM"""OM""'O("')""'OM ..J o .t + ~ .. co >- It: 0 :;) III o :r: ~ c( W ll.. :::E ll.. 'C ~ U ~ o 0 ~ g ~ ci 0 0 o 0 ~ <0 '" co b :g ~ o 0 ci o 0 o 0 ::;:U 0..> ~ ~ ~ N '" o 0 ci o '" N '" 0 N N cioci .. E("')(()Ncocn cn 10,.... ~~~cn ~~N~~~ > u ~ "~ "5 ~ 0.. > o(()OOOOOOCO~Ov :E ~ 0 U ~ ::;:U 0..> ~ ~ ~ c:i 0 0 (f)ON COOl...... cn ~~Ol ~~~ <0"'... ~ ~ ~ 000 .. E ~ " :: (5 >- > - Q! oe ~ ~ a. III ~ ~ "#- r-. :: on .- e q '" e c> M 0.. o ...... ...... 0 ~ g ~ 000 o ...... 0 0 o 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ci ci ci '" o <0 ... '" r-. N ~ ~ ~ M co ~ ... '" 000000000000 ~IO~~ g g g g o t: ,.... ~ 00000000 Ro~~~~RR~ ;201.0,....0 0.. > ~ N ~ cioo co '" r-. g~~1O 9 g g g 8 ~ ~ ~ '" ci ~ ...... ...... N ...... Z ~ <0 0 on co 0 co o 0 o 0 ci on '" ~ o 0 000 r-. u; ... <0 0 ~ :g ~ cioci ......IOCOIO ~ N cn !;;: 000 000 ~ ~ ~ o '" ., CI> ffi ..... ...... N ...... 0 M ..... ..... C\I ..... ..... N ..J 00..... .....00 .....00 00..... on N \0 ~ ~ en d ci ci <0 on N ~ ~ ~ 000 000 ~ ~ ~ ..... ..... N ..... ..... C\l *~...Ja::l-...Ja:::l-....Ja:::........Ja:::t-' ~Ezzzenenenwww~~$ 75A;;L27 'C E en U ~ c .g :0 c o o '" ~ III X W ~~g~~og dcicico 0 ::;: <( co 10 a; ~ ~ ~ 6 [ ~ ~ E E 0 ~ 8 8 ~ ~ ~~~~ <b :Il g :il ~ (f) 0 0 ciooci :? :E .. CI> I ~ ~ ~ E E 0 l!l 8 8 ~ lii en ~ I-: ~ zUJa::(3 OCOOOCIJ ...... ~~g~r! o 0 0 d ci r-. CO o <0 ... CO ~ ~ c ~ ~ E o 8 ~~ o<Oooco ~~g~~() ciadcid ~ CD > ~~~~:Jen EEol!l52g o 8 ~ c ~2'~~ z~a::c3 COCOOOtO ~reg:g~u cioocio ~ Q) > g~~~:Jen E E 0 l!l U 0 8 8 ~ ~ - ..J S!? ~ ~ m z i:il IX: C} .. > 0..1:: E - o l!l u c c: ~ I-: m ((C} :Jen ~g "0 ~ .5 ~ "e- ~ co o o ~ ~ '" ill 0 ci :Jen ~g o U 0 ci => en 1i ~ 9 ~ "0 .~ e 0.. c: .. E .. > o E .. ..;~ .. S ~ -~ al~ ~ E 5i .a :E 1: c: '" CI> -c E OJ ~ J2 o ., E CI> ~ ~ ., c -c .. UI- ... ., x <Ii c o tl CI> l!? .. c: >. '0 <3 en ::, 52 I- W W :I: In lI:: It: o 3: z o i= ;s ::::i i= ::> ~ <3 <C a.. <C (.) z o i= (.) W In It: W I- ~ 0' E Q: (3 > + ::E ~ .. ~:E~ 0<> III c .. 0: OJ ~ c ., Cl "' N o N '1'""0000"1""""1"""0000..... Ol 0 III MOO o 0 o ci ci ., ~ C;; ~ IX) o . U; > i~ ~ Ol 0 <Xl <Xl 0 0 0: 0 M o ci ci " <0 " :oJ ~ ~ co g ;: N 0 ~ 060 M Ol <Xl : M ~ M 0 N MOM o - o 0 ci <0 Ol M ~ N ~ OOOOOOo)0'100~ ~ ~ T" ()::E ~ .. ., >- o III C III E a:~~Nt::~ > g () III U c:: l! "- III m 1:: I~ Q ~ CIl > <C :c 'C CIl It: en z It) z o i= (.) W In It: W I- ~ e ., C ., Cl "' N o N o 0 00'1'"" ..... ::E() <'> COOUlmolX) ag~~g~ doooad ~ 8 :2 ci ci ci M 0 '" " III ... M III o 0 000 .... ;;; o 0 o 0 o ~ 0 M " <0 ... o .... Ol (') ('II ~ o 0 0 ~ 000 Ill;:l; ;;; MOO ~ g (") ci ci ci <0 '" M ~ N : o 0 o 0 ~ ~ III <II CD :6'""0(")<"10(").....0(0)'1'""0(") -' ~ ~ ~ a()::E It + ::E () :0 4:::> ., >- o III It: tl ::> ~ ~ It lI:: <C w a.. :E <C .. ., >- - Q X"e ~ ~ D- III tl~~ ~<3M It <Xl 0 <Xl ... 0 <Xl 000 ci ci ci CD ~ ;Z (; > 2'cS 0.. > ~ o 0 00..... 0 0 NO'" '" 0 0 o 0 N ci ci 0 :e ;1; to ~ CONoom ~cnOlOCO M MOO,.... aoaoo ~ ~ 8 ~ g g o 0 ~ ~ Iii :? ci.'E ~ B c: c: e I-: m 0:(3 ... 0 .... ~ g re ci ci ci o '" <0 II) ~ ~ o 0 o 0 ~ o 0 NON '" 0 0 o 0 N ci ci ci .... N .... III <Xl ... N .... o 0 000 .... ;;; (') 0 0 0 ..... ;;~g~ ciocici Q) Q) > ~3~:S E E 0 CD 8 8 u g c: e (f) ~ I-: III zWO::(3 . o 0 '" III 0 M '" 0 M ... 0 cicid c ~ i 3 ~ E g 8 g ~~~~~~~ '" 0 <Xl <Xl 0 III N 0 cicio en ~ N .... oooooocnO'lOO~ ~ i'! ~ ()~ :n~ '" 0 <Xl ... 0 <Xl 000 ci ci ci ;:I; g r;; o N ci ci ci o '" '" ~ <0 <Xl ... III .... <Xl " ~ ~ ~ 0 o~~g~~o 00600 '" 0 <Xl 0 N 0 ci 0 <0 ~ ~ . > ~I~~~:S oEEo~ 8 8 ~ ~ ~a;~(J)~l-:ca '01t <ozwO:[5 000000000000 ::EQ <> ... 0 III ... 0 <Xl 000 000 CD E :> ~ ~ LO"I"""~ ~Ul~ LOQ)~ ::U')~ g g 0 g ();:I; u:; o 0 000 ~ u; o 0 000 ~ u; <II CD ~NOMC\lOC")""'OM"I"""O(,,) ~~""'OOOO'l'""OO""''''''OO ()::E .. C ~ :;; C o () ~ .. )( W (5 O'l en ,.... >;!.~ gOO 8 ~ 0 ~ o 0 <Xl M 0 .... o N ci ci ci ~ M ~ <o:t t: ~ '" 0 <0 <Xl 0 '" o 0 ci 0 d N ... III '" .... N N .... m g u; N 0 ci d d 000000 000000000 ~ u;t::: ;nf'-- u; <Xl <0 '" .... .... '" ... '" <II ci~NOMNO(,,)_ Z ~ o M ~ 0 M ~CQ) -'~I- -'~I- -'~I- 5g;~ o zzzcncnUJWww>:>> ::;; E I I I ~~g~~o ciacicic.i &i ~ ~ ~ E E 8 8 ~~ > ~ ~ ::> VJ 8 g Q 9 c: ~ I- '" ~c3 '" () g ci ::::>(f) gg ... :e () ci ::::>(f) gg o 0 co ~ ~ 0 g dd ci '" > ~ ::::> (f) ti ()_ 0 !!! -' ~ ::::>(f) gg ti '" 0- ~ ti .~ e 0.. '0 ~ E ci: u ~ + co .. ~a:~ III C co 0: e .. C CD Cl '" N o N ~ .. ., ::E () ~o..:> III C '" 0: '" ~ g..2 f C\I ~ ., C ., Cl '" N o N .....0000..........0000..... Ol 0 '" ~ g ~ cicici CD E.... N :J M 0 Q) '0 "It CD > "e- ci 0.. > .... 0 M '" 0 M o 0 N cicid '" <Xl <Xl N '" N M ... .... <Xl 0 <0 N 0 Ol o 0 ci c:i 0 <Xl ... <0 N ~ ~ NOM M 0 '" o 0 000 '" ... <Xl LOre~ (000 000 O"lt''l:t 00<.0 ~ E ~ () ~ .... 0 '" ~ g ~ cicid c;; 0 ~ ... <Xl 00 o 0 .... 0 M '" 0 M o 0 N ci ci d 0.0000 ('QOOOOOO ();:I; ;;;;:1; u:; '" <Xl <Xl N III N M ... .... <Xl 0'" N 0 Ol o 0 d ci ci <Xl 0 N N ~ ~ o 0 000 ~ ~ (DNgg~ M MOO,.... cicicicio 1: C ~ :?! :?! Q 1:; o ~ E CD ~ 5 8 g 8 U c: l! ~~~~ N 0 M 0 '" o 0 ci 0 d 0') 000 oO'l"'"~~g~ OOCO ell ell > g~~:S E8~8g () c ~ (f) ~ I-: '" - - Q) z ~(3 o 0 III ... N III ~ ~ o 0 a 0 ~ ~ III '" CD ffiNOMNOM.....OM.....OM -' ~ E ()~ o~u~g~ It a..:> 0 C\I + ci ci ci ti ,~ e Cl. C CD E ~ o E CD "..:1 '" '" !l ~ .~ "" Q) .5 !S E ~ ;3 " - ~~ Q) E '" ~ .E ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ .. .. >- It: 0 ::> III o :I: lI:: <C w a.. :E a.. tl ~ '2' "is ~Cl.> ~ .. ., >- - Q l'e ~ ~ Q. III tl ~ It o 0 Q) ~ ~ (; <If" '0 LO C\I ~ > ... 0 '" ~ g ,.... ci ci ci U'i gJ .... M N <0 o 0 ~ 0 0 oo.....~~g~ ciodo '" :? ci.c g -; o g c: e I- '" .,.J Q) ~(3 '" 0 M .... 0 " o 0 N ci 0 ci '" M ... M M 0 M Ol COOOOOOO"lt-.:tOOtO ~ ~ 0 ()~ o M .... 0 M o 0 ci c:i ci o .... M N ~ ~ 0..........00.....00 ::;; () Cl. '> M 0.... '" 0 .... o N cicio <0 l!l " 0 '" ~ g ,.... ado ~ ~ ;: M N <0 ~ ,.... ~ o ~ 0 M o N .... 0 M o 0 o ci ci o M Ol N ~ U'i ... ... o 0 ~ ~ g :; o 0 N ci ci ci III M <Xl M M 0> M <Xl 000000000000 ~ "It ~ re 0000 0 ~oa~oao LOt:: IO~ ~ ~ g ~ ci ci d ... <0 ~ N NOM <Xl 0 <Xl <0 0 N o 0 ci ci ci ;n(Om~M <0 '" o o 0 ;;; o 0 000 .... ;;; CD ~ Ol a "It g ~ C\I ~ ~ <fI. '" o 0 ~ cD M g gag 0:; ;n '" CD 5jNOMNOM.....OM.....OM -' 'C: ~ .. () ::E C ~ :;; C o () .~ .. )( W 00..........00.....0000..... ::;; () Cl. :> <Xl 0'" ... 0 <0 ON ci ci ci ~ 0 M .... 0 ... .... 0 M o 0 N d ci d o 0 :2 0 ~ ~ 0 M <h C >Q)-Ja:::..... ...Ja:::1- ...JCl:::1- ...JQ::t:- ~EZZZ(f)(f)(f)WWW::::::$ 7SA'T~28 og:g~ > '" ciO 00 J~O~~ '" ci ~ z ~ NOM ~ ~ c: ~ ~ E 8 8 !!?~ z w N N 0 a ''''It ~Mg~;!U cicicicid 5i <U > ~g~:S E E 8 g 8 8 c: e !!? ~ I-: III zWO:(3 a MOO (") ~gg~~u o 0 ci c:i c:i M N N .... M <Xl 5i CD > g3~:S::::>C/) E E 0 l'l () 0 8 8 ~ ~ - -' ~ 5: !:; m zU:l~(3 M () g ci ::E < <0 '" 0; co o o ~ " C/} ti ::::> 0 \!I g -' ~ 13 Q) "e- ~ Ol ~() ci ::::>C/} gg III 0 ;! U 0 ci c:i ::::>(f) gg 13 '" 0- ~ ti ,~ e 0.. ::::>(f) gg C CD E ~ o E CD 1 ~ .. '" !l ~ .~ " " Q) "~ ~ E ~ ;3 :2 1: C Ol CD 'C: E '" ~ .e o '" E CD ~ ~ '" c: 'C: CD () I- '" '" >< <Ii c: o '" o CD II! !l c: >. " :> (jj :::, g SHORT REPORT ""'~'It.'.~(_ Analyst JAR Intersection Grand/S8-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 7/7/2004 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period AM Peak Period Analysis Year Existing EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 3 0 Lane group L R T T Volume (vph) 441 332 644 632 % Heavv veh 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. Qreen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 PhasinQ WB Only 02 03 04 Thru Only 06 07 08 Timing G = 40.0 G= G= G= G = 42.0 G= G= G= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 464 349 678 665 Lane group cap. 802 718 1688 2415 v/c ratio 0.58 0.49 0.40 0.28 Green ratio 0.44 0.44 0.47 0.47 Unif. delay d1 18.7 17.7 15.8 14.7 Delay factor k 0.17 0.11 0.11 0.11 Increm. delay d2 1.0 0.5 0.2 0.1 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 19.7 18.2 15.9 14.7 Lane group LOS 8 8 8 8 Apprch. delay 19.1 15.9 14.7 Approach LOS 8 8 8 Intersec. delay 16.8 Intersection LOS 8 HCS2000™ Copyright rg 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.le 754,.;129 Analyst JAR Intersection Grand/Sa-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimfey-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 717/2004 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period PM Peak Period Analysis Year Existing 'r1lll1 IIIflll ~:'.,-_' ,: , . ':: .. --';.0" 1!,~"""..<".,_..."._~,, EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 3 0 Lane group L R T T Volumeu(vph) 313 333 628 665 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A StartuD lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. Qreen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival tyoe 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 PhasinQ WB Only 02 03 04 Thru Only 06 07 08 Timing G = 38.0 G= G= G= G = 44.0 G= G= G= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 329 351 661 700 Lane group cap. 762 682 1769 2530 v/c ratio 0.43 0.51 0.37 0.28 Green ratio 0.42 0.42 0.49 0.49 Unif. delay d1 18.4 19.2 14.4 13.6 Delay factor k 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.11 Increm. delay d2 0.4 0.7 0.1 0.1 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 18.8 19.9 14.5 13.7 Lane group LOS a a a a Apprch. delay 19.3 14.5 13.7 Approach LOS a a a Intersec. delay 15.8 Intersection LOS a HCS2000™ Copyright <<:J 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e 7M13130 SHORT REPORT .. Analyst JAR Intersection Oyer/SB-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 7/1/2004 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period AM Peak Period Analysis Year Existing EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 1 3 1 2 3 1 1 1 2 0 2 1 Lane group L T R L T R L LT R LT R Volume (vph) 78 1062 253 269 803 134 272 22 695 89 201 153 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (PIA) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasing WB Only Thru & RT EB Only 04 NB Only SB Only 07 08 Timing G = 10.0 G = 24.0 G = 7.0 G= G = 28.0 G = 13.0 G= G= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 82 1118 266 283 845 141 286 23 732 306 161 Lane group cap. 140 1783 556 389 1955 610 562 591 889 515 233 v/c ratio 0.59 0.63 0.48 0.73 0.43 0.23 0.51 0.04 0.82 0.59 0.69 Green ratio 0.08 0.34 0.34 0.11 0.38 0.38 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.14 0.14 Unif. delay d1 40.1 24.7 23.2 38.7 20.8 19.1 25.4 21.6 28.7 36.0 36.6 Delay factor k 0.18 0.21 0.11 0.29 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.36 0.18 0.26 Increm. delay d2 6.2 0.7 0.7 6.7 0.2 0.2 0.8 0.0 6.3 1.9 8.4 PF factor 1.000 0.949 0.949 1.000 0.917 0.917 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 46.3 24.1 22.6 45.4 19.3 17.7 26.1 21.6 35.0 37.9 45.0 Lane group LOS 0 C C 0 B B C C 0 0 0 Apprch. delay 25.1 24.9 32.3 40.4 Approach LOS C C C 0 Intersec. delay 28.5 Intersection LOS C HCS2000™ Copyright <9 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e 7M13131 SHORT REPORT Illi._ Analyst JAR Intersection Oyer/S8-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 7/7/2004 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period PM Peak Period Analysis Year Existing EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 1 3 1 2 3 1 1 1 2 0 2 1 Lane group L T R L T R L LT R LT R Volume (voh) 119 1204 209 569 1092 81 208 2 180 120 412 190 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startuo lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eft. areen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival tvoe 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasing EB Only Thru & RT WB Only 04 NB Only SB Only 07 08 Timing G = 9.0 G = 20.0 G = 16.0 G= G= 12.0 G= 15.0. G= G= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 125 1267 220 599 1149 85 219 2 189 560 200 Lane group cap. 203 1876 585 701 2329 727 271 285 429 671 303 v/c ratio 0.62 0.68 0.38 0.85 0.49 0.12 0.81 0.01 0.44 0.83 0.66 Green ratio 0.11 0.36 0.36 0.20 0.45 0.45 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.19 0.19 Unif. delay d 1 33.9 21.5 18.8 30.9 15.6 12.8 32.9 28.9 30.9 31.3 30.1 Delay factor k 0.20 0.25 0.11 0.39 0.11 0.11 0.35 0.11 0.11 0.37 0.23 Increm. delay d2 5.5 1.0 0.4 10.1 0.2 0.1 16.5 0.0 0.7 9.0 5.2 PF factor 1.000 0.932 0.932 1.000 0.836 0.836 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 39.4 21.0 18.0 41.0 13.2 10.8 49.3 28.9 31.7 40.3 35.4 Lane group LOS 0 C 8 0 8 8 0 C C 0 0 Apprch. delay 22.0 22.1 41.1 39.0 Approach LOS C C 0 0 Intersec. delay 26.6 Intersection LOS C HCS2000™ Copyright @ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e 7M13132 11I'1111" 5HO~T ~~\1 " "'.:'" ,,:,. Analyst JAR Intersection Dyer/NB-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Hom and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 7f1/2004 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period AM Peak Period Analysis Year Existing EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 3 0 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 Lane group T T L R Volume (vph) 1667 653 722 527 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. areen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 4 4 