Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout80A - JT PUBLIC HRG-320 WEST FOURTH REQUEST FOR AGENCY! COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: FEBRUARY 5, 2007 TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING - AMENDMENT APPLICATION NO. 2006-04 TO ALLOW A ZONE CHANGE FROM C3-A TO SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT ZONE NO. 80, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-14, SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 2006-07 AND IMPLEMENTATION AGREEMENT TO ALLOW MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT WITH FIVE CONDOMINIUM UNITS AND GROUND FLOO TAIL LOCATED AT 320 WEST FOURTH STR T - WEST+ST TEG~9'l APPLICANT CY,(!<.}/ 1/(; ~ n~ /~ & CITY MANAGER EXEC TIVE DIREstrOR RECOMMENDED ACTION CITY COUNCIL ACTION CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: APPROVED D As Recommended D As Amended D Ordinance on 1st Reading D Ordinance on 2nd Reading D Implementing Resolution D Set Public Hearing For CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER 1. Approve and adopt the amended Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2004-234. 2. Adopt an ordinance approving Amendment Application No. 2006-04. 3. Adopt a resolution approving Site Plan Review No. 2006-07. 4. Adopt a resolution approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-14 as conditioned. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION Direct the Agency General Counsel to prepare and authorize the Executive Director and the Secretary to execute a First Implementation Agreement. Planning Commission Action On September 25, 2006, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2004-234; adopt an ordinance approving Amendment Application No. 2006-04; adopt a resolution approving Site Plan Review No. 2006-07; and adopt a resolution approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-14 as conditioned by a vote of 7:0 to allow a zone change from Central Business Artists Village (C3-A) to Specific Development Zone No. 80 and to allow mixed use development with five condominium units and ground floor retail at 320 West Fourth 80A-1 West End Lofts February 5, 2007 Page 2 Street. The item was scheduled for the October 16, 2006 City Council meeting, but was continued at the request of staff. A neighboring property owner expressed concern over potential impacts to adjacent historic buildings due to future construction activities related to this project, as well as concerns regarding possible aesthetic impacts. The applicant agreed to pursue additional professional studies to investigate any potential impacts. No additional impacts were found. These studies were included in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, and this environmental document was re-circulated for public comment. On January 22, 2007, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve and adopt the amended Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, and Environmental Review No. 2004-234 by a vote of 5:0 (Gartner absent) (Exhibit A). DISCUSSION Background and Project Description The subject property is located at 320 West Fourth Street (Exhibit A-I) in the Central Business Artists Village (C3-A) zoning district, and has a General Plan land use designation of District Center (DC), and is located within the Downtown Historic National Register District. Surrounding land uses include historic commercial buildings to the east (Semi-Tropic Hotel), west (West End Theater), and south (American Legion Hall) (Exhibits A-2 and A-3), as well as the Ronald Reagan Federal Building to the north. An alley runs directly behind the property in an east/west configuration. The proposed project consists of the construction of a new 16,000 square foot mixed-use building with 1,189 square feet of retail on the first floor, 3,544 of basement that includes parking and storage, as well as five residential units occupying the remaining upper floors, on a 4,000 square foot lot. Parking will be provided in a garage using a mechanical parking lift. The application includes a request for a zone change to create a Specific Development zone with development standards for the proposed project. In addition, an original Disposition and Development Agreement dated November 15, 1983, allowed for an approximately 12,000 square foot, three level building. Office/retail was proposed on the above ground levels and the basement was to be used for storage. The first implementation agreement would revise the scope of development to allow for the above mixed-use project. 80A-2 West End Lofts February 5, 2007 Page 3 Analysis of the Issues This project, though small in size, presents a number of complex issues due to its location on a small infill lot within a National Register Historic District with limited site access in an area that is completely built out. The following analysis highlights the policy issues that were considered during the review of this project. The project was also the subject of several study sessions, most recently with the Historic Resources Commission on September 7, 2006 and subsequently with the Planning Commission on September 11, 2006. The questions raised at these meetings have been addressed through the final design and recommendation of approval for the project. Land Use The property is currently zoned C3 -A. This zoning designation allows commercial uses by right and live/work communities subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. The proposed mixed-use proj ect includes a commercial component on the ground floor and residential units above. The residential units, while they may be used in a live/work manner, are not designed to the standards for live/work communities contained within the C3-A zone. In addition, the property is within the boundaries of the Santa Ana Renaissance Specific Plan study area and, as such, it is anticipated that its zoning will change with the ultimate adoption of the Specific Plan. That being the case, staff believes that the best way to provide a regulatory framework for this proj ect in the interim is to create a Specific Development zone that would address the unique circumstances of the proposed proj ect rather than amending the larger C3-A zone (Exhibit B) . Parking and Site Access Parking will be provided at a comparable amount to that of existing multi-family residential code requirements of one space per bedroom. Since the proposed units have open floor plans, it is proposed to impose the following parking requirements: · One parking space for each unit with a size of 1,600 gross square feet or less of residential area per unit. · Two parking spaces for each unit with a size of 1,601 gross square feet up to 3,200 gross square feet of residential area per unit. 80A-3 West End Lofts February 5, 2007 Page 4 . Three parking spaces for each unit with a si ze of 3,201 and larger gross square feet of residential area per unit. This creates a total requirement of eight parking spaces for the project. The parking for the commercial (ground floor) component of the building, as well as any guest parking, would be served by existing street parking and public parking structures. The applicant proposes to supply these eight parking spaces via a stacking parking lift accessed from the rear alley. It has been determined through a study by Kaku and Associates that alley access is a viable solution for this infill proj ect. The parking lift will have assigned spaces per residential unit, and Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) will be in place to educate prospective owners as to any property constraints (Exhibit C) . Architecture and Historic Compatibility The proposed building will be designed in a modern architectural style with design details and use of building materials to tie it into the existing fabric of the Historic District, while at the same time providing a strong counterpoint to the historic architecture surrounding it (Exhibit D) . The building will feature a shopfront glass fac;ade at the ground level accented with metal canopies over the retail/gallery entry doors. The front fac;ade of the building for the upper residential floors include large roll-up windows clear non-reflective glass. Stone veneer will clad the fac;ade on the bottom three floors in order to tie in to create a feel of permanence and natural materials found in the historic fabric of the block. Through a study performed by an architectural historian, Kaplan Chen Kaplan (Exhibit E), and review by the Historic Resources Commission, it has been determined that the juxtaposition of contemporary style architecture and eclectic historic commercial architecture meets the Secretary of the Interior's Standards as it relates to infill development. Additionally, the Downtown National Register District includes buildings in a variety of heights ranging from single story to six stories. Based on this information and analysis, staff believes that the proposed structure is compatible with the massing and scale of other buildings in the district. 