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasing Thru Only 02 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 41.0 G= G= G= G = 41.0 G= G= G= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 1755 687 760 555 Lane group cap. 2358 2358 1597 736 v/c ratio 0.74 0.29 0.48 0.75 Green ratio 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 Unif. delay d 1 20.2 15.4 17.0 20.3 Delay factor k 0.30 0.11 0.11 0.31 Increm. delay d2 1.3 0.1 0.2 4.4 PF factor 0.829 0.829 1.000 1.000 Control delay 18.1 12.8 17.3 24.8 Lane group LOS B B B C Apprch. delay 18.1 12.8 20.4 Approach LOS B B C Intersec. delay 17.9 Intersection LOS B HCS2000™ Copyright <1::i 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e 75A,.;&33 Analyst JAR Intersection Dyer/NB-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 7/7/2004 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period PM Peak Period Analysis Year Existing EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 3 0 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 Lane group T T L R Volume (vph) 868 1428 214 101 % Heavv veh 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A StartuD lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eft. areen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 4 4 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasinq Thru Only 02 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G = 42.0 G= G= G= G = 40.0 G= G= G= y= 4 y= y= y= y= 4 y= y= y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 914 1503 225 106 Lane group cap. 2415 2415 1558 718 vlc ratio 0.38 0.62 0.14 0.15 Green ratio 0.47 0.47 0.44 0.44 Unif. delay d1 15.5 18.0 14.8 14.9 Delay factor k 0.11 0.21 0.11 0.11 Increm. delay d2 0.1 0.5 0.0 0.1 PF factor 0.815 0.815 1.000 1.000 Control delay 12.8 15.2 14.9 15.0 ~ Lane group LOS B B B B Apprch. delay 12.8 15.2 14.9 Approach LOS B B B Intersec. delay 14.4 Intersection LOS B HCS2000™ Copyright <Sd 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.le 75A"Ti34 .. Analyst JAR Intersection Grand/S8-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Hom and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/6/06 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period AM Peak Period Analysis Year Proj 80 Year EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 3 0 Lane group L R T T Volume (vph) 454 342 664 651 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eft. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasing WB Only 02 03 04 Thru Only 06 07 08 Timing G = 40.0 G= G= G= G = 42.0 G= G= G= y= 4 y= y= y= y= 4 y= y= y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 478 360 699 685 Lane group cap. 802 718 1688 2415 v/c ratio 0.60 0.50 0.41 0.28 Green ratio 0.44 0.44 0.47 0.47 Unif. delay d1 18.9 17.9 15.9 14.8 Delay factor k 0.18 0.11 0.11 0.11 Increm. delay d2 1.2 0.6 0.2 0.1 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 20.1 18.4 16.0 14.8 Lane group LOS C 8 8 8 Apprch. delay 19.4 16.0 14.8 Approach LOS 8 8 8 Intersec. delay 16.9 Intersection LOS 8 HCS2000™ Copyright ~ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e 75A"Ti35 .'~+1W%!ii , ./llll., Analyst JAR Intersection Grand/S8-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Hom and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/6/06 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period PM Peak Period Analysis Year Proj 80 Year EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 3 0 Lane group L R T T Volume (vph) 322 343 647 685 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. areen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasing WB Only 02 03 04 Thru Only 06 07 08 Timing G = 38.0 G= G= G= G = 44.0 G= G= G= Y= 4 y= Y= y= Y= 4 Y= y= Y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 339 361 681 721 Lane group cap. 762 682 1769 2530 v/c ratio 0.44 0.53 0.38 0.28 Green ratio 0.42 0.42 0.49 0.49 Unif. delay d1 18.5 19.3 14.5 13.7 Delay factor k 0.11 0.13 0.11 0.11 Increm. delay d2 0.4 0.8 0.1 0.1 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 18.9 20.1 14.6 13.7 Lane group LOS 8 C 8 8 Apprch. delay 19.5 14.6 13.7 Approach LOS 8 8 8 Intersec. delay I 16.0 Intersection LOS 8 HCS2000™ Copyright i1d 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e 75A'T136 ,I ,I Analyst JAR Intersection Dyer/Sa-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/6/06 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period AM Peak Period Analysis Year Proj ao Year EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 1 3 1 2 3 1 1 1 2 0 2 1 Lane group L T R L T R L LT R LT R Volume (voh) 80 1094 261 277 827 138 280 23 716 92 207 158 % Heavv veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (PIA) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. Qreen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival tyoe 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasing WB Only Thru & RT EB Only 04 NB Only SB Only 07 08 Timing G = 10.0 G = 24.0 G= 7.0 G= G = 28.0 G = 13.0 G= G= Y= Y= y= 4 Y= y= y= 4 y= y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 84 1152 275 292 871 145 295 24 754 315 166 Lane group cap. 140 1783 556 389 1955 610 562 591 889 515 233 v/c ratio 0.60 0.65 0.49 0.75 0.45 0.24 0.52 0.04 0.85 0.61 0.71 Green ratio 0.08 0.34 0.34 0.11 0.38 0.38 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.14 0.14 Unif. delay d1 40.1 24.9 23.3 38.8 20.9 19.1 25.5 21.6 29.0 36.1 36.7 Delay factor k 0.19 0.22 0.11 0.31 0.11 0.11 0.13 0.11 0.38 0.20 0.28 Increm. delay d2 7.0 0.8 0.7 7.9 0.2 0.2 0.9 0.0 7.8 2.1 9.8 PF factor 1.000 0.949 0.949 1.000 0.917 0.917 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 47.1 24.4 22.8 46.7 19.4 17.8 26.4 21.7 36.8 38.3 46.5 Lane group LOS 0 C C 0 a a c c 0 0 0 Apprch. delay 25.4 25.3 33.6 41.1 Approach LOS C C C 0 Intersec. delay 29.1 Intersection LOS C HCS2000™ Copyright ~ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e 75A,137 i{;~~ Analyst JAR Intersection Oyer/S8-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas nate Performed 4/6/06 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period PM Peak Period Analysis Year Proj 80 Year 11!.(1IIIIIIIIIl""'''''llr 'lIiJl'''' '! ,.L..> dlUI'...I. ..It' EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 1 3 1 2 3 1 1 1 2 0 2 1 Lane group L T R L T R L LT R LT R Volume (voh 123 1240 215 586 1125 83 214 2 185 124 424 196 % Heaw veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. oreen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasino EB Only Thru & RT WB Only 04 NB Only SB Only 07 08 Timing G= 9.0 G= 20.0 G= 16.0 G= G= 12.0 G= 15.0 G= G= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= EB WB NB 5B Adj. flow rate 129 1305 226 617 1184 87 225 2 195 577 206 Lane group cap. 203 1876 585 701 2329 727 271 285 429 671 303 v/c ratio 0.64 0.70 0.39 0.88 0.51 0.12 0.83 0.01 0.45 0.86 0.68 Green ratio 0.11 0.36 0.36 0.20 0.45 0.45 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.19 0.19 Unit. delay d1 33.9 21.7 18.9 31.1 15.7 12.8 33.0 28.9 31.0 31.5 30.3 Delay factor k 0.22 0.26 0.11 0.41 0.12 0.11 0.37 0.11 0.11 0.39 0.25 Increm. delay d2 6.4 1.1 0.4 12.5 0.2 0.1 19.1 0.0 0.8 11.0 6.1 PF factor 1.000 0.932 0.932 1.000 0.836 0.836 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 40.3 21.4 18.0 43.5 13.3 10.8 52.1 28.9 31.8 42.4 36.3 Lane group LOS 0 C 8 0 8 8 0 C C 0 0 Apprch. delay 22.4 23.1 42.6 40.8 Approach LOS C C 0 0 Intersec. delay 27.5 Intersection LOS C HCS2000™ Copyright ~ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e 7M.,.;I38 ,1...,.'St.... ...... " Analyst JAR Intersection Dyer/N8-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/6/06 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period AM Peak Period Analysis Year Proj 80 Year EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 3 0 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 Lane group T T L R Volume (vph 1718 673 744 543 % Heavv veh 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A StartuD lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eft. Qreen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 ArrivaltVDe 4 4 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 PhasinQ Thru Onlv 02 03 04 NB Onlv 06 07 08 Timing G= 41.0 G= G= G= G = 41.0 G= G= G= y= 4 y= y= Y= Y= 4 Y= y= y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 1808 708 783 572 Lane group cap. 2358 2358 1597 736 v/c ratio 0.77 0.30 0.49 0.78 Green ratio 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 Unif. delay d 1 20.5 15.5 17.2 20.6 Delay factor k 0.32 0.11 0.11 0.33 Increm. delay d2 1.6 0.1 0.2 5.3 PF factor 0.829 0.829 1.000 1.000 Control delay 18.6 12.9 17.4 25.9 Lane group LOS 8 8 8 C Apprch. delay 18.6 12.9 21.0 Approach LOS 8 8 C Intersec. delay 18.4 Intersection LOS 8 HCS2000™ Copyright Ii) 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e 76A-ri39 Analyst JAR Intersection Dyer/N8-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/6/06 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period PM Peak Period Analysis Year Proj 80 Year EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 3 0 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 Lane group T T L R Volume (vph) 894 1471 220 104 % Heavv veh 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eft. oreen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 4 4 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasino Thru Only 02 03 04 NB Onlv 06 07 08 Timing G = 42.0 G= G= G= G = 40.0 G= G= G= y= 4 y= y= y= y= 4 y= y= y= Duration of Anal sis hrs = 0.25 C cle Len th C = 90.0 EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 941 1548 232 109 Lane group cap. 2415 2415 1558 718 vlc ratio 0.39 0.64 0.15 0.15 Green ratio 0.47 0.47 0.44 0.44 Unif. delay d1 15.6 18.3 14.9 14.9 Delay factor k 0.11 0.22 0.11 0.11 Increm. delay d2 0.1 0.6 0.0 0.1 PF factor 0.815 0.815 1.000 1.000 Control delay 12.8 15.5 14.9 15.0 Lane group LOS 8 8 8 8 Apprch. delay 12.8 15.5 14.9 Approach LOS 8 8 8 Intersec. delay 14.5 Intersection LOS 8 HCS2000™ Copyright lid 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.le 75AT3140 SHORT REPORT .. .~~f$ > WAY. Analyst JAR Intersection Grand/SB-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kim/ey-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/6/06 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period AM Peak Period Analysis Year Proj 80 Year + Proj EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 3 0 Lane group L R T T Volume (vph 454 352 707 698 % Heavv veh 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (PIA) A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eft. Qreen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 PhasinQ WB Only 02 03 04 Thru Only 06 07 08 Timing G = 40.0 G= G= G= G = 42.0 G= G= G= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Anal sis hrs = 0.25 C cle Len th C = 90.0 EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 478 371 744 735 Lane group cap. 802 718 1688 2415 v/c ratio 0.60 0.52 0.44 0.30 Green ratio 0.44 0.44 0.47 0.47 Unif. delay d 1 18.9 18.0 16.1 14.9 Delay factor k 0.18 0.12 0.11 0.11 Increm. delay d2 1.2 0.7 0.2 0.1 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 20.1 18.7 16.3 15.0 Lane group LOS C 8 8 8 Apprch. delay 19.5 16.3 15.0 Approach LOS 8 8 8 Intersec. delay 17.0 Intersection LOS 8 HCS2000™ Copyright @ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.le 7Mi3141 SHORT REPORT ~'" :;-: .:.<' :::__ , , W ,.-1,_,'. > ":'_, __ .,: /,' ;' : ' ~l(.._I. . Analyst JAR Intersection Grand/Sa-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/6/06 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period PM Peak Period Analysis Year proj ao Year + proj EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 3 0 Lane group L R T T Volume (vph) 322 349 674 708 % Heavv veh 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. Qreen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival tvpe 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 PhasinQ WB Only 02 03 04 Thru Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 38.0 G= G= G= G = 44.0 G= G= G= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 339 367 709 745 Lane group cap. 762 682 1769 2530 v/c ratio 0.44 0.54 0.40 0.29 Green ratio 0.42 0.42 0.49 0.49 Unif. delay d 1 18.5 19.4 14.6 13.7 Delay factor k 0.11 0.14 0.11 0.11 Increm. delay d2 0.4 0.9 0.1 0.1 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 18.9 20.3 14.8 13.8 Lane group LOS B C B B Apprch. delay 19.6 14.8 13.8 Approach LOS a a a Intersec. delay 16.0 Intersection LOS B HCS2000™ Copyright <1:! 