80A-4 West End Lofts February 5, 2007 Page 5 Historic Ghost Billboard The project site is located on a lot that has been vacant since 1978. The site has been occupied by a variety of one and two-story buildings over time, with a fire and subsequent demolition, of a commercial building in 1978. The site was cleared and the existing basement was excavated. During the demolition, a "ghost billboard" was uncovered on the adjacent Semi Tropic Hotel building directly to the east (Exhibit A- 7). This sign is a remnant of billboard advertising painted directly on the building's party wall. While not individually listed on the Santa Ana Register of Historical Properties, it has been determined through a study by a qualified architectural historian that the ghost sign is eligible for listing in the California State Historical Register, thereby rendering it worthy of preservation. Additionally, the Historic Resources Commission had the opportunity to review and comment regarding this project at its September 7, 2006 meeting. The applicant proposes to highlight this ghost sign by creating a courtyard next to the adjacent Semi-Tropic Hotel building. This will be accomplished through a 30-foot setback of the proposed building for a width of approximately 15 feet. This courtyard will be gated, and will highlight the public view of the historic ghost sign through landscaping, a water feature, and an interpretive sign with photos of the sign in its entirety. Additionally, the sign will be fully documented through the completion of a Historic American Building Survey (HABS) This survey includes large format pictorial documentation, as well as historical documentation and drawings. Summary and Conclusion Based upon the analysis detailed above, it is recommended that the City Council approve Amendment Application No. 2006-04, approve and adopt the amended Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Review No. 2004- 234, Site Plan Review No. 2006-07 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-14. CEQA COMPLIANCE In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, a Mitigated Negative Declaration Environmental Review No. 2004-234 has been prepared for this project (Exhibit A-4) . 80A-5 West End Lofts February 5, 2007 Page 6 FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. ~- '. J~M./T~~ino Executive Director Planning and Building Agency cnlVn~c:4' tdwcudo Nancy T. dwards Assistant Dlrector Community Development Agency HS:rb hs\West_End_Lofts\AA06-04 SPR06-07 CUP06-14.cc-agency 80A-6 REQUEST FOR Planning Commission Action PLANNING COMMISSION SECRETARY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: JANUARY 22, 2007 TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING - AMENDED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN TO ALLOW MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT WITH FIVE CONDOMINIUM UNITS AND GROUND FLOOR RETAIL LOCATED AT 320 WEST FOURTH STREET (AMENDMENT APPLICATION NO. 2006-04 TO ALLOW A ZONE CHANGE FROM C3-A TO SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT ZONE NO. 80 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-14 AND SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 2006-07) Prepared by Hally Soboleske APPROVED o As Recommended o As Amended o Set Public Hearing For DENIED o Applicant's Request o Staff Recommendation CONTINUED TO ~j1---", , Executive Director ~).UM ~ Planning Ma ger RECOMMENDED ACTION Recommend that the City Council approve and adopt the amended Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2004-234. DISCUSSION Background and Project Description The subject property is located at 320 West Fourth Street (Exhibit 1) in the Central Business Artists Village (C3 -A) zoning district, and has a General Plan land use designation of District Center (DC), and is located within the Downtown Historic National Register District. Surrounding land uses include historic commercial buildings to the east, including the Semi-Tropic Hotel. The West End Theater is adjacent to the west, the American Legion Hall is immediately south(Exhibits 2 and 3), as well as the Ronald Reagan Federal Building and United States Courthouse to the north. This project was reviewed by the Planning Commission and recommended to the City Council for approval on September 25, 2006. On October 16, 2006, this item was brought to City Council but was continued at the request of staff to December 18, 2006, and then continued to February 5, 2007. In the interim, the applicant and staff met with property owners of adjacent structures who expressed concern regarding the safety of their historic buildings during construction, as well as potential noise and vibration caused by the proposed parking lift. EXHIBIT A 80A-7 Environmental Review No. 2004-234 January 22, 2007 Page 2 To address consultants, supplemented these concerns, addi t ional and the Mitigated Negative with these additional resources studies were completed Declaration was amended (Exhibit 4) . by and The additional studies include: · "Aesthetic Impact Evaluation", Kaplan Chen Kaplan, December 26, 2006 (Exhibit 5) · "Klaus Parking Systems Sound Meter Measurements", December 8, 2006 (Exhibit 6) · "Project Construction vibration Recommendations", Snyder-Langston letter, December 12, 2006 (Exhibit 7) · "Geotechnical Recommendations for Settlement Monitoring of Adjacent Buildings", Albus-Keefe & Associates, December 20, 2006 (Exhibit 8) The additional analysis of the studies noted above include the evaluation of the architecture on the area aesthetics, the impacts of the Klaus parking system, and any potential impact to adjacent buildings from construction activities. No new impacts were identified. The project description has not changed; however, the re-circulation of the Mitigated Negative Declaration necessitates this item to be brought back to the Planning Commission to make a recommendation to the City Council. Summary and Conclusion Based upon the analysis detailed above, it is recommended that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for Environmental Review No. 2004-234. CEQA Compliance In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, a Mitigated Negative Declaration Environmental Review No. 2004-234 has been prepared for this project. ~ Associate Planner J HS:jm hs\West_End_Lofts\AA06-04 SPR06-Q? CUP06-14.012207.pc 80A-8 JL:JL:,:1l:J l:J~a13 0 I ~~:i~s~~r:J tJ '_::'.3 ~'~' -Bsm' Dffi2R2G] P R2 'j BB SP.3 R1:z R1 R1 Rl R2 RZ D SP3 rT;l1 :Ii ~ SP-3 SP-3 wM ~ R1 "" R1 R1 R1 .B P SP-3 SP-3 ". r:::l m:J 80-20 ,h., _~~,,~ 5D-20 8D-20 rPl L..:J ~ _ tV! EI~j'f~f'fl)R. I 8TH ST ,\'>}. \~ \'.'1. \ ~ ~,. "J",JGc []]c I ~ · ...... ~~'~ J,,~:~!OOJ.c:f,,~, ~,~~,-~,,\, " 'i' GC" GC ~m' ,~p "" ,",It ~ \>-.., Y"~ ~ I C3 C3~1OJ< ,...' -~ R2 "S~ " y.'l "" ~ "'~ ffi GC · ."," .'."'..."'~:" C2~':! 'y.:'~; ",,'" -:-1) . ... I~ . 03 QQ 1C3l1C3l0r;;;l!lm ",'" .. ~I GC .. ~... .: .~~,~j~'ff~MM~i~il':~'il~;:::1 0 P ,_ S},NTAANA6L ' ~; _11011 Sl:~:,._ _11011 _IIDII _11011>-, -11011 :;; 4WII 4T~H~~T (;2-"''' ~I P I~tmll P I~' ; ".',CH 03''''1'''''11 C3""" li~~ .2 iE il ", J!.,.~ ",: ,,,' ," .- O! "' j~j 7~-;,: 'ii. _'; .~ ~&j^1 .. [, IB a C3A _ .;;" .2 I ,~;., II c~STSTI~!1 .100lDilSol~QQ'QQ'n~~~[ II HZ I ~~ 0, i ~LiJ~~t:Jla~~~ DO ~ OQ Ii: :: :B :'"~" 8000 Dm~~lffiJfili!8: :: :: :: II :: :i :: :f 18 .. DDDDD~ic:'JQLI,;lr:tl,;l~~QDj~[[ D L1':j ~rJ 00 o~~ ~~ :: ~D 0 nDDD'D"""~'h;J ';M ;~! ~~ ffi6B8B 6B "",," .~ U L11 ,~~ 'l ~~ c:J 0 R1 :: Ir'lODDDDDDDOOrnEEBB0G R1 I l Ii ;0 D D(~oO"'I\l.y.,O. fJf;Jl D 1IfJ' .-!~ RR ~~' m'R~: ; 0 \~ ,HJ UL:J LtJ,. 112 R1 ~ ,R1 R1 R1-' .. Illl iI r'l"f'-rnn nn illRi ~"l 'Rl I R1 I R1 ' R1 ~I ~I -;;;II -.:...J I ~I."'e" ~I~""''''"" [lIM,,"'"'' lJl ][:) --...... C1 R2 R2 R2 R2 R3 '-'NDAV AI .8 C.SM G1 C1-MO C2 C3 C3-A C4 C5 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 R1 .2 R3 R4 RE SO SP SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE TWO-FAMILY RESIDENCE MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE SUBURBAN APARTMENTS RESIDENTIAL ESTATE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT SPECIFIC PLAN CR GC M1 M2 MO o P PGO PRO COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL GOVERNMENT CENTER LIGHT INDUSTRIAL HEAVY INDUSTRIAL MilITARY OPERATIONS OPEN SPACE PROFESSIONAL PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ~~i ~C1llilll1 ~. . . ..m_..' ......-- . 1"= 1000 FEET AA-2006-4-SD/CU P-2006-14/ SPR-2006-07/ER-2004-234 WEST END LOFTS 320 WEST FOURTH STREET IA ,pi(' - = 500 FEET PLANN N G B U L 0 AGE N C Y N G AND VICINITY MAP 8~'91 G 0 V M E N T -.L COMMERCIAL CO ME" C I A L G 0 V R M E N T FOURTH STREET COM1E CIAL I- W W a: I- en ::c u a: m c .0 M MER C I A L ~ ~ W " '" " " o w COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL COMMER IAL THIRD SREET OPEN SPACE COMMERCIAL MULTI-FAMILY -,.~~ n =";liIiI1" I~\! ~\. - __.' I .... ...,."...,.. AA-2006-4-SD/CU P-2006-14/ SPR-2006-07/ER-2004-234 WEST END LOFTS 320 WEST FOURTH STREET L ~ ~ w " '" >- " " ~ 0 w C <l: ~ 0 ~ a: w m " '" " " 0 w ~\ c!l{' PLANNING BUILDING AGENCY AND LAND USE MAP ffol~'1 0 ; / / , CUP 06-14/ AA 06R66~?/ ER 04-~41 SP E>8<JA.31 aTIoF~ANTA ANA Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance PLANNING DIVISION I. Project Title: SD-80 II. Project Numbers: AA-2006-4 SP and ER 2004-234 III. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Santa Ana Planning Division (M-20) P.O. Box 1988, Santa Ana, CA 92702 IV. Contact and Phone Number: Hallv Soboleske (714) 647-5842 V. Project location: South side of West Fourth Street. east of Birch Street. west of Broadwav VI. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: David DiRienzo, Urban+West+Strategies, Inc. 421 North Main Street, Santa Ana, CA 92701 VII. General Plan Designation: District Center (DC) VIII. Zoning: C3-A Downtown Commercial - Artists Village IX. Description of Project: The project is the creation of a specific plan to facilitate the infill development of the downtown project area to improve the pedestrian streetscape, reduce blight, and encourage an urban lifestyle, thereby promoting the use of transit. The intensity of development is in keeping with that allowed per the General Pian designation of District Center that allows ninety dwelling units per acre; however, the subject site will be developed at a six-story height (with one story being below grade). The proposed project consists of the construction of a new 16,000 square foot mixed use building with 1,189 square feet of retail on the first floor, 3,544 of basement that includes parking and storage, as well as five residential/commercial units occupying the remaining upper fioors. X. Surrounding land Uses and Setting: The project is located in the central urban core of Santa Ana, and is comprised of a 4,000 square foot lot in the Downtown National Register District. The surrounding land uses include the Ronald Regan Federal Courthouse just north and across the street from the subject site. Additionally, there are retail and office land uses to the south, east, and west. A public alley runs perpendicular and directly behind/south of the site. XI. Other agencies whose approval is required. There are no outside agencies that require approval. LL\M:\West_End_Lofts\Wesl_End_Checklistrlv_2.doc 8~g~81~ Page 1 of 2 C'TYOF~ANTA ANA Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Environmental Factors Potentially Affected: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by that project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. 0 Aesthetics 0 Agricultural Resources 0 Air Quality 0 Biological Resources 0 Cultural Resources 0 Geology and Soils 0 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 0 Hydrology and Water Quality 0 Land Use and Planning o Minerai Resources o Noise o Population and Housing o Public Services o Recreation o Transportation and Traffic o Utilities and Service Systems o Mandatory Findings of Significance Environmental Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation, I find that: A. 0 The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. B. [2J 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. 0 The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. D. 0 Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR (EIR No. - ) pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the project, nothing further is required. E. 0 Pursuant to Section 15184 of the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR (EIR No. - ) has been prepared earlier and only minor technical changes or additions are necessary to make the previous EIR adequate and these changes do not raise important new issues about the significant effects on the environment. An ADDENDUM to the EIR shall be prepared. F. 0 Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR (EIR No. - ) has been prepared earlier; however, subsequent proposed changes in the project and/or new infonmation of substantial importance will cause one or more significant effects no previously discussed. A SUBSEQUENT EIR shall be prepared. Signature December 29.2006 Date Hallv Soboleske. Associate Planner Printed Name LL\M:\West_End_Lofts\WesLEnd_Checklistrlv_2.doc 80A4'813 Page 2 of 2 ClTIOF~ANTA ANA Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: I. A brief expianation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported If the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). II. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. III. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. IV. "Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. Less Than Significant Potentially With 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 [8] D B. Damage scenic resources, including but not limited D D [8] 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 [8] D D. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? D D [8] D 81\e AO:~14 un48 ClITOF~ANTA ANA Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact II. Agricultural Resources - In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, iead 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 Farmiand 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.) 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? o o o o o ~ o o ~ o o ~ III. Air Quality - Where available, the significant criteria established by the applicable air quality management or pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: 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 exceeds quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? D. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? 80Af;~ 5 o o o o o ~ o o ~ o o ~ o o ~ o cITIOF~ANTA ANA Environmental Checklist 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 paleontological resource or site? 81YJ!;316 Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D D D D Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated D D D D D [8:J D D Less Than Signilicant Impact [8:J D D D D D D D No Impact D [8:J [8:J [8:J [8:J D [8:J [8:J clITof~ANTA ANA Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources D. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? VI. Geology and Soils - Wouid the project: A. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, Inciuding the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 1. 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? 2. Strong seismic ground shaking? 3. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? 4. Landslides? B. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? C. Would the project result In the loss of a unique geologic feature? D. Is the project located on strata or soil that is unstable or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentialiy result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? E. Where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater, is the soil capable of supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems? 8a~~~ 7 Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D D D D D Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated D D D D D D D D D Less Than Significant Impact D D D D D D D D D No Impact [g] [g] [g] [g] [g] [g] [g] [g] [g] ClITOF~ANTA ANA Environmental Checklist 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 requirernents? B. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there wouid be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (Le., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? 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? 8'O;4~' 8 Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D D D Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated D D D D D D D Less Than Significant Impact D D D D D D D No Impact ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ cITIOF~ANTA ANA Environmental Checklist' CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources 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? IX. Land Use and Planning - Would the project: A. Physically divide an established community? B. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? C. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? X. Mineral Resources - Would the project: A. Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? 86'fto!, ::19 !rot 48 Potentially Significant Impact o o o o o o o o Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated o D D D D I2<J D D Less Than Significant Impact o o o o o o o o No Impact I2<J I2<J I2<J I2<J I2<J D I2<J I2<J ClTYOF~ANTA ANA Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources XI. Noise - Would the project result in: A. Exposure 01 persons to or generation 01 noise levels in excess 01 standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards 01 other agencies? B. Exposure 01 persons to or generation 01 excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? C. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? D. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without project? E. For a project located within an airport land use plan or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles 01 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 (lor example, by proposing new homes and business) or indirectly (lor example, through extension 01 roads or other inlrastructure)? B. Displace substantial numbers 01 existing housing, necessitating the construction 01 replacement housing elsewhere? C. Displace substantial numbers 01 people, necessitating the construction 01 replacement housing elsewhere? 8'0A~2o Potentially Significant Impact o o o o o o o o Less than Signilicant with Mitigation Incorporated o o o o o o o o Less Than Signilicant Impact [8J [8J [8J [8J [8J [8J o o No Impact o o o o o o [8:J [8:J CIITOF~ANTA ANA Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources XIII. Public Services A. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service rations, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public service: 1. Fire protection? 2. Police protection? 3. Schools? 4. Parks? 5. 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 faciiities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XV. Transportation I Traffic A. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (Le., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ration on roads, or congestion at intersections)? Page 8 of 21 8QA-21 Potentially Significant Impact 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 [8J [8J [8J [8J [8J [8J D [8J No Impact D D D D D D [8J D ClTIOF~ANTA ANA Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources B. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? C. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? D. Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? E. Result in inadequate emergency access? F. Result in inadequate parking capacity? G. Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? XVI. Utilities and Service Systems A. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? B. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? C, Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? D. Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources or are new or expanded entitlements needed? E. Result in the determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? Page 9 of 21 80Ar22 Potentially Significant Impact o o o o o o o o o o o Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated o o [8] o o o o o o o o Less Than Significant Impact [8] o o [8] [8] o o o o o o No Impact o [8] o o o [8] [8] [8] [8] [8] [8] cmOF~ANTA ANA Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources F. Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's sold waste disposai 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? a(jA:23 Potentially Significant Impact o o o o o Potenlially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated o o I2J o o Less Than Significant Impact, I2J o o I2J o No Impact o I2J o o I2J ClTIOF~ANTA ANA Responses to Environmental Checklist For CECA Compliance I. Aesthetics A. The Scenic Corridors Element of the Santa Ana General Plan identifies certain corridors that serve as major views and vantage points to the City of Santa Ana. These corridors consist of existing scenic vistas or views open to the public. The proposed project is not within a scenic corridor and will not obstruct any scenic vista in the City. Impacts would be less than significant. B. The Orange Freeway (SR-57), Newport Freeway (SR-55), and Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22) are the three state highways that can be found in the City of Santa Ana. The project area is not visible from these highways, and the proposed project will not damage or destroy any scenic resources that are located within the vicinity of these highways. Impacts would be less than significant. C. Implementation of the proposed project would alter the visual quality of the site. However, impacts are anticipated to be beneficial, not adverse. The intent of the project is to improve the aesthetics in the planning area. The architectural style will be designed to complement the Downtown National Register District. The project includes development standards. D. Major sources of light and glare in the planning area include light from street and parking lot lights, illuminated signage, headlights from vehicles, security lighting, and indoor lighting. The proposed project will not introduce substantial new lighting that will be discern able over existing conditions. Impacts would be less than significant. II. Agricultural Resources A. Section 68474.4 of the Subdivision Map Act identifies certain categories of agricultural resources that are significant and, therefore, require special consideration. According to the Santa Ana General Plan, the City of Santa Ana does not contain Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. Therefore, the proposed project will not adverseiy affect these categories of farmland. B. The Williamson Contract applies to parcels consisting of at least 20 acres of Prime Farmland or at least 40 acres of land not designated as Prime Farmland. Santa Ana does not contain any parcels of Prime Farmland, nor does it contain any parcel consisting of more than 40 acres of farmland. Therefore, the Williamson Contract is not applicable to the City of Santa Ana. C. The proposed project will not disrupt or damage the operation and/or productivity of any farmland in the City of Santa Ana. No impacts would occur. III. Air Quality A. The project will not introduce substantial new growth in population to the downtown area. The project includes five residential units, which would generate a negligible population growth consistent with population projections used to develop the Air Quality Management Plan. Impacts are less than significant. 80Ar,24 ClITOF~ANTA ANA Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance H. Dunng the demolllion/constructlon associated with the proposed project, short-term construction-related activities will impact air quality in the local area. Long-term, new development and vehicle trips will not result in substantial or significant emissions due to the relatively small scale of this infill development. C. The proposed project will not result in an increase of criteria pollutants in the City of Santa Ana since the thresholds of the region due to the commercial nature of the downtown commercial area account for the contribution of pollutants to the region. This relatively small infill development will not contribute significantly to the region's overall pollutant level. The impact will be iess than significant. D. Sensitive receptors include land uses such as homes, schools, day care centers, and hospitals. This project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants. Impacts will be less than significant. E. Construction and implementation of the proposed project could ultimately involve materials/uses, such as drycleaners and salons, in the retail space on the first floor that may create objectionable odors. Impacts will be less than significant. IV. Biological Resources A. According to the Natural Diversity Database operated by the California Department of Fish and Game, sensitive species in Santa Ana are limited to a possible occurrence of the San Diego Horned Lizard. The site of the proposed project is not known to be a habitat for the species named above. No impacts would occur. B. Santa Ana is a built-up, urban community. As a result, readily apparent resources, such as natural habitat and wildlife, are limited. The proposed project does not interfere with the sustenance of any riparian habitat or natural community in the City of Santa Ana. No impacts would occur. C. The project site is located in an urbanized area. Due to the presence of this developed environment, and lack of natural water bodies in the area, no wetland habitat exists on the site. No impacts would occur. D. The official City tree is the Jacaranda. The proposed project will not damage or destroy existing Jacarandas in the area as it is developed. No impact wouid occur. V. Cultural Resources A. According to the Historic Resources Exhibit in the Santa Ana General Plan Revised Draft Land Use Element, the building immediately east of the subject site includes a historically and culturally significant ghost sign that may be affected by this project. Additionally, the subject site is iocated within the Downtown National Register District. Impacts will be mitigated by setting the upper levels of the building back from the lower floors so as not to obscure the historic ghost sign on the adjacent building's wall. Additionally, the building will be compatibie with the Downtown National Register District in terms of massing and scale, and will set itself apart from older development by utilizing a more modern style of architecture and materials, thereby meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Standard Number Nine requiring new deveiopment to be differentiated from old. Impacts will be mitigated to a less than significant level, and 80A-25 ClITOF~ANTA ANA Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance will be further analyzed with the help of special studies by a qualified architectural historian. B. The project area is located within an urbanized area and has been disturbed by previous and existing development. Therefore, it is unlikeiy that any significant archaeoiogicai resources exist on-site. The construction phase of this project will be monitored so as to identify an archeological resources unearthed during the implementation portion of this project. C. The project site is located within an urbanized area and has been disturbed by previous and existing development. Therefore, it is unlikely that any significant paleontological resources exist on-site. Implementation of the proposed project is not anticipated to disturb any known paleontological resources, and less than significant impacts on such resources are expected. D. The project site is not known to contain human remains interred inside or outside formal cemeteries, Discovery of human remains is governed by State Law, which requires stop of work and reporting to authorities. No impact would occur. VI. Geology and Soils A-1 According to the most recent Alquist-Priolo Zoning Map, no known fault traces are located in the City of Santa Ana. No impact would occur. A-2 Seismic hazard from ground shaking is typical for large areas of Southern California. However, the implementation of seismic design provisions for structural safety will help to minimize threats to human safety in the event of an earthquake. All structures will be designed in accordance with the seismic design provisions of the Uniform Building Codes to promote maximum safety in the event of an earthquake. No impact would occur. A-3 According to Exhibit 3-8 of the Santa Ana General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report, the project site is located in an area of very low/low liquefaction hazard. No impact would occur. A-4 The project area is generally flat and implementation of the proposed project will, therefore, not require slope cuts that could result in landslides. No unstable hills or cliffs are located in the project vicinity. No impact would occur. B, Localized erosion of on-site soils may occur as a result of the proposed project. Individual projects that meet certain criteria are required to comply with the Orange County Stormwater Program and Stormwater Permit, and implement best management practices for each site, inciuding post-construction. Given the relatively level slope and urban nature of the planning area, along with existing regulations, the potential for significant erosion such that a geologic hazard would be created is considered low. No impact would occur. C. The project site has been disturbed in the past and does not contain any unique geological or physical feature. No impact is anticipated. D. The proposed project is not located on sensitive or unstable soil. No impacts are anticipated. 