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e 75A'I"3142 SHORT REPORT Analyst JAR Intersection Dyer/Sa-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/6/06 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period AM Peak Period Analysis Year Proj ao Year + proj EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 1 3 1 2 3 1 1 1 2 0 2 1 Lane group L T R L T R L LT R LT R Volume (vph) 80 1113 261 281 844 138 280 23 716 92 207 158 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. Qreen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 PhasinQ WB Only Thru & RT EB Only 04 NB Only SB Only 07 08 Timing G = 10.0 G = 24.0 G= 7.0 G= G = 28.0 G = 13.0 G= G= y= y= y= 4 y= y= y= 4 y= y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 84 1172 275 296 888 145 295 24 754 315 166 Lane group cap. 140 1783 556 389 1955 610 562 591 889 515 233 v/c ratio 0.60 0.66 0.49 0.76 0.45 0.24 0.52 0.04 0.85 0.61 0.71 Green ratio 0.08 0.34 0.34 0.11 0.38 0.38 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.14 0.14 Unif. delay d1 40.1 25.0 23.3 38.8 21.0 19.1 25.5 21.6 29.0 36.1 36.7 Delay factor k 0.19 0.23 0.11 0.31 0.11 0.11 0.13 0.11 0.38 0.20 0.28 Increm. delay d2 7.0 0.9 0.7 8.6 0.2 0.2 0.9 0.0 7.8 2.1 9.8 PF factor 1.000 0.949 0.949 1.000 0.917 0.917 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 47.1 24.6 22.8 47.4 19.5 17.8 26.4 21.7 36.8 38.3 46.5 Lane group LOS 0 C C 0 a a C C 0 0 0 Apprch. delay 25.5 25.5 33.6 41.1 Approach LOS C C C 0 Intersec. delay 29.2 Intersection LOS C HCS2000™ Copyright @ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e 75A'Ti43 Analyst JAR Intersection Dyer/SB-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/6/06 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period PM Peak Period Analysis Year Proj BO Year + Proj EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 1 3 1 2 3 1 1 1 2 0 2 1 Lane group L T R L T R L LT R LT R Volume (vph) 123 1252 215 588 1133 83 214 2 185 124 424 196 % Heavv veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eft. Qreen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 PhasinQ EB Only Thru & RT WB Only 04 NB Only SB Only 07 08 Timing G = 9.0 G = 20.0 G = 16.0 G= G = 12.0 G = 15.0 G= G= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 129 1318 226 619 1193 87 225 2 195 577 206 Lane group cap. 203 1876 585 701 2329 727 271 285 429 671 303 vlc ratio 0.64 0.70 0.39 0.88 0.51 0.12 0.83 0.01 0.45 0.86 0.68 Green ratio 0.11 0.36 0.36 0.20 0.45 0.45 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.19 0.19 Unif. delay d 1 33.9 21.8 18.9 31.1 15.7 12.8 33.0 28.9 31.0 31.5 30.3 Delay factor k 0.22 0.27 0.11 0.41 0.12 0.11 0.37 0.11 0.11 0.39 0.25 Increm. delay d2 6.4 1.2 0.4 12.8 0.2 0.1 19.1 0.0 0.8 11.0 6.1 PF factor 1.000 0.932 0.932 1.000 0.836 0.836 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 40.3 21.5 18.0 43.8 13.3 10.8 52.1 28.9 31.8 42.4 36.3 Lane group LOS D C B D B B D C C 0 0 Apprch. delay 22.5 23.2 42.6 40.8 Approach LOS C C D D Intersec. delay 27.6 Intersection LOS C HCS2000™ Copyright <<) 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.le 75A'Ti44 Analyst JAR Intersection Dyer/NB-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kim/ey-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/6/06 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period AM Peak Period Analysis Year Proj BO Year + Proj EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 3 0 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 Lane group T T L R Volume (vph) 1735 692 749 543 % Heavv veh 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (PIA) A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eft. creen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival tvoe 4 4 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasinc Thru Only 02 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G - 41.0 G- G= G= G = 41.0 G= G= G= y= 4 y= y= y= y= 4 y= y= y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 1826 728 788 572 Lane group cap. 2358 2358 1597 736 vIe ratio 0.77 0.31 0.49 0.78 Green ratio 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 Unif. delay d 1 20.6 15.5 17.2 20.6 Delay factor k 0.32 0.11 0.11 0.33 Increm. delay d2 1.7 0.1 0.2 5.3 PF factor 0.829 0.829 1.000 1.000 Control delay 18.8 12.9 17.4 25.9 Lane group LOS B B B C Apprch. delay 18.8 12.9 21.0 Approach LOS B B C Intersec. delay 18.5 Intersection LOS B HCS2000™ Copyright IQ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e 75A'Ti45 ~- "':I ~:.I' Analyst JAR Intersection Dyer/N8-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/6106 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period PM Peak Period Analysis Year Proj 80 Year + Proj EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 3 0 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 Lane group T T L R Volume (vph) 902 1483 223 104 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eft. Qreen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 4 4 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 PhasinQ Thru Only 02 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G = 42.0 G= G= G= G = 40.0 G= G= G= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= . Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 949 1561 235 109 Lane group cap. 2415 2415 1558 718 v/c ratio 0.39 0.65 0.15 0.15 Green ratio 0.47 0.47 0.44 0.44 Unif. delay d 1 15.7 18.3 14.9 14.9 Delay factor k 0.11 0.22 0.11 0.11 Increm. delay d2 0.1 0.6 0.0 0.1 PF factor 0.815 0.815 1.000 1.000 Control delay 12.9 15.5 14.9 15.0 Lane group LOS 8 8 8 8 Apprch. delay 12.9 15.5 15.0 Approach LOS 8 8 8 Intersec. delay 14.6 Intersection LOS 8 HCS2000™ Copyright (Q 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 e 76A-ra46 Analyst JAR Intersection Grand/S8-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 7(1/2004 Jurisdiction Cay of Santa Ana Time Period AM Peak Period Analysis Year Gen Plan 80 EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 3 0 Lane group L R T T Volume (vph 461 276 574 689 % Heaw veh 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. Qreen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 PhasinQ WB Only 02 03 04 Thru Only 06 07 08 Timing G = 40.0 G= G= G= G = 42.0 G= G= G= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 485 291 604 725 Lane group cap. 802 718 1688 2415 v/c ratio 0.60 0.41 0.36 0.30 Green ratio 0.44 0.44 0.47 0.47 Unif. delay d1 19.0 16.9 15.4 14.9 Delay factor k 0.19 0.11 0.11 0.11 Increm. delay d2 1.3 0.4 0.1 0.1 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 20.3 17.3 15.5 15.0 Lane group LOS C 8 8 8 Apprch. delay 19.2 15.5 15.0 Approach LOS 8 8 8 Intersec. delay 16.7 Intersection LOS 8 HCS2000™ Copyright @ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Versiol) 4.le 75A~147 Analyst JAR Intersection Grand/S8-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 7/7/2004 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period PM Peak Period Analysis Year Gen Plan 80 EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 3 0 Lane group L R T T Volume (voh) 301 309 560 700 % Heavv veh 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A Startuo lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eft. areen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasina WB Only 02 03 04 Thru Onlv 06 07 08 Timing G = 38.0 G= G= G= G = 44.0 G= G= G= y= 4 y= y= y= y = 4 y= y= y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 317 325 589 737 Lane group cap. 762 682 1769 2530 v/c ratio 0.42 0.48 0.33 0.29 Green ratio 0.42 0.42 0.49 0.49 Unif. delay d 1 18.2 18.8 14.0 13.7 Delay factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Increm. delay d2 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.1 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 18.6 19.3 14.2 13.8 Lane group LOS 8 8 8 8 Apprch. delay 19.0 14.2 13.8 Approach LOS 8 8 8 Intersec. delay 15.6 Intersection LOS 8 HCS2000™ Copyright <<::J 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.le 7iAT'3148 Analyst JAR Intersection Dyer/Sa-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Hom and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 7 f1 /2004 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period AM Peak Period Analysis Year Gen Plan ao EB WB NB SB . LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 1 3 1 2 3 1 1 1 2 0 2 1 Lane group L T R L T R L LT R LT R Volume (voh) 106 1004 345 298 647 137 284 27 689 67 217 120 % Heavv veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startuo lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eft. areen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival tvoe 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasina WB Only Thru & RT EB On Iv 04 NB Onlv SB Only 07 08 Timing G = 10.0 G = 24.0 G = 7.0 G= G = 28.0 G = 13.0 G= G= y= y= y= 4 y= y= y= 4 y= y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 112 1057 363 314 681 144 299 28 725 299 126 Lane group cap. 140 1783 556 389 1955 610 562 591 889 516 233 v/c ratio 0.80 0.59 0.65 0.81 0.35 0.24 0.53 0.05 0.82 0.58 0.54 Green ratio 0.08 0.34 0.34 0.11 0.38 0.38 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.14 0.14 Unif. delay d 1 40.8 24.3 24.9 39.1 20.1 19.1 25.6 21.7 28.6 35.9 35.7 Delay factor k 0.34 0.18 0.23 0.35 0.11 0.11 0.13 0.11 0.36 0.17 0.14 Increm. delay d2 27.2 0.5 2.7 11.9 0.1 0.2 1.0 0.0 5.9 1.6 2.5 PF factor 1.000 0.949 0.949 1.000 0.917 0.917 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 68.0 23.6 26.4 51.0 18.5 17.7 26.6 21.7 34.6 37.6 38.3 Lane group LOS E C C 0 a a c c c 0 0 Apprch. delay 27.5 27.4 32.0 37.8 Approach LOS C C C 0 Intersec. delay 29.6 Intersection LOS C HCS2000™ Copyright <D 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e 7&AT'3149 Yi:~Y::i.: Analyst JAR Intersection Oyer/S8-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 7/7/2004 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period PM Peak Period Analysis Year Gen Plan 80 EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 1 3 1 2 3 1 1 1 2 0 2 1 Lane group L T R L T R L LT R LT R Volume (vph) 94 1050 191 639 1241 77 220 9 179 102 360 170 % Heaw veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eft. oreen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasino EB Only Thru & RT WB Only 04 NB Only SB Only 07 08 Timing G = 9.0 G = 20.0 G = 16.0 G= G = 12.0 G = 15.0 G= G= y= y= y= 4 y= y= y= 4 y= y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 99 1105 201 673 1306 81 232 9 188 486 179 Lane group cap. 203 1876 585 701 2329 727 271 285 429 671 303 v/c ratio 0.49 0.59 0.34 0.96 0.56 0.11 0.86 0.03 0.44 0.72 0.59 Green ratio 0.11 0.36 0.36 0.20 0.45 0.45 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.19 0.19 Unif. delay d1 33.3 20.7 18.6 31.7 16.2 12.7 33.2 29.0 30.9 30.6 29.7 Delay factor k 0.11 0.18 0.11 0.47 0.16 0.11 0.39 0.11 0.11 0.28 0.18 Increm. delay d2 1.8 0.5 0.4 24.5 0.3 0.1 22.7 0.0 0.7 3.9 3.1 PF factor 1.000 0.932 0.932 1.000 0.836 0.836 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 35.2 19.8 17.7 56.2 13.8 10.7 55.8 29.1 31.7 34.4 32.7 Lane group LOS 0 8 8 E 8 8 E C C C C Apprch. delay 20.5 27.6 44.7 34.0 Approach LOS C C 0 C Intersec. delay 27.9 Intersection LOS C HCS2000™ Copyright i!J 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.le 7iA~150 IIIW;. .....11 ,. Analyst JAR Intersection Dyer/N8-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 7/7/2004 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period AM Peak Period Analysis Year Gen Plan 80 EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 3 0 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 Lane group T T L R Volume (voh) 1935 611 658 542 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eft. Qreen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 4 4 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasinq Thru Only 02 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G = 41.0 G= G= G= G = 41.0 G= G= G= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 2037 643 693 571 Lane group cap. 2358 2358 1597 736 v/c ratio 0.86 0.27 0.43 0.78 Green ratio 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 Unif. delay d1 22.0 15.2 16.6 20.6 Delay factor k 0.39 0.11 0.11 0.33 Increm. delay d2 3.6 0.1 0.2 5.2 PF factor 0.829 0.829 1.000 1.000 Control delay 21.8 12.7 16.8 25.9 Lane group LOS C B 8 C Apprch. delay 21.8 12.7 20.9 Approach LOS C 8 C Intersec. delay 20.0 Intersection LOS C HCS2000™ Copyright <<:> 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4, Ie 75A'I"3151 ~TRE~9~L~ .'1111111IIII.1..., Analyst JAR Intersection Dyer/N8-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 7/7/2004 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period PM Peak Period Analysis Year Gen Plan 80 EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 3 0 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 Lane group T T L R Volume (vph) 835 1650 166 136 % Heavv veh 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (PIA) A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eft. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 4 4 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasing Thru Only 02 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G = 42.0 G= G= G= G = 40.0 G= G= G= y= 4 y= y= y= y= 4 y= y= y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 879 1737 175 143 Lane group cap. 2415 2415 1558 718 v/c ratio 0.36 0.72 0.11 0.20 Green ratio 0.47 0.47 0.44 0.44 Unif. delay d 1 15.4 19.3 14.6 15.2 Delay factor k 0.11 0.28 0.11 0.11 Increm. delay d2 0.1 1.1 0.0 0.1 PF factor 0.815 0.815 1.000 1.000 Control delay 12.7 16.8 14.7 15.4 Lane group LOS 8 8 8 8 Apprch. delay 12.7 16.8 15.0 Approach LOS 8 8 8 Intersec. delay 15.3 Intersection LOS 8 HCS2000™ Copyright @ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.le 75AT3152 Analyst JAR Intersection Grand/Sa-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/6/06 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period AM Peak Period Analysis Year Gen Plan ao + Proj ,= ,'.0 EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 3 0 Lane group L R T T Volume (voh) 461 286 617 736 % Heavv veh 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eft. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasing WB Only 02 03 04 Thru Only 06 07 08 Timing G = 40.0 G= G= G= G = 42.0 G= G= G= y= 4 y= y= y= y= 4 y=" y= y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 485 301 649 775 Lane group cap. 802 718 1688 2415 v/c ratio 0.60 0.42 0.38 0.32 Green ratio 0.44 0.44 0.47 0.47 Unif. delay d1 19.0 17.1 15.6 15.1 Delay factor k 0.19 0.11 0.11 0.11 Increm. delay d2 1.3 0.4 0.1 0.1 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 20.3 17.5 15.7 15.1 Lane group LOS C a a a Apprch. delay 19.2 15.7 15.1 Approach LOS a a B Intersec. delay 16.8 Intersection LOS a HCS2000™ Copyright @ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 e ~ 75A~453 Analyst JAR Intersection Grand/Sa-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/6/06 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period PM Peak Period Analysis Year Gen Plan ao + Proj EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 3 0 Lane group L R T T Volume (Vph) 301 315 587 723 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A Startuo lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eft. areen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival tvoe 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasina WB Only 02 03 04 Thru On Iv 06 07 08 Timing G = 38.0 G= G= G= G = 44.0 G= G= G= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 317 332 618 761 Lane group cap. 762 682 1769 2530 v/c ratio 0.42 0.49 0.35 0.30 Green ratio 0.42 0.42 0.49 0.49 Unif. delay d 1 18.2 18.9 14.2 13.8 Delay factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Increm. delay d2 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.1 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 18.6 19.5 14.3 13.8 Lane group LOS a a a a Apprch. delay 19.0 14.3 13.8 Approach LOS a a a Intersec. delay 15.6 Intersection LOS a HCS2000™ Copyright@ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.le 715A~~ 54 _....*.~ Analyst JAR Intersection Dyer/SB-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/6/06 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period AM Peak Period Analysis Year Gen Plan BO + proj EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 1 3 1 2 3 1 1 1 2 0 2 1 Lane group L T R L T R L LT R LT R Volume (vph) 106 1023 345 302 664 137 284 27 689 67 217 120 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eft. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasing WB Only Thru & RT EB Only 04 NB Only SB Only 07 08 Timing G = 10.0 G = 24.0 G = 7.0 G= G = 28.0 G = 13.0 G= G= y= y= y= 4 y= y= y= 4 y= y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 112 1077 363 318 699 144 299 28 725 299 126 Lane group cap. 140 1783 556 389 1955 610 562 591 889 516 233 v/c ratio 0.80 0.60 0.65 0.82 0.36 0.24 0.53 0.05 0.82 0.58 0.54 Green ratio 0.08 0.34 0.34 0.11 0.38 0.38 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.14 0.14 Unif. delay d 1 40.8 24.4 24.9 39.1 20.1 19.1 25.6 21.7 28.6 35.9 35.7 Delay factor k 0.34 0.19 0.23 0.36 0.11 0.11 0.13 0.11 0.36 0.17 0.14 Increm. delay d2 27.2 0.6 2.7 12.8 0.1 0.2 1.0 0.0 5.9 1.6 2.5 PF factor 1.000 0.949 0.949 1.000 0.917 0.917 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 68.0 23.8 26.4 51.9 18.6 17.7 26.6 21.7 34.6 37.6 38.3 Lane group LOS E C C 0 B B C C C 0 0 Apprch. delay 27.6 27.6 32.0 37.8 Approach LOS C C C 0 Intersec. delay 29.7 Intersection LOS C HCS2000™ Copyright@ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.le 75A,-s155 H~~TI ~~PORT .'Mill!ii'//i'!iL )II Analyst JAR Intersection Dyer/SB-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/6/06 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period PM Peak Period Analysis Year Gen Plan BO + Proj EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 1 3 1 2 3 1 1 1 2 0 2 1 Lane group L T R L T R L LT R LT R Volume (vph) 94 1062 191 641 1249 77 220 9 179 102 360 170 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startuo lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eft. areen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasina EB Only Thru & RT WB On Iv 04 NB Only SB Onlv 07 08 Timing G = 9.0 G = 20.0 G = 16.0 G= G = 12.0 G = 15.0 G= G= y= Y= y= 4 y= y= Y= 4 y= Y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 99 1118 201 675 1315 81 232 9 188 486 179 Lane group cap. 203 1876 585 701 2329 727 271 285 429 671 303 v/c ratio 0.49 0.60 0.34 0.96 0.56 0.11 0.86 0.03 0.44 0.72 0.59 Green ratio 0.11 0.36 0.36 0.20 0.45 0.45 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.19 0.19 Unif. delay d1 33.3 20.7 18.6 31.7 16.2 12.7 33.2 29.0 30.9 30.6 29.7 Delay factor k 0.11 0.18 0.11 0.47 0.16 0.11 0.39 0.11 0.11 0.28 0.18 Increm. delay d2 1.8 0.5 0.4 25.1 0.3 0.1 22.7 0.0 0.7 3.9 3.1 PF factor 1.000 0.932 0.932 1.000 0.836 0.836 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 35.2 19.8 17.7 56.8 13.9 10.7 55.8 29.1 31.7 34.4 32.7 Lane group LOS 0 B B E B B E C C C C Apprch. delay 20.6 27.7 44.7 34.0 Approach LOS C C 0 C Intersec. delay 28.0 Intersection LOS C HCS2000™ Copyright @ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e 7 0A,-s156 SHORT REPORT Iln",rlifJll{i,";*,*flll''''i . IrQ\" " L J~,.",~".J'il . ..J Analyst JAR Intersection Dyer/NB-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/6/06 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period AM Peak Period Analysis Year Gen Plan BO + Proj EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 3 0 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 Lane group T T L R Volume (voh) 1944 630 663 542 % HeaVY veh 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eft. Qreen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival tyoe 4 4 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasing Thru Only 02 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 41.0 G= G= G= G= 41.0 G= G= G= Y= 4 Y= y= y= y= 4 y= Y= y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 2046 663 698 571 Lane group cap. 2358 2358 1597 736 v/c ratio 0.87 0.28 0.44 0.78 Green ratio 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 Unif. delay d1 22.1 15.3 16.7 20.6 Delay factor k 0.40 0.11 0.11 0.33 Increm. delay d2 3.7 0.1 0.2 5.2 PF factor 0.829 0.829 1.000 1.000 Control delay 22.0 12.8 16.8 25.9 Lane group LOS C B B C Apprch. delay 22.0 12.8 20.9 Approach LOS C B C Intersec. delay 20.1 Intersection LOS C HCS2000™ Copyright @ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 e 75A1'6157 ~...~ Analyst JAR Intersection Dyer/NB-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/6/06 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period PM Peak Period Analysis Year Gen Plan BO + proj EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 3 0 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 Lane group T T L R Volume (vph) 839 1662 169 136 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A Startuo lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eft. areen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 4 4 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasing Thru Only 02 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G = 42.0 G= G= G= G = 40.0 G= G= G= y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Y= 4 y= Y= Y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 883 1749 178 143 Lane group cap. 2415 2415 1558 718 v/c ratio 0.37 0.72 0.11 0.20 Green ratio 0.47 0.47 0.44 0.44 Unif. delay d1 15.4 19.3 14.6 15.2 Delay factor k 0.11 0.28 0.11 0.11 Increm. delay d2 0.1 1.1 0.0 0.1 PF factor 0.815 0.815 1.000 1.000 Control delay 12.7 16.9 14.7 15.4 Lane group LOS B B B B Apprch. delay 12.7 16.9 15.0 Approach LOS B B B Intersec. delay 15.4 Intersection LOS B HCS2000™ Copyright @ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 e 75AT3158 APPENDIX C SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS 75A,-s159 .-.. 1(') = = N =- .~ .... :0 roiil '0 g~ 00 y-< t;1 ~~ > ....:lroiil ....:l -<Q -< ;;JC ~ ZZ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ Q -<~ ~ ~roiil -< ~~ ~ -<~ =0 oo~ - ....:l ;;J roiil = E-< ~ roiil ~ ~ I.L. IJ... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o oo-M 0\00- - M 00 v) \.0 \0 .... .c bIl ;Z ... Q .... .. .. r... .. :;; u.l -i :. U ~ ~. ti: ..... c "'" u.l c 0 ~ , ;: ~ o ....l 0 -< 0 ;:J .... 0' .... b b '" '" ~ ~ 00 <t; ;,; E "" 0 " 0 (/) ~ ~ ~ :J ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ggOM ~O 9:: -0 ,!:J ::l o -i :c u.l .~ b z ::z:: o -i "" <: u I'-< g 0 Z I'-< -i I(') <:M U I'-< M u.l e 0 >"",000000 8~:; 55:; , (/) ~ <...< 000000 cB)o ~~~ u8~o --- <5 ::z:: "",000000 ~~:; 555~ ~ ~ Q ~ <: ~ ;.. =- <: r... Q o r... ~ 0 " cz: <: ;;J I'-< 0 ~ ::z:: u ;.. ~ lXl =- ;.. 0( ~ ~ ~ ~ E ::E o 0 ~ iil 0000t--0 565 ~a~::;~~~~~ ]l..L.~Sooooo ,,0(/)00 \O~~~ e~~\.Ci --- ::l .is '" " ~ &"'" '" (/) 6~ o;;S('i")OOO M \O~O\~ ~ -0- 00 I(') '0; "'" 9:: ~ ~ .n .. .. : 0 ~:siB;;J ~ ~ r:. 0 .. 0 Q C ::z:: ~ .. u \0000 M565 000000 ~~~ V OMOOOO ~l..L.g ::::5:: <5 ~ 0 ~ u ~ .., o cz: =- " ~ ~ ~ ;g i: =- Q L: Z ~ Q z.....o(l'-<O' j~g~~ .. .s .. ... .s '" ... r... .. ~ "0 .s r... .. ... .. .. '" u ~ ~ ~ c c; ~ ~ g ~ "0 ~ ~ ~ ~ o M Q Z 0( ~ ~ ;.. Q 0( " Q Z r... ~ 0 0( cz: =- g Q ::z:: ~ ;.. tJ lXl ~ .., o cz: =- ~OO~~-OM~O~~~~M~OOM_~ ~ -N~S~~~OOOOS~~~~~-~ <5 I'-< >0000000000000000000 c o U <...< c o <i U <5 ::z:: 0000000000000000000 ",0000000000000000000 " ~ EooooooOOOOOOOOOOOOO o o ~ ~.g ;z:O OOOOOOOOOOOOI(')OvO\O\O\~ -M V V') l.r)l(')V) gM~~~~~~~~~~;~~~~~~M "'" "'" " '" .... ::l ~ .f2 ~ ';;j ::l CI OOOOooMMMt--MooMVt--t--t--VMV NVVMNNvt.r)V')V)l.I1l.r)V_ .;O-VOO~~~~~~~~~~~~~NO OJ ~ 00000000000000000000 :siB ~ g c 80000000000000000000 S o >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~o cooooooooooooooooooo 8 l.I')~SS~SS3SSv)MM- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ cOOOOOOl(')l(')l(')l(')l(')OOOOOOoo o <""l\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\OOOOOOI(') ~u ----- <5 ::z:: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "'OOOOOI(')OOMOOOI(')OOt--ooo ~ -M-- SSM--MV)~~~~VM ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ El(')l(')ooool(')l(')OOI(')Ol(')l(')Ol(')l(')OO g~~~oo~~~~~~~oooooo~~~ss ~ ~.g ;z:u ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 0000000000001(')01(')0000 MI(')t--OOOO - - -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~l.I1S~g~~gg~~~~~~~g~Sl.l') "'" -- " '" .... ::l ~~ ~ '" ::l CI ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 00001(')01(')1(')1(')001(')1(')0001(')1(')1(') -vt--t--\OVI(')t--O\OOOO\t--M - -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~-~~~~~~g~~~~~~~~~~o ~ - o~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~001(')01(')01(')0001(')1(')0t--000\000 ~u~~oooo~~~~~~~oo~~~~~~~ " C ~ 0 c u~~~~~~~~~*~~~~~~~~~ o~o~~ooooOOOO~O~M_OO S M~O'\SS~O\SSO'\~N- o ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ;.. -<:-<:-<:-<:............~~~~~~=-~~-- ~~gggg~~~ggggggggg~~~ ~ ~~OO~S=~-N~~~~~OO~~=~ 75A~160 ~ ~ o o c=-: E-< -<: ?J?- 00 <'l ..., I(') <'l \0 M \0 .... M II II II ~ QQ~ zz~ -<:-<:~ ~~-<: ~u.l~ QQQ OO~ ~~-<: ~~::c ~~CZ1 -<:-<:0 ~~E-< ~~u.l -<:-<:::J u.lu.lQ ~~E-< QQz u.lu.lu.l E-<E-<~ UCZlE-< ~~CZ1 OQ~ ~-<:Q ~5-<: o ~ ~ ~ -<: ~ \0 '7' .... 0- 1 M -<: '" ";( I'i .g :0 u.l "1:l !::: M bl) !::: :r;;: a ~ "1:l '" a ..<:: CZI ~ -<: M \Ci o o M N ~ 00 - 00 > ....:l -< Z -< C Z ~ -< ~ Q ~ = 00 ....:l -< ;;JQ Zz -<-< ~~ Croiil ZQ ~~ ~~ Q-< ~~ -<Q =z oo~ -roiil ....:lroiil ~~ =~ E-<O ~~ roiil ~ .Cl " o ~ z ... o 4: .. r.. .. .. .. .~ Ul ....l ~ ~ ~ Q ~ Ul ~OP:: ~ ~ ~ c.x.. rJ:l Cf.) CI:l 00 :.: :.: :.: :.: 00 - M 00\00_ O_NOO ;";--0--0 ;S ~ o ~ Z I<l U Vl > ~ C CZl 8 ::<: Q ....l 0 <( 0 :J ..... 0' ..... ~ ~ en en ~ ~ ....l Vl ~~ 8 00 o .0 00 .0 Vi ~ 'OJ 0 ., 0 CZl p:: ~ ~ en V) :.: :><: 00 00 ~o -.0 :J ~ Q :.: ON 0\ - .0 N p:: ~ ....l Q ....l ..:: Ul CO ..:: Ulr-Ur- :I: 0 <: 0 r-:I:: gr- CZl Ul r:>:: 0000 ~Vl~ -00 ,,",~gooooo 8~.o ::::6 .. (5 :I: ~~gooooo ~~.o ::::6~ ~ I<l Q ~ < I<l ;.. '" < r... Q o r... I<l 0 '0 9 c:r:: g "" ;:;, c ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ I<l :I: f3 U ;.. "'.€ ---~=~~ '" CI Q Z ~ I<l I<l ~ E ::E o 0 o 0 r:>:: r:>:: 000000 ~~'" - - 0 ~~u"?3~~~~~~ z.,:&.j ............- -g~~~OOOMO C OCZlOO \O~O\~ e~~\O -0- " f3 '" ., r:>:: .€ ~ ~ '" CZl &::<:--0 :::MOOO \O~~~ ooVl\OOOO .~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ J1~"; --- .. .. ~ 0 ~CZlEl::J ~gjco .. 0 o c :I: ~ .. u 000000 :=ci5 o OMOOOO ~~g 565 <5 ~ .0 ?: u I<l .., o c:r:: '" " ~ ~ ~ ~ E: '" Q L: Z ~ Q Z'"""<r-O j~g~~ .. $ .. u B .. u r... .. ca '0 .s r... c u ~~~ ~ ~ C> ; "0 ~ ~~~ '" (5 r- MOOlrlr----OOO\O-- -N~OO-N NooO\oo"f'N\O\OVlN O\ooO\~;::~~:!~~ >0000000000000000000 c o U ~ooooooooooooooooooo o OJ U (5 :I: ... '" ., p:: 0000000000000000000 Q ~ ~ I<l ;.. Q < " Q Z r.. g 0 c:r:: c:r:: < ;:;, '" 0 Q :I:: I<l ;.. c t; = ~ e; ~ .