80A-26 cITIOF~ANTA ANA Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance E. Sewer access is available in the project area. No impacts would occur. VII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials A. implementation of the proposed project is not associated with the use, storage, or disposal of hazardous substances. No impact wouid occur. B. The proposed project is less than one-half mile of an existing school. Due to the small number of units, and low additlonai traffic count. No impact would occur. C. The proposed project area does not include sites located on a Hazardous Material Site List. There are no impacts. D, There are no public airports in the City of Santa Ana; however, John Wayne International Airport is located one-mile southwest of city limits. The proposed project is not located within a two-mile radius of the airport. The proposal does not include structures which exceed 200 feet in height, and is not within the John Wayne Airport Planning Area. No impact would occur. VIII. Hydrology and Water Quality A. Runoff from the project area will not result in ongoing or new violations of water quality or waste discharge standards imposed by the various agencies (RWQCB, Orange County Water District, etc.). This is a relatively small infill development project, and does not include an unanticipated amount of discharge into drainage. No significant impact would occur. B. The proposed project, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonable foreseeable future projects, will contribute to the utilization of public water. The level of development anticipated under the proposal is such that it does not necessitate the preparation of an assessment to ensure water supplies are not adversely affected. Impacts are insignificant due to the relatively small scale of this project as an infill development project.. C. The proposed project is within a developed and urbanized area. The project will not result in a significant change in surface drainage patterns or absorption, as the site is currently impervious, and will continue to be post-construction. The site is less than one acre, and would not require preparation of a Water Quality Management Plan. No significant impact would occur.. D. Surface waters in the region could be degraded by runoff from the proposed project; however, do the relatively small scale of the project (less than one acre). In impact would occur. E. The proposed project includes new housing development. According to Exhibit 3-11 of the Santa Ana General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report, the proposed project is not located within a 1 OO-Year Flood Zone. No impacts would occur. F. The project does not consist of a structure that would impede or redirect flood flows. No impacts would occur. 8QA-~7 cmOF~ANTA ANA Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance G. The proposed project will be designed in compliance with appiicabie flood control ordinances and will not expose persons or property to water-related hazards. No impacts would occur. IX. Land Use and Planning A. The proposed project area does not Include existing residential neighborhoods. The project will not divide existing neighborhoods. No impact would occur. B. The project area is in an urban setting that does not harbor any significant environmental resources. However, the project includes amendment of the Zoning Code and associated maps, and to create a Specific District with development standards. The project has been analyzed for consistency with all applicable planning documents, and meets the intent of the C3-A zoning district by including retail iand uses at the ground level to augment the primarily commercial nature of the Downtown. Additionally, the General Plan Land Use Element District Center designation considers residential population density for this area. This mixed use project meets this requirement, and therefore, the project meets the intent of the all applicable planning documents. A Specific District zone will clarify and bring consistency to the zoning and General Plan in this location. C. The proposed project is located in an urbanized setting and no locally designated species or natural communities are known to exist in the project area. The site is not part of any habitat conservation plan or natural community preservation plan. Therefore, no impacts would occur. . X. Mineral Resources A. Pursuant to Section 3.8 of the Santa Ana General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report, there are no areas in the City of Santa Ana designated as Significant Mineral Aggregate Resource Areas (SMARA). No mineral resources are known to exist in the project area; therefore, no impacts would occur. XI. Noise A. The proposed project will not expose the public to noise levels in excess of the standards set forth in the City of Santa Ana General Plan. However, during the construction phase of the proposed project, there will be an increase in existing noise levels. Adjacent land uses will be affected by construction-reiated noise, but this is a temporary condition and a singular occurrence due to development. Impacts are less than significant. B. Construction grading could generate vibrations; however, impacts are less than significant since this is a temporary condition and a singular occurrence due to development. C. Due to the relatively small scope of the project, the implementation of the project will not generally increase ambient noise levels in the area, and impacts will be less than significant. Adjacent land uses will be affected by construction-related noise, but this is a temporary condition and a singular occurrence due to development 8QAr28 ClITOF~ANTA ANA Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance D. Hefer to XI.A. E. There are no public airports in the City of Santa Ana; however, John Wayne International Airport is located one-mile southwest of city limits. The proposed project is not located within a two-mile radius of the airport, According to the Santa Ana General Pian Draft Environmental Impact Report, no area of the City of Santa Ana is within the noise impact area or 65 CNEL of John Wayne International Airport. Therefore, people residing or working in the project area will not be exposed to excessive noise levels. Impacts will be less than significant. XII. Population and Housing A. The project includes the development of housing and would result in an increased population in the planning area. According to the 2003 United States Census, the City's average household size was 4.6 persons per household. Therefore, this project has the potential for 23 additional persons to be added to the overall population if household members were from outside the City. The direct and indirect impacts of this growth are less than significant with an overall City population to be approximately 337,977 according the 2000 U.S. Census. B. The project will not displace existing housing as the subject site is currently vacant. There will be no impacts. C. The project would not displace existing population as no housing currently exist onsite. The project will result in an overall increase in housing in the planning area. No impact would occur. XIII. Public Services A.1 Implementation of the proposed project may result in an increased demand for fire protection and emergency medical services in the local area, but at a small scale. Impacts are less than significant. A.2 The proposed project may result in an increased demand for police services, but at a small scale. Impacts are less than significant. A.3 The proposed project may generate additional students, but at a small scale. Impacts are less than significant. AA The project will increase demand for recreational facilities, but at a small scale. Impacts are less than significant. A.5 The project may impact other governmental facilities, but at a small scale. Impacts are less than significant. XIV. Recreation A. The proposed project will not result in a substantial or significant increase in residents and employees in the area. However, the project does propose an onsile courtyard at the street level, and may be used for passive recreation. Since this project is infill development, and is of a relativeiy small scale, the project does not affect long term City goals for recreational land uses. Additionally, a roof deck is proposed that will 80A1'"29 CITYOF~ANTA ANA Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance allow for additional recreational space for residents. Impacts will be less than significant. B. The proposed project entails the construction passive recreational facilities that will not adversely impact the environment. The impacts of these facilities are included in the analysis for the respective issues. Impacts will be less than significant. XV. TransportationlTraffic A. The implementation of the proposed project would increase vehicle trips in the project area. However, due to the small scale of the proposed project, impacts will be less than significant. B. The Circulation Element of the City of Santa Ana declares a minimum acceptable Level of Service - D (LOS - D) for major intersections in the City. This is above and beyond what is required by the County's Congestion Management Plan, Due to the small scale of this project, the implementation will not result in a less lt1a'2.-si9l}~!1i. impact.--'j_.