€ o 2 '" c:r:: ... '" '" CI EooooooooOOOOOOOOOOO o o r:>:: 000000000000t-"f'- - ("<) Vl 00 00 00 00 \0 \0 \0 \0 ~.g zu ]M\OMo\l.r)~MM~OOl.r)OO~-NO\M\OM o --Ml.r)\O\Ol()MM("f")l.I')\(')M-_ ~ ~ 000000\ -l.I')OOOOOOOOt'-OMr-r-r-- ("<)("<)NNNMVl\O\OVlVlVlM "; 0 ...... M 00 ~ s:: J1 -M\O\OV)M-O\r-MO\VO NNNNNNN--- 00000000000000000000 -d co '0; U ., C p:: 0 c U Ul o 80000000000000000000 IE o ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~b~I~11 8 l.I')33S33~S~SV'lMM- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ cOOOOOOVlVlVlVlVlOOOOOOoo o M\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\OOOOOOVl vU ----- (5 :I: ... '" 0) p:: ~~~~~~*~~~~~~~~~~~~ OOOOOVlOOMOOOVlOOt-OOO -M-- OOM--Ml.I')\Or-\O\O-M ~~~*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ EVlVlOOOOVlV>OOVlOVlVlOVlVlOO gO\O\O\oor-r-\O\Or-r-r-ooooooO\O\O\ss r:>:: ~.g Zu ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ oooooOOOOOOOVlOVlOOOO NVlt-OOOO .................. ...... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ VlOOOVlVlOOOOVlOVlOOOOOVl -NMl.I')OOOOO\\OV'l~OOOO~MN_ - - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ OOOOOVlOVlVlVlVlOOVlOOOOO -VlVl "f'''f' "f'\O 0\0\ 0 0\ 0\ O\Vl - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .;-~ooo~oooo~o~~~o~~o ~ -~~~OO~SS~~OO~~~~- o~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -dCOOOVlOVlOVlOOOVlVlOt-ooO\ooo .~u~~OOOO~~~~~~~OO~~~~~~S ., c r:>:: 0 c ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~oooooooooooo~oooooo S N\OOOO\SO\OO~VN- o ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ...-<-<-<-<...............p..p..p..p..p..p..p..p..p..--- ~~gggg~~~ggggggggg~~~ ~ ~~OO~S=~~N~~~~~OO~~-~ 75A...~61 ~ p.. o '? t- -< en >1 ci .g :.a ~ ~ !::: N co !::: :.;;; a p.. ~ <U a ..<:: (/J E-< -< '$. t- N .". Vl \ON \0 .... N " " " ~ OOl=: ZZ:::.G -<-<~ ~~-< ~~p.. 000 OO~ 2525-< ~~~ -<-<0 p..p..E-< :::.G:::.G~ -<-<::> ~~O p..p..E-< OOz ~~~ E-<E-<~ ~~ti OO~ ~-<O p..S-< o 25 ~ -< p.. \0 <;> .. 0. -< N ~ -< N --0 o o !:::l N ~ AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION FOR ORANGE COUNTY 3160 Airway Avenue · Costa Mesa, California 92626 · 949.252.5170 fax: 949.252.6012 May 17,2006 -. -C-iVr::::~"'), R.oc. \t:. !i;.V MAY 2 2 2006 Bill Apple, Associate Planner City of Santa Anal Planning & Building Services 20 Civic Center Plaza (M-20) P.O. Box 1988 Santa Ana, Ca 92707 S,\NTA ,\NA PLANNING DEPT Subject: Crazy Horse Square Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration ER 2004-109 Dear Mr. Apple: Thank you for the opportunity to review Initial Study ER 2004-109 for the Crazy Horse Square Project in the context ofthe Commission's Airport Environs Land Use Planfor John Wayne Airport (JWA AELUP) and the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for Heliports. We wish to offer the following comments. The project description should include the proposed project height above mean sea level (AMSL). It is also suggested that a reference to the building height (AMSL) be included in Section VII.D. Hazards/Hazardous Materials, and Section XV.C. Transportation/Traffic. With regards to noise impacts, the initial study discusses the project's location in Noise Impact Zone 2 and states that, "The project is subject to Uniform Building Code requirements which would include California Noise Insulation Standards to achieve appropriate interior noise levels for the mix of land uses proposed for the project." Please identify what the interior noise level standard would be. If the development of Heliports/Helistops will be permitted at this project site, the initial study should address compliance with the AELUP for Heliports by incorporating the following language into the document: "The City will ensure that each applicant, seeking a Conditional Use Permit or similar approval for the construction or operation of a heliport or helistop, complies fully with the state permit procedure provided by law and with all conditions of approval imposed or recommended by the F ederal Aviation Administration (FAA), by the Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County (ALUC) and by Caltrans/Division of Aeronautics. This requirement shall be in addition to all other City development requirements." EXHIBIT B 75A-162 A referral by the City to the ALUC is required for this project due to the location of the proposal within an AELUP Planning Area and due to the nature of the required City approvals (i.e. zoning amendment) under PUC Section 21676(b). In this regard, please note that the Commission wants such referrals to be submitted and agendized by the ALUC staff between the Local Agency's expected Planning Commission and City Council hearings. Since the ALUC meets on the third Thursday afternoon of each month, submittals must be received in the ALUC office by the first ofthe month to ensure sufficient time for review, analysis, and agendizing. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this initial study. Please contact me at (949) 252-5170 or at krigoni@ocair.com if you need any additional details or information regarding the future referral of your project. ~~, Kari A. Rigoni Executive Officer 75A-163 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FOR CRAZY HORSE SQUARE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ER-2004-109 FROM AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION 1. The project description should include the proposed project height above mean sea level (AMSL). It is also suggested that a reference to building height (AMSL) be included in Section VII.D. Hazardlhazardous Materials, and Section XV.C. Transportation! Traffic. RESPONSE So noted. All future references to height will be made in above mean sea level (AMSL) as well as in feet and inches. The project is 28 feet tall at its highest point. The above mean sea level elevation is 62 feet, calculated using NA VD 88 datum. 2. With regards to noise impacts, the initial study discusses the project's location in Noise Impact Zone 2 and states "The project is subject to Uniform Building Code requirements which would include California Noise Insulation Standards to achieve appropriate interior noise levels for the mix of land uses proposed for the project. Please identify what the interior noise level standard would be. RESPONSE The Crazy Horse Square Project is located in Noise Impact Zone 2 (60 dB CNEL or greater, less than 65 dB CNEL). The City of Santa Ana uses the California Building Code, 2001 edition when plan checking building projects. According to the Building Department's Senior Plan Check Engineer, the Cities noise ordinance applies to residential development and the City has not adopted interior noise standards for commercial projects. Generally, a 15 dB to 20 dB drop down in decibel level is achieved between exterior and interior noise levels using conventional construction methods, so it is likely that the interior noise levels of the proposed retail and restaurant buildings will achieve the 45 dB level. The three structures will be constructed in accordance with normal City codes and standards and conventional construction methods as dictated by the California Building Code, 2001 edition. 3. If the development of HeliportslHelistops will be permitted at this project site, the initial study should address compliance with the AELUP for Heliports incorporating the following language into the document. "The City will ensure that each applicant, seeking a Conditional Use Permit or similar approval for the construction or operation of a heliport or helistop, complies fully with the state permit procedure provided by law and with all conditions of approval imposed or recommended by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), by the Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County (ALUC) and by 1 75A-164 Response to Comments Airport Land Use Commission Page 2 of2 CaltranslDivision of Aeronautics. This requirement shall be in addition to all other City development requirements." RESPONSE The project is zoned Specific Development No.8 (SD-8). Heliports and Helistops are not a permitted use within SD-8 by right or with a conditional use permit. Any proposed Heliport or Helistop would require a zoning ordinance amendment and would require the project to be scheduled for a formal review and determination by the Airport Land Use Commission. There are no Heliports or Helistops proposed as part of the Crazy Horse Square project. 4. A referral by the City to the ALUC is required for this project due to the location of the proposal within an AELUP Planning area and due to the nature of the required City approvals (i.e. zoning amendment) under PUC Section 21676(b). In this regard, please note that the Commission wants such referrals to be submitted and agendized by the ALUC staff between the Local Agency's expected Planning Commission and City Council hearings. Since the ALUC meets on the third Thursday afternoon of each month, submittals must be received in the ALUC office by the first of the month to ensure sufficient time for review, analysis, and agendizing. RESPONSE So noted. 2 75A-165 STATE OF CALIFORNIA BUSINESS. TRANSPORTA nON AND HOUSING AGENCY ARNOW SCHW ARZENEGGER. Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT A TION District 12 3337 Michelson Drive, Suite 380 Irvine, CA 92612-8894 RECEiVED MAY 3 1 2006 Flex your power! Be energy efficient! S/.NM ANA PUNNING DEPT May 18,2006 Mr. Bill Apple 20 Civic Center Plaza M-20 Santa Ana, CA 92702 File: IGR/CEQA SCH#: 2006041111 Log #: 1725 SR: 55 Subject: Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration for Crazy Horse Square Project Dear Mr. Apple: Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration for Crazy Horse Square Project. The project proposes to develop 20,154 square feet of retail and food uses on a 2.8-acre site. The project is located at 1580 East Warner Avenue in the City of Santa Ana, California. Caltrans District 12 is a reviewing agency on this project, and has the following comments: 1. Due to the proximity to SR-55 the Environmental Document should identify and mitigate any and all potential significant permanent and temporary impacts, including but not limited to, visual (lighting, signage, etc), traffic (access to ramps), noise, grading and storm water runoff. 2. Please check the storage queue length on the SB-55 off-ramp to Grand Avenue, especially for right turn to make sure that will not back to mainline during peak hour. 3. Figure 2 on page 3 shows that there are buildings proposed on the comer of the SB-55 off- ramp with Grand A venue, please make sure the requirement of comer sight distance is met. 4. On page 4 under the Aesthetics section it states that SR-55 is not a designated scenic highway. On page 6, however, it states that "The Urban Design Element identifies State Route 55 as a scenic corridor." Note that According to the California Scenic Highway Mapping system, State Route 55 is not listed as a scenic highway. Please correct the discrepancy. 5. Any project work (e.g. street widening, emergency access improvements, sewer connections, sound walls, stormdrain construction, street connections, lighting and signage, etc.) proposed in the vicinity of the Caltrans Right-of-Way, would require an encroachment permit and all environmental concerns must be adequately addressed. If the environmental documentation for the project does not meet Caltrans requirements, additional documentation would be required before approval of the encroachment permit. Please coordinate with Caltrans to meet requirements for any work within or near Caltrans Right-of-Way. If an encroachment permit is needed for construction purpose, the Department of Transportation will become a "Caltrans improves mobility across California" 75A-166 responsible agency on this project. (See Attachment: Environmental Review Requirements for Encroachment Permit) 6. All work within the State Right of Way must conform to Caltrans Standard Plans and Standard Specifications for Water Pollution Control, including production of a Water Pollution Control Program (WPCP) or Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) as required. Any runoff draining into Caltrans Right of Way from construction operations, or from the resulting project, must fully conform to the current discharge requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board to avoid impacting water quality. Measures must be incorporated to contain all vehicle loads and avoid any tracking of materials, which may fall or blow onto Caltrans roadways or facilities. Please note that all projects involving soil disturbance activities should pay extra attention to storm water pollution control during the "Rainy Season" (October 1st - April 30th) and follow the Water Pollution Control BMPs to minimize impact to the receiving waters. Please continue to keep us informed of this project and any future developments, which could potentially impact the State transportation facilities. If you have any questions or need to contact us, please do not hesitate to call Lan Zhou at (949) 756-7827. Sincerely, r;:--/) /---7 ~./) ~ \ S " C<~'h'" l , /' /' ..--- 'j , / ,~... J' ... / ( / ;', 1....--.... --. . " RY AN CHAMBERLAIN Chief of Local Development/Intergovernmental Review Branch District 12 Attachment c: Terry Roberts, Office of Planning and Research Terri Pencovic, Caltrans HQ IGR/Community Planning Gale McIntyre, Deputy District Director for Planning and Local Assistance Permits, Mory Mohtashami Leslie Manderscheid, Environmental Planning Isaac Alonso Rice, Traffic Operations "Caltrans improves mobility across California" 75A-167 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW REQUIREMENTS FOR ENCROACHMENT PERMITS Any Party, outside of Caltrans, that does work on a State Highway or Interstate Highway in California needs to apply for an encroachment permit. To acquire any encroachment permit, environmental concerns must be addressed. Environmental review of encroachment permit applications may take 3 weeks if the application is complete or longer if the application is incomplete. For soil disturbing activities (e.g. geotechnical borings, grading, usage of unpaved roads from which dirt and other materials may be tracked onto the State/Interstate highways, etc.), compliance with Water Quality and Cultural Resources Provisions are emphasized. Surveys may/ may not be soil-disturbing activities, depending on the site and survey method. A complete application for environmental review includes the following: 1. If an environmental document (CE, EIRlEIS, ND, etc.) has been completed for the project, copy of the final, approved document must be submitted with the application. 2. Water Qualitv Provision: All work within the State Right of Way must conform to Caltrans Standard Plans and Standard Specifications for Water Pollution Control including production of a Water Pollution Control Program or Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan as required. The applicant must provide Encroachments with a copy of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) including Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be implemented for construction activities impacting Caltrans Right of Way, prepared for this as required by the NPDES Statewide Storm Water Permit for General Construction Activities. If no SWPPP has been prepared for this project, then the applicant must follow the requirements described in the attached Water Pollution Control Provisions (please see attachment). 3. Cultural Resources Provisions: If not included in the environmental document, before permit approval and project construction, the encroachment permit applicant must complete a Cultural Resource Assessment pursuant to Caltrans Environmental Handbook, Volume 2, Appendix B-1, and Exhibit 1, as amended. The Cultural Resources Assessment ascertains the presence or absence of cultural resources within a one-mile radius of the project area and evaluates the impact to any historical/cultural resource. Cultural Resources include "those resources significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, and culture, including Native American Resources" (Caltrans Environmental Handbook, Volume 2, Chapter1, as amended)]. The Cultural Resource Assessment must include: a) a clear project description and map indicating project work, staging areas, site access, etc.; b) a Record Search conducted at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) located at California State University, Fullerton. For information call (714) 278-5395; c) proof of Native American consultation. Consultation involves contacting the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), requesting a search of their Sacred Lands File, and following the recommendations provided by the NAHC. For information call (916) 653-4082; d) documentation of any historic properties (e.g. prehistoric and historic sites, buildings, structures, objects, or districts listed on, eligible for, or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places) within a one mile radius of the project area; e) and a survey by qualified archaeologist for all areas that have not been previously researched. The SCCIC and NAHC have an approximate turn around time of 2 weeks. 4. Bioloaical Resources Provisions: Work conducted within Caltrans Right of Way should have the appropriate plant and wildlife surveys completed by a qualified biologist. If the information is not included in the environmental document, Environmental Planning requests that the applicant submit a copy of the biological study, survey, or technical report by a qualified biologist that provides details on the existing vegetation and wildlife at the project site and any vegetation that is to be removed during project activities. Official lists and databases should also be consulted for sensitive species such as the California Natural Diversity Database and lists provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game. Any impacts that affect waterways and drainages and/or open space during construction, or that occur indirectly as a result of the project must be coordinated with the appropriate resource agencies. As guidance, we ask that the applicant include: a) clear description of project activities and the project site b) completed environmental significance checklist (not just yes and no answers, but a description should be given as to the reason for the response), c) staging/storage areas noted on project plans, d) proposed time of year for work and duration of activities (with information available), e) any proposed mitigation (if applicable to the project), f) and a record of any prior resource agency correspondence (if applicable to the project). 75A-168 . RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FOR CRAZY HORSE SQUARE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ER-2004-109 FROM DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIS1RICT 12 1. Due to the proximity to the SR-55 the Environmental Document should identify and mitigate any and all potential significant permanent and temporary impacts, including but not limited to, visual (lighting, signage, etc), traffic (access to ramps) noise, grading and storm water runoff. RESPONSE A copy of the mitigation nieasures that have been incorporated into the project are part of the environmental document and are available for review. 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 the mitigation measures placed on the project, and agreed to by the applicant, have reduced each impact to below a level of significance. 2. Please check the storage queue length on the SB-55 off-ramp to Grand Avenue, especiaIly for right turn to make sure that wiIl not back to mainline during peak hour. RESPONSE The SR-55 southbound off-ramp at Grand Avenue is approximately 975 feet in length, with approximately 375 feet of a two-lane section, and the remaining 600 feet in a single lane, for a total of approximately 1,350 feet of vehicle storage. Assuming 25 feet per vehicle, the ramp would accommodate a queue of 54 vehicles before the queue backs up onto the mainline. The analysis evaluated future morning and evening peak hour operating conditions for Opening Year With Project conditions using the Highway Capacity Software (HCS). The results are summarized on Table A. Analysis worksheets are attached.' Please see attached documentation prepared by the traffic consultant. Both the average peak hour queue and the 95th percentile back of queue are reported. The 95th percentile back of queue means that the queue wiIl be less than the reported queue 95% of the time. The results of the analysis indicate that the projected peak hour queues with the Crazy Horse project will not exceed the queuing capacity of the off-ramp, and will not back up onto the mainline. 75A-169 3. Figure 2 on page 3 shows that there are buildings proposed on the comer of the SB-55 off ramp with Grand Avenue, please make sme the requirements of corner site distance is met. RESPONSE The proposed building will be setback a minimum of20 feet from the property line adjacent to both the 55 freeway off-ramp and from Grand Avenue. This is the setback requirement of the SD-8 zoning district. There will be no obstructions within this 20 foot by 20 foot corner cut off area. In addition, the 55 freeway off-ramp at Grand Avenue is a signalized intersection, so the traffic signal will aide in both right and left hand turning movements at the intersection. Because ofthe 20 foot building setback, there will be no obstructions at the intersection of the South bound 55 freeway off-ramp and Grand Avenue as the result of this project. 4. On page 4 under the Aesthetics section it states that SR -55 is not a designated scenic highway. On page 6, however, it states that "The Urban Design Element identifies State Route 55 as a scenic corridor." Note that according to the Scenic Highway Mapping System, State Route 55 is not listed as a scenic highway. Please correct the discrepancy. RESPONSE The City recognizes that according to the state of California Scenic Highways Mapping System that State Route 55 is not listed as a scenic Highway, however, The City of Santa Ana's Scenic Corridors Element of the General Plan identifies the Newport (State Route 55) , Santa Ana and Garden Grove Freeways as high-speed scenic corridors operating at a regional scale. They influence Santa Ana's image. The Scenic Corridor element calls for landscape edges to promote selected views into the City. The proposed project will provide extensive trees and landscaping in keeping with the requirements ofthe Specific Development No.8 zoning district. Over 19 percent of the project site will be landscaped including a 10 to 20 foot landscape setback adjacent to the 55 freeway south bound off-ramp and a 10 foot landscape buffer adjacent to the freeway. Over 100 new trees will be added to the project site resulting in a project that will enhance the views of motorists as they travel along the 55 freeway corridor in keeping with the Scenic Corridor element of the City's General Plan. 5. Any project work (e.g. street widening, emergency access improvements, sewer connections, sound walls, storm drain construction, street connections, lighting, signage, ect.) proposed in the vicinity ofthe Caltrans Right-of-Way, would require an encroachment permit and all environmental concerns must be adequately addressed. If the environmental documentation for the project-does not meet Caltrans requirements, additionai documentation would be required before approval of the encroachment permit. Please coordinate with Caltrans to meet requirements for any work within or near Caltrans Right-of-Way. If an encroachment permit is needed for construction purposes, the Department of Transportation will become a responsible agency on this project. (See Attachment: Environmental Review Requirements for Encroachment Permit) 75A-170 RESPONSE So noted. It is not anticipated that the proposed project will require encroachment permits from the State, however, proper encroachment permits will be obtained and all environmental concerns addressed by the project applicant if work is to be performed on or near the Caltrans Right -of-Way. 6. All work within the State Right of Way must confonn to CaltraIis Standard Plans and Standard Specifications for Water Pollution Control, including production of a Water Pollution Control Program (WPCP) or Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) as required. Any runoff draining into Caltrans Right-of-Way from construction operations, or from the resulting project, must fully conform to the current discharge requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board to avoid impacting water quality. Measures must be incorporated to contain all vehicle loads and avoid any tracking of materials, which may fall or blow onto Caltrans roadways or facilities. Please note that all projects involving soil disturbance activities should pay extra attention to stonn water pollution control during the "Rainy Season" (October 1 st - April 30th) and follow the Water Pollution Control B:MPs to minimize impact to the receiving waters. RESPONSE So noted. No work is anticipated or proposed within the Caltrans Right-of- Way. In addition, the following mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project. · To ensure compliance with SCAQMD Fugitive Dust Rule 403, grading plans and construction 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, once in the late morning and once after work is done for the day. 2. 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. 3. Streets surrounding the project site should be cleaned at the end of each day of construction. 4. All material transported off site shall either be sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. 5. The amount of area disturbed by clearing and earthwork activities shall be minimized at all times. 6. Equipment engines shall be maintained in good condition and ill proper tune according to manufacturer's specifications. 