~~-_. C. The project is not within the John Wayne Airport's Planning Area, and the proposed project does not include any heliports/helipads. Therefore air traffic will not be affected. No impact is anticipated. D. The proposed project will incorporate all applicable civil engineering standards to ensure that its implementation will not result in hazardous design features for vehicular traffic. A traffic study regarding the maneuverability of the public alley access was completed, and the results indicate a less than significant impact. A mitigation measure to have a mirror will be installed that will help the drivers leaving the proposed parking lift see oncoming alley traffic. E. Construction of the proposed project is not anticipated to result in inadequate emergency access to the site. Impacts are less than significant. F. The project includes underground parking with a parking lift to allow for eight parking spaces - one per bedroom of the proposed housing project thereby meeting the requirements for the City's multi-family residential parking ordinance. This measure will mitigate any effects for the need for additional parking capacity. Guest and consumer parking will be supplied through existing street parking and existing parking structure facilities. No significant impact will occur. G. The project will not negatively impact alternative transportation. There is no impact. XVI. Utilities and Service Systems A. The Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) regulates wastewater treatment for the City of Santa Ana. The proposed project will not cause any violation of those standards set forth by the OCSD as it is a small infill development. No adverse impacts are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required. B. The project will not cause a significant increase on existing water supply and wastewater facilities due to the relatively small scale of this infill development project. 8 QArJ 0 ClITOF~ANTA ANA Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance There will be no significant Impact as prevIous analysIs for water supply has Included the build-out of this project area. C. The Santa Ana Public Works Agency has reviewed the proposed project and has not identified a need for new or aitered systems to meet the increased demand for water drainage faciiities resulting from this project. No impact will occur. D. The proposed project will not require modifications to the existing water system. No impact would occur. E. Refer to XVLB. F. The project will generate additional solid waste. A preliminary review of landfills currently serving the project area shows significant remaining capacity. www.ciwmb.ca.qov. Santa Ana disposed of a total of 379,259 tons in the year 2000, at a rate of 2 pounds/resident/day and 10.9 pounds/employee/day. A study of the area iandfills and their remaining capacity is presented in the following table. Landfill Closure Remaining Capacity Santa Ana Contribution Year (million cubic vards)- (tons 2000) Arvin 2008 2.2 23.0 Bradley West and West 2007 4.7 4.0 Expansion Colton 2006 0.6 3.0 Frank R. Bowerman 2022 63 290,175 Olinda Aloha 2013 38 74,965 Prima Deshecha 2067 87.4 2,158 Puente Hills #6 2013 62.3 2.0 Simi Valley Landfill and 2034 9.5 33.0 Recyclinq Center Remaining Capacity in 267.7 Svstem There is sufficient current capacity to accommodate waste generated in the project area. Impacts will be less than significant due to the reiatively small scale of this project. G. The solid waste disposal needs of the proposed project will be served by Great Western Reclamation. Great Western Reclamation complies with all federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. The City's current diversion rate Is 59 percent, more than the 50 percent required by state law. No significant impact is anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required. XVII. Mandatory Findings of Significance A. The project may impact historic resources, but to a less than significant ievel. Impacts will be mitigated by setting the upper levels of the building back from the lower floors so as not to obscure the historic ghost sign on the adjacent building's wall. Additionally, the building will be compatible with the Downtown National Register District in terms of massing and scale, and will set itself apart from oider development by utilizing a more modern style of architecture and materials, thereby meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Standard Number Nine requiring new development to be 8QA-J 1 C'ITOF~ANTA ANA Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance differentiated from old. I he architecture and potential Impact will be further analyzed with the help of a qualified architectural historian. B. It is anticipated that air quality and traffic are less than significant due the small scale of this project. C. Implementation of the proposed project is expected to have no environmental impacts that are not expected to cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. There will be no significant impact. XVIII. References City of Santa Ana General Plan: General Plan, Adopted September 1982. Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Proposed Santa Ana General Plan Draft Land Use Element. Prepared for the City of Santa Ana. Whittier, California: Blodgett/Cunningham and Associates, August 1, 1997. Draft Land Use Element. Prepared for the City of Santa Ana. Whittier, California: BlodgetVCunningham and Associates, August, 1997. Secretary of the Interior's Standards. National Parks Service. 80A1I32 REQUEST The proposed project is to create a Specific Development Zone 80 and development standards for a site located in the Central Business Artists Village (C3-A) zoning district with a current General plan use designation of District Center (DC). PROJECT DESCRIPTION The subject property is located in the Central Business Artists village (C3-A) zoning district and has a General Plan use designation of District Center (DC). The proposed project consists of the construction of a new six-story, 16,000 square foot mixed-use building with 1,189 square feet of retail on the first floor, 3,544 of basement that includes parking and storage, as well as five residential and/or commercial units occl,lpying the remaining upper floors, on a 4,000 square foot lot. parking will be provided in a garage using a parking lift. The project will require a zone change to create a Specific Development zone with development standards for the zone. The Community Development Agency is the responsible agency for the Disposition and Development Agreement on file for this site, and this Agency will appropriately amend this agreement. A Tentative Tract Map will be filed and considered at a later date. RESPONSES TO ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST The following is an analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish a Specific District. The analysis is based upon the City of Santa Ana Environmental Check List. The analysis focuses on impacts associated with approval of the proposed amendment to the municipal code. I . AESTHETICS A. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? B. Damage scenic resources, including but not limited to trees, rock outpourings and historic buildings within a State highway? Less than significant. 8 QArJ 3 Approval of establish a result in the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to zoning ordinance for a Specific District would not adverse impacts to any scenic vista, or scenic The proj ect area is not located wi thin a Scenic identified in the Santa Ana General Plan. the subject site is not located near a State resource. Corridor as Additionally, Highway. c. Substantially quality of the degrade the site and its existing visual surroundings? character or Less than significant Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish a zoning ordinance for a Specific District would not degrade the visual character of the City, in that the proposed proj ect would establish development standards to minimize potential visual impacts associated with the project such as using non-reflective glass and traditional building materials on the exterior, as well as the protection of the historic ghost sign. Additionally, the architectural style will be designed to complement the Downtown National Register District. It will not create a "faux historic" appearance. The architectural style will be differentiated, but compatible in terms of exterior materials, features, size, scale and proportion to the historic district as a whole in order to protect the integrity of the environment thereby meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Standard Number Nine. Standard Number Nine states: ~New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment." The proposed new structure will be designed to provide a beneficial visual quality to the Downtown area. The essence of this Downtown National Register District is one of eclectic archi tecture over various periods of development, ranging from the turn of the eighteenth century to present. This proj ect is in keeping with the eclectic and unique nature of the character defining features of the district. Further, the project will include a courtyard area that will possess multiple amenities such as seating, landscape, public art, and a water feature. These amenities will add, rather than detract from, the visual character and aesthetics of the 80A~34 downtown. The proposed project meets the intent of the Citywide Design Guidelines through massing, scale, and proportion that is in keeping with that of the Downtown National Register District setting in its entirety. Several other buildings in this district range from two to six stories in height, and this proposed structure continues this model. D. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Less than significant Major sources of light and glare in the project area will stem from existing street lighting. The proposed project will not introduce substantial new lighting that will be discernable over existing conditions. Parking and residential areas will have interior lighting, and the parking entrance lighting will be activated by the garage door opening. Glass on the exterior of the proposed structure will be non-reflective. Up-lighting will be utilized to highlight the historic ghost sign during evening hours, but will not be on past 10:00 p.m. II. AGRICULTURE A. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland 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 Farmland, to non-agriculture use? No Impact According to the California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, the City of Santa Ana contains a limited amount of Prime and Unique Farmlands. Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish a zoning ordinance for a Specific District would not result in impacts to agriculture resources, in that the subject area does not contain Prime Farmlands or Unique Farmlands. III. AIR QUALITY A. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of applicable Air Quality Attainment Plan or Congestion Management Plan? 80&35 Less than significant The City of Santa Ana is included within the South Coast Air Quality Management District and subject to the requirements of the Clean Air Act at both the Federal and State level. The South Coast Air Quality Management plan (AQMP) is the primary planning document to monitor if air quality standards and objectives are being achieved in the South Coast Air Basin. The air quality objectives in the AQMP are based upon population and growth proj ections provided in regional planning programs and local general plans. A project could be in conflict with the AQMP if it results in population and growth impacts beyond those identified in regional planning programs and local general plans. Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish a zoning ordinance for a Specific District and any subsequent construction according to this zoning document would not have any effect on the growth projections in the City's General Plan Land Use Element. The estimated growth project is approximately 24 additional persons, or a maximum of 16,000 sf of commercial land uses, and is not considered substantial growth. Therefore, approval of the proposed ordinance amendment would not be in conflict with the South Coast AQMP. Additionally, this project is not within '4 mile of a school facility, and is therefore in compliance with Section 21151.4 of the Public Resources Code requirements. 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? D. Expose Sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? E. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Less than significant Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish a zoning ordinance for a Specific District and any subsequent project adhering to this zoning document would not result in any short-term construction related or long-term opera tional air quali ty impacts or odor impacts. The approval of the proposed ordinance would not involve any activities that 80A'lI36 would emit long-term or short-term air quality emissions or odor pollutants. This proj ect shall meet all requirements stated in Air Quality Management Rule 404 and the criteria stated in AQMD Rule Table 404(a) as amended February 7, 1986. III. 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 either individually or in combination with the known or probable impacts of other activities through direct removal, filling hydrological interruption, or other means? D. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact According to the City's Updated General Plan Land Use Element EIR and the California Department Fish and Game Natural Diversity Data Base, there is a limited amount of sensitive biological resources wi thin the Ci ty. Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish a zoning ordinance for a Specific District and any subsequent project adhering to this zoning document would not result in any adverse impacts to any sensitive biological resources. The project site is in an urbanized area, and the project will not be disturbing any wetland site or existing City tree (Jacaranda). IV. CULTURAL RESOURCES A. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. According to the Historic Resources Exhibit in the Santa Ana General Plan Updated Land Use Element, the building 8QA437 immediately east of the subject site includes a historically and culturally significant ghost sign that may be affected by this project. Additionally, the subject site is located within the Downtown National Register District. Impacts will be mitigated by setting the upper levels of the building back from the lower floors so as not to completely obscure the historic ghost sign on the adjacent building's party wall. That portion which will be obscured may be impacted negatively over time due to it being obscured; however it has been determined by a special study ("Courthouse Lofts Proj ect Historic Resource Impacts") that current ambient conditions may have a greater impact over time than if a structure is built on the subject site. The consultant believes that if left open to the elements, sunlight and inclement weather will cause the historic sign to deteriorate at a greater pace that if it were sheltered. That portion of the ghost sign that will not be obscured will be highlighted for public view through landscaping, a water feature, up-lighting, and an interpretative sign that will offer photos and description of the historic sign as indicated in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan. The un-obscured portion of the historic ghost sign is that area closest to the public right-of-way so as to allow more persons the ability to see the resource. Additionally, this portion of the sign is the most intact and visually interesting. The entire historic sign will be fully documented through a HABS survey as indicated in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan. Additionally, the proposed building will be compatible with the Downtown National Register District in terms of massing and scale ("Aesthetic Impact Evaluation"), and will set itself apart from older development by utilizing a more modern style of architecture and materials, thereby meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Standard Number Nine requiring new development to be differentiated from old. While the Secretary of the Interior's Standard Number Nine does not specifically apply, since this is new infill construction and not new construction or addition to an existing historic building, this standard is used as a baseline for potential adverse impacts. Impacts will be mitigated to a less than significant level through the measures noted above, and has been further analyzed with the help of a qualified architectural historian and consultant ("Courthouse Loft Project-Historic Resource Impacts" and "Aesthetic Impact Evaluation") . 8QA:i;38 Another baseline standard used in the design of this proposed development is the Secretary of the Interior's Standard Number Ten: "New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired." The historic ghost sign has been protected in a way that it will not be adversely affected by this project. Further, the new structure will not negatively impact adjacent structures as part of construction through the implementation of the reconunendations from special studies ("Geotechnical Reconunendations for Settlement Monitoring" and "Proj ect Construction vibration Reconunendations") including performing exploratory work on adjacent building support systems and ongoing testing for soil settlement. The City of Santa Ana is a Certified Local Government for Historic Preservation as approved by the California State Office for Historic Preservation. The City received this recogni tion in 2002 by meeting all the requirements deemed necessary by the State including having an established local preservation ordinance, as well as a local board or conunission comprised of those members of the conununity which meet strict qualification standards. This proposed project was brought to the City of Santa Ana Historic Resources Conunission for review and conunent as experts of local preservation. The conunission was unanimously in favor of the proj ect in general, albeit wi th concerns regarding the proj ect' s scale and the Conunission's overall desire to minimize visual impacts of the proposed six story building. To address these concerns, a consul tant report was completed ("Aesthetic Impact Evaluation") addressing the scale and visual impacts of the proposal. This report determined that the scale is in harmony with the National Register District as a whole as there are several other four to six story buildings within the district boundaries. This proposal follows this pattern of development. B. Cause a substantial. adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeol.ogica1 resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? C. Directly or indirectly disturb or destroy a unique pa1eontogica1 resource or site? D. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. No Impact 8QA1I39 According to the City's General plan Land Use Element EIR, the City of Santa Ana is unlikely that any significant paleontological, archeological or human remains at located the project site. Additionally, the site is located within an urbanized area that has been disturbed by previous and existing development. The project will be monitored during the construction phase to ensure that no cultural resources are affected. In the unlikely event that any human remains are found at the site, a qualified paleontologist and/or archeologist will be required to survey the area prior to the continuance of construction. v. GEOLOGY/SOILS A-1. 