15A-171 7. To the extent feasible, gasoline powered equipment shall be used for onsite and off site construction activities. · Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project developer shall provide proof of coverage under NPDES General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit that includes; (a) A copy of the project's permit issued by the State Water Resource Control Board that identifies the permit number, (B) Two copies of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. · Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project developer shall provide proof of coverage under NPDES General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit that includes; (a) A copy of the project's permit issued by the State Water Resource Control Board that identifies the permit number, (B) Two copies of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. · Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project developer shall submit and have approved a surface drainage/utility plan that depicts all applicable Site Design, Structural . Source Control and Treatment Control Best Management Practices in accordance with the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan and the City of Santa Ana Local Implementation Plan. · Provide two copies of the Water Quality Management Plan that would include the following: a. Site Assessment b. Site design Best Management Practices (BMP) c. Applicable Routine Source Control BMP d. Selecting and sizing the Treatment Control BMP e. Mechanisms by which funding for long-term operation and maintenance of all structural BMP will be provided f Operation and Maintenance Plan to describe the long-term operation and maintenance requirements of all applicable structural BMP and to identify the entity in charge of implementation. · 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 without exceeding the capacity of any street or adjacent storm drain facility. 15A-172 ~=~ Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Jooe 5, 2006 . Suite 140 2100 W. Orangewood Avenue Orange, Cafifornia 92868 Mr. Bill Apple City of Santa Ana, Planning Department 20 Civic Center Plaza, M-20 Santa Ana, CA 92702 Subject: Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration for Crazy Horse Square Project Dear Mr. Apple: At your request, Kimley-Horn has prepared the attached queuing analysis for the SR-55 southbound off-ramp at Grand Avenue, to determine whether or not the vehicle storage distance on the off-ramp will be adequate to handle future peak hour demand with the Crazy Horse project traffic. This analysis responds to comment #2 in the comment letter from the Department of Transportation, District 12, dated May 18,2006. The SR-55 southbound off-ramp at Grand Avenue is approximately 975 feet in length, with approximately 375 feet of a two-lane section, and the remaining 600 feet in a single lane, for a total of approximately 1,350 feet of vehicle storage. Assuming 25 feet per vehicle, the ramp would accommodate a queue of 54 vehicles before the queue backs up onto the mainline. The analysis evaluated future morning and evening peak hour operating conditions for Opening Year With Project conditions using the Highway Capacity Software (RCS). The results are summarized on Table A. Analysis worksheets are attached. Both the average peak hour queue and the 95th percentile back of queue are reported. The 95th percentile back of queue means that the queue will be less than the reported queue 95% ofthe time. The results ofthe analysis indicate that the projected peak hour queues with the Crazy Horse project will not' exceed the queuing capacity of the off- ramp, and will not back up onto the mainline. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions, or if you need additional information. Sincerely, KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. ~~ Serine Ciandella, AlCP Vice President . TEL 714 939 1030 FAX 714 938 9488 75A-173 Table A Summary of Queueing Analysis SR-55 Southbound Off-Ramp at Grand Avenue Crazy Horse Square - Opening Year with Project AM Peak PM Peak Condition Right Lane Left Lane Right Lane Left Lane Average Queue (a) 7.3 9.9 7.5 6.5 Queue Length (b) 200 250 200 175 Available Storage 1,350 1,350 Adequate? y y 95% Back of Queue (c) 13.8 18.3 14.2 12.5 Queue Length 350 475 375 325 Available Storage 1,350 1,350 Adequate? y y (a) Queue is expressed in terms of vehicles per lane (b) Queue length is calculated by multiplying the number of vehicles in the queue (assuming whole vehicle values) by 25 feet per vehicle (c) 95% back of queue means that 95% ofthe time, the queue would be x vehicles or less. 75A-174 Analyst JAR Intersection DyerlNB-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/6/06 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period AM Peak Period Analysis Year Proj BO Year EB WB NB SB , LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT LT RT TH RT NUm. of Lanes 0 3 0 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 Lane group T T L R Volume (vph) 1718 673 744 543 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 . Ext. eff. oreen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 4 4 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 . Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 . Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 . Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parkin glh r . Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasing Thru Only 02 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G = 41.0 G= G= G= G = 41.0 G= G= G= y= 4 y= y= y= y= 4 y= y= y= EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 1808 708 783 572 Lane group cap. 2358 2358 1597 736 v/c ratio 0.77 0.30 0.49 0.78 Green ratio 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 Unif. delay d1 20.5 15.5 17.2 20.6 Delay factor k 0.32 0.11 0.11 0.33 (nerem. delay d2 1.6 0.1 0.2 5.3 PF factor 0.829 0.829 1.000 1.000 'Control delay 18.6 12.9 17.4 25.9 Lane group LOS B B B C Apprdl. delay 18.6 12.9 21.0 Approach LOS B B C Intersec. delay 18.4 Intersection LOS B 'fCS2000™ Copyright IS> 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version4.1e 75A-175 Back-of-Queue Worksheet Page 1 of1 BACK-Of-QUEUE WORKSHEET General Information Project Description Crazy Horse Square - Opening Year w/ Project - AM Peak Hour Averaae Back of Queue EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Lane Group L R T T Initial Queue/Lane 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Flow Rate/Lane Group 478 371 744 735 Satflow/Lane 1805 1615 1900 1900 Capacity/Lane Group 802 718 1688 2415 Flow Ratio 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 v/c Ratio 0.60 0.52 0.44 0.30 I Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PF Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Q1 9.0 6.7 6.5 4.2 ks 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Q2 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.3 Q Average 9.9 7.3 7.0 4.5 Percentile Back of Queue (95th percentile) fs% 1.8 1.9 1.9 2.0 Back of Queue 18.3 13.8 13.4 8.8 Queue Storage Ratio Queue Sl?acing 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Queue Storage 975 975 450 300 Average Queue Storage 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.4 Ratio 95% Queue Storage Ratio 0.5 0.4 0.7 0.7 Copyright @ 2005 University of Florida, All Rights ReselVed fi1e://C:\Temp\s2k240. tmp HCS+™ Version 5.2 Generated: 6/5/2006 7:01 PM 75A-176 6/5/2006 r ~: ~~~~ Analyst JAR Intersection Dyer/N8-55 Off-Ramp Agency or Co. Kimley-Horn and Associates Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/6/06 Jurisdiction City of Santa Ana Time Period PM Peak Period Analysis Year Proj 80 Year EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 3 0 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 Lane group T T L R Volume (vph 894 1471 220 104 % Heavv veh 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Actuated (P/A) A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. areen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 4 4 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 Lsme Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasing Thru Only 02 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G = 42.0 G= G= G= G = 40.0 G= G= G= y= 4 Y= y= Y= y= 4 Y= y= y= Duration of Anal sis hrs = 0.25 C cle Len th C = 90.0 EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 941 1548 232 109 Lane group cap. 0 2415 2415 1558 718 vIe ratio 0.39 0.64 0.15 0.15 Green ratio 0.47 0.47 0.44 0.44 Unif. delay d1 15.6 18.3 14.9 14.9 Delay factor k 0.11 0.22 0.11 0.11 Increm. delay d2 0.1 0.6 0.0 0.1 PF factor 0.815 0.815 1.000 1.000 Control delay 12.8 15.5 14.9 15.0 Lane group LOS 8 B 8 8 Apprch. delay 12.8 15.5 14.9 Approach LOS 8 8 8 Intersec. delay 14.5 Intersection LOS 8 HCS2000™ Copyright @ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 e 75A-177 Back-of-Queue Worksheet Page 1 of1 BACK-OF-QUEUE WORKSHEET General Information Project Description Crazy Horse Square - Opening Year w/ Project - PM Peak Hour AveraQe Back of Queue EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Lane Group L R T T Initial Queue/Lane 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Flow Rate/Lane Group 339 367 709 745 Satflow/Lane 1805 1615 1900 1900 Capacity/Lane Group 762 682 1769 2530 Flow Ratio 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 v/c Ratio 0.14 0.54 0.10 0.29 I Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PF Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Q1 6.0 6.9 5.9 4.1 ks 0.6 0.5 0.7 0.7 Q2 0.5 0.6 0.1 0.3 Q Average 6.5 7.5 6.3 4.3 Percentile Back of Queue (95th percentile) fs% 1.9 1.9 1.9 2.0 Back of Queue 12.5 14.2 12.2 8.6 Queue Storage Ratio Queue Spacing 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Queue Storage 975 975 450 300 Average Queue Storage 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.4 Ratio 95% Queue Storage Ratio 0.3 0.4 0.7 0.7 Copyright@ 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved file:lle:\ Temp \s2k26D. tmp HCS+™ Version 5.2 Generated: 6/512006 7:03 PM 75A-178 6/5/2006 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AMENDING SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT NO.8, CREATING A THIRD PROJECT AREA THAT WILL ALLOW RETAIL AND FOOD USES FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1580 EAST WARNER AVENUE (ZOA NO. 2006-02) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana does hereby find, determine and declare as follows: A. Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2006-021 has been filed with the City of Santa Ana to amend the Specific Development NO.8 (SD-8) to create a third project area (Zone III) that will permit multi-tenant retail and food uses (excluding drive through facilities) within Zone III. B. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana held a duly noticed public hearing on May 22, 2006, and by a vote of 6:0 (Cribb absent) voted to recommend that the City Council: 1. Approve and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2004-109. 2. Adopt an ordinance approving Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2006-02. 3. Adopt a resolution approving Site Plan Review No. 2006-01. C. The City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on June 19, 2006 on Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for Environmental Review No. 2004-109, Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2006-02 to amend SD-8, and Site Plan Review No. 2006-01. D. The Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for Environmental Review No. 2004-109, was approved and adopted by resolution which came before the City Council on June 19, 2006. This ordinance incorporates by reference, as though fully set forth herein, this resolution and the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program. Section 2. Specific Development NO.8 is hereby amended as set forth in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated as though fully set forth herein. Section 3. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the Clerk of the Council shall attest to and certify the vote adopting this Ordinance. Ordinance No. NS- XXX Page 1 of 9 75A-179 Section 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion thereof irrespective of the fact that anyone or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional. ADOPTED this _ day of ,2006. Miguel A. Pulido Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joseph W. Fletcher City Attorney By: Kylee O. Otto Assistant City Attorney AYES: Councilmembers NOES: Councilmembers ABSTAIN: Councilmembers NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers Ordinance No. NS- XXX Page 2 of 9 75A-180 CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, PATRICIA E. HEALY, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Ordinance No. NS- to be the original ordinance adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on , and that said ordinance was published in accordance with the Charter of the City of Santa Ana. Date: Clerk of the Council City of Santa Ana Ordinance No. NS- XXX Page 3 of 9 75A-181 SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT NO.8 (new language shown in bold, deleted language shown in strikeout for tracking purposes only): General Notes 1. Water within the district will be by private water facilities served by the City of Santa Ana facilities within adjacent public streets. 2. Sewage disposal will be by private sewers and appurtenances connected to City of Santa Ana facilities within adjacent public streets. 3. Easements shall be created for all private and public utilities which cross over, along, under or through any parcels which may be created within this district and are intended to serve other parcels within the district. 4. The development and management of Brookhollow will be subject to the supervision of the Brookhollow Office Park Association, a non-profit corporation, and to the terms and conditions of the recorded Declaration of Establishment of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) of Brookhollow Office Park to insure continued maintenance of utilities, private streets, landscaping and general appearance of the development within the district. Any amendments to the CC&Rs, which affect these regulations, shall require approval of the City Attorney and Planning Department. 5. Existing private streets and driveway access to adjacent public streets shall be maintained. Additional access to adjacent public streets proposed after adoption of this ordinance shall meet the requirements and approval of the Director of Public Works. 6. The Boundaries of Zones I. II. and III are shown on Attachment "1 II attached hereto and incorporated as thoUQh fullv set forth herein. Intent and Purpose It is the intent of this district to allow a combination of multi-tenant leasehold professional and business office uses, single parcel professional and business offices uses, and single parcel retail, commercial and minimal impact industrial activity uses (as specified in this ordinance). Specific plan review shall be required for all development within this district. Site Reauirements A. Site Coverage Exhibit A Ordinance No. NS- XXX Page 4 of 9 75A-182 1) Structure shall not cover more than 55 percent of the total net site area. (Net area shall be the gross area less any area used for public or private street purposes.) 2) Each parcel to be created within this district shall have a minimum average width of 1 foot for each 2.5 feet of average depth. 3) The minimum lot size for parcels within Zone III shall be 2.8 acres (121,968 square feet). B. Permitted Uses The following uses shall be permitted in Zone I: 1 ) Professional Offices a. Accountants b. Attorneys c. Dentist, doctors and related professions d. Engineers, architects and planners e. Research and development facilities f. Private trade, vocational or professional schools 2) Business offices, including but not limited to: a. Advertising agencies b. Banks or other financial offices c. Employment agencies d. Escrow and real estate companies e. Insurance companies f. Corporate headquarters g. Photographers, artist, etc. h. Travel agencies i. Computer or computer training centers 3) Laboratories except those, which emit offensive odors, vibrations, or may be hazardous to the public. 4) Political, civic and charitable organization uses, which shall not include bingo or other gaming activities. 5) Restaurants. 6) Union Halls 7) Museums, art galleries and libraries. Ordinance No. NS- XXX Page 5 of 9 75A-183 8) Religious meeting halls 9) Day care and child care facilities, nurseries, etc. The following uses shall be permitted in Zone II: 1) All uses within Zone I. 2) Minimal impact light industry. 3) Hotels, motels and associated shops and services related to the hotel or motel uses. 4) Retail, with a maximum of two tenants per building. 5) Furniture and bulk merchandise stores with a maximum of two tenants building. The followinq uses shall be permitted in Zone III: 1 ) Professional Offices a. Accountants b. Attornevs c. Dentist. doctors and related professions d. Enqineers, architects and planners e. Research and development facilities 2) Business offices, includinq but not limited to: a. Advertisinq aqencies b. Banks or other financial offices c. Emplovment aqencies d. Escrow and real estate companies e. Insurance companies f. Corporate headquarters g. Photoqraphers, artist. etc. h. Travel aqencies 3) Commercial uses, includinq: a. Food and retail uses excludinq drive throuqh facilities The followinq uses shall be permitted in Zone III with a Conditional Use Permit: Ordinance No. NS- XXX Page 6 of 9 75A-184 a. Dancinq or entertainment ancillary to a permitted restaurant use. b. The servinq of alcohol in coniunction with a permitted food/restaurant use. C. Any use permitted herein may be prohibited by reason of noise, odor, dust or electrical interference or adverse environmental impact on adjacent uses. D. Setbacks: 1) Front setback along public street frontage shall be 20 feet minimum. 2) Front setback along private street frontage shall be: a) 10 feet within Zone I. b) 20 feet within Zone II. c) 10 feet within Zone III 3) Side yard setbacks shall be 10 feet. 4) Rear yard setback shall be 10 feet. E. Building Heights: 1) Structures shall be limited to four stories and not exceed 70 feet in height in Zone I. 2) Structures shall be limited to four stories and not exceed 70 feet in height in Zone II. 3) Structures shall be limited to two stories and shall not exceed 40 feet in heiqht in Zone III. F. Landscaping: 1) All sites shall have a minimum landscape coverage of 15 percent. 2) The landscape setback along public streets shall be 20 feet. 3) The landscape setback along private streets shall be 20 feet fully landscaped or a minimum of 10 feet parallel with and along the private street line landscaped. The remainder of the required setback area shall be used for parking and/or vehicular circulation, provided a matching square footage of such area used for parking Ordinance No. NS- XXX Page 7 of 9 75A-185 and/or vehicular circulation, is provided on the site and is visible from either public streets, freeways or private streets. 4) Side yard landscape shall be a minimum of five feet. (This requirement applies to new construction. An area equal to this five- foot requirement may be proposed at another location on the parcel. 5) A minimum landscape setback of 10 feet is to be maintained along the frontage; and, in addition, there shall be a 15-foot wide planter island, fully landscaped, placed an average 160 feet apart and extending into the paved area the depth of the parking spaces along said freeway frontage. No curb and gutter shall be permitted along the edge of paving parallel to the Newport Freeway right-of- way to allow for sheet flow of drainage from the rear portion of any parcels created along the frontage in accordance with the approved drainage plan on file with the City of Santa Ana. However, parking bumpers shall be required in lieu of the curb and gutter. 6) A landscape plan shall be approved by the appropriate City agency prior to issuance of building permits. 7) Landscaping shall include trees, and at least 50 percent of the trees shall be within the parking area itself so as to give visual relief to rows of parked vehicles. 8) Landscaping shall be installed prior to occupancy or utility release and permanently maintained. 9) Landscape plan shall include an irrigation system to be installed and maintained. G. Parking Requirements: The parking requirements in this district shall conform to the requirements of Article IV, Sections 41-614, 41-615, 41-616, and 41-617, except that there shall be no requirement that one-third (1/3) of the total lot be devoted to off street parking. Zone III. The Citv recoqnizes that a lease aqreement has been entered into between the property owner and Southern California Edison to utilize the Transmission riqht-of-way easement to provide 63 parkinq spaces to satisfy City of Santa Ana parkinq requirements for the proiect. Should this lease be revoked or terminated resultinq in the loss of parkinq spaces or Ordinance No. NS- XXX Page 8 of 9 75A-186 the loss of continuous and uninterrupted circulation and access to these spaces the followinq remedies shall be used to cure the parkinq deficit: a. A parkinq study shall be provided by the City at the property owner's expense that determines if a parkinq deficiency has been created and examines ways the parkinq deficit can be cured. b. Should the parkinq study determine that a parkinq deficiency exists, replacement parkinq necessary to cure the deficiency shall be provided within 100 feet of the proiect site. H. Signs Sh311 be subject to site pl3n review. All siqnaqe shall comply with the City siqn code, (Santa Ana Municipal Code, Chapter 41 , Article XI). I. Storage and Refuse Collection Areas: All storage and refuse areas shall be enclosed by a minimum six-foot block walls and solid gates so as to eliminate unsightliness. No open outside storage shall be permitted. Ordinance No. NS- XXX Page 9 of 9 75A-187 S. CE RITCHEY ST. LIGHT INDUSTRIAL COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES g ffi O!; ~ ~ '---- LIG T IN USTRIAL AVENUE R. V. STORAGE BRISTOL PARK MEDICAL OFFICE SPOONS RESTAURANT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ~. ,,, I · ""W..Wi~~.' - 80-8 ---- A GY' P LAN N N G AND B U L D N G AGE N C Y ATTACHMENT 1 75A-188 KO - 6/14/06 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW NO. 2004-109 AND SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 2006-01 FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1580 EAST WARNER AVENUE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. Applicant is requesting approval of Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for Environmental Review No. 2004-109, Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2006-02, and Site Plan Review No. 2006-01 for the property located at 1580 East Warner Avenue. B. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana held a duly noticed public hearing on May 22, 2006, and by a vote of 6:0 (Cribb absent) voted to recommend that the City Council: 1. Approve and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2004-109. 2. Adopt an ordinance approving Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2006-02. 3. Adopt a resolution approving Site Plan Review No. 2006-01. C. The City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on June 19, 2006 on Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for Environmental Review No. 2004-109, Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2006-02 to amend SO-8, and Site Plan Review No. 2006-01. D. Applicant is requesting approval of Site Plan Review No. 2006-01 for the property located at 1580 East Warner Avenue. E. Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-493.5 requires approval of all plans for projects within a specific development district to ensure the project is in conformity with the specific development standards. Resolution No. 2006-XXX Page 1 of 3 75A-189 F. The City Council considered all testimony, written and oral, and finds the project is in compliance with all applicable development standards and the provisions outlined within Specific Development NO.8 (SD- 8). G. The Request for Council Action and all matters presented to the Council are incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth. Section 2. The City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the initial study and the mitigated negative declaration and mitigation monitoring program for Environmental Review No. 2004-109 prepared with respect to this Project. It is determined that, as required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the State CEQA Guidelines, a mitigated negative declaration and mitigation monitoring program adequately addresses the expected environmental impacts of this Project. On the basis of this review, the City Council finds that there is no evidence from which it can be fairly argued that the project will have a significant adverse effect on the environment. The City Council hereby certifies and approves the mitigated 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") 9 735.5(c)(1), the City Council has determined that, after considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have the potential for any adverse effect on wildlife resources or the ecological habitat upon which wildlife resources depend. The proposed project exists in an urban environment characterized by paved concrete, roadways, surrounding buildings and human activity. Therefore, pursuant to Fish and Game Code 9 711.2 and Title XIV, CCR 9735.5(a)(3), the payment of Fish and Game Department filing fees is not required in conjunction with this project. Section 3. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby, approves Site Plan Review No. 2006-01. ADOPTED this _ day of June, 2006. Miguel A. Pulido Mayor Resolution No. 2006-XXX Page 2 of 3 75A-190 APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joseph W. Fletcher City Attorney By: Kylee O. Otto Assistant City Attorney AYES: Councilmembers NOES: Councilmembers ABSTAIN: Councilmembers NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, PATRICIA E. HEALY, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2005- to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on Date: Clerk of the Council City of Santa Ana Resolution No. 2006-XXX Page 3 of 3 75A-191 75A-192