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? A-2. Strong Seismic Ground shaking? A-3. Seismic-related'ground failure, including liquefaction? A-4. Landslides No Impact According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR there are no active earthquake faults, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Zones or landslides within the City. However, several active faults are located wi thin fifty miles of the City. In the event a moderate to high earthquake occurs along one of these faults, portions of the City could experience moderate seismic shaking impacts. However, the seismic risks in Santa Ana are similar to other areas in the Southern Californian region. Additionally, according to the City of Santa Ana General Plan Seismic Element (1982), the potential for liquefaction hazards within the City ranges from very low to very high. Areas with high liquefaction potential are those having ground water less than twenty feet in depth. According to the Seismic Element, the proposed construction site is not within an area with liquefaction or significant seismic activity potential. Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish a zoning ordinance for a Specific District and any subsequent construction according to this zoning document would not increase the potential for seismic impacts, an/or liquefaction impacts, in that the approval of proposed ordinance amendment would not involve the development of any structures 8nAr40 that would be subject to seismic shaking impacts or liquefaction hazards. To ensure safe construction and monitoring methods, two studies were performed by qualified consultants ("Geotechnical Recommendations for Settlement Monitoring" and "Project Construction Vibration Recommendations") . Per the recommendations made by these reports, exploratory work will be performed to discover the depth and location of adjacent buildings' footings, and any necessary temporary support of these foundations will be completed as needed. Additionally, all soil settlement will be monitored to ensure no damage to adjacent historic buildings. B. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? No Impact Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish a zoning ordinance for a Specific District and any subsequent construction according to this zoning document would not result in or increase the potential for soil erosion or sedimentation impacts. Short-term erosion potential would be subject to the City's erosion control requirements, and would therefore not cause an impact. c. Would the project result in the loss of a unique geological feature? No Impact According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR there are no known geological hazards or unique geologic features in the City. Therefore, approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish a zoning ordinance for a Specific District and any subsequent construction according to this zoning document would not result in the loss of any unique geologic features. D. In the project located on strata or soil that is unstable or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially resu1t in on-or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? 80A,.41 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 According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, Santa Ana contains a wide variety of soil types and associated geotechnical constraints. Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish a zoning ordinance for a Specific District and any subsequent construction according to this zoning document would not involve the construction of any structures that would be subject to geotechnical constraints. Further studies by qualified consultants have offered recommendations to monitor soil settlement during and after construction to ensure the continued safety and integrity of the adjacent historic buildings. VI. 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 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 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 Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish a zoning ordinance for a Specific District and any subsequent construction according to this zoning document would not result in the creation of or increase the potential of any significant hazardous material impacts to the public, in that the approval of the proposed ordinance would not involve any acti vi ties that would include the handling, storage or distribution of hazardous materials or emit hazardous emissions. This proposed project will comply with the Phase I Environmental Audit completed in 2004. Any retail use that operates from this site in the future would be subject to local, state and federal regulations regarding the handling of hazardous materials. 8QA:ifl2 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 project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact According to the City's General plan Land Use Element EIR and the Orange County Airports Environs Land Use Plan, Santa Ana is not located within any aircraft accident potential zones, nor is the proposed project located within a John Wayne Airport Planning Area. Additionally, there are no private airstrips in the City. Therefore, approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code would not increase the potential for safety hazards for people residing in or working within the City. VII. HYDROLOGY/WATER QUALITY A. Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? E. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? I. Result in an increase in pollutant discharges to receiving waters? N. Tributary to an already impaired water body, as listed 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? R. Cause or contribute to an exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses? No Impact 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 Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan. 8 (\Ai443 The City of Santa Ana does not contain any impaired bodies, as defined by Section 303 of the Clean Water However, the City does contain several drainage facilities convey surface water runoff into bodies of water that classified as impaired. water Act. that are Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish a zoning ordinance for a Specific District and any subsequent construction according to this zoning document would not directly involve routine waste discharges that would be in conflict with water quality standards established by the State Regional Water Quality Control Board, in that the approval of the proposed ordinance would not involve any long term operations or construction activities that would involve the discharge of water. This project would be subject to the City's storm water protection 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. Q. Have a potentially significant adverse impact on groundwater quality? No Impact The City of Santa Ana receives 66% of its water from underground water supplies. The underground water basin in the City ranges from -SO-feet to +40-feet above sea level. Presently, the City pumps underground water from 21 water wells. Fourteen of the water wells pump ground water into small surface reservoirs. The remaining seven water wells pump underground water into the City's distribution system. Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish a zoning ordinance for a Specific District and any subsequent construction according to this zoning document would not result in adverse impacts to underground water supplies or prevent the recharge of underground water supplies, in that approval of the proposed ordinance would not involve any activities that would impact underground water supplies or provide impervious surfaces that would prevent the recharge of underground water supplies. c. Substantia11y site or area, alter the existing including through drainage pattern the alteration of of the the 8QA-A4 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? L. Result in increased impervious surfaces and associated runoff? M. Create a significant adverse environmental impact to drainage patterns due to changes in runoff flow rates or volumes. No Impact The City of Santa Ana has a Master Plan of Drainage to guide the construction of adequate drainage facilities in the City. The facilities include a series of underground storm drain systems, open storm drain systems, catch basins and natural drainages. A significant drainage impact can occur when existing rates of surface water runoff are increased and existing drainage facilities are unable to accommodate the additional rates of runoff. Existing rates of surface water runoff can increase through the introduction of additional amounts of impervious surfaces, or through changes to existing drainage patterns. Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish a zoning ordinance for a Specific District and any subsequent construction according to this zoning document would not significantly alter existing drainage patterns or increase existing rates of surface water runoff due to the project's relatively small scale such as that determined by California Environmental Quality Act Section 15303. The applicant shall also pay the required National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) fee as a mitigation measure, as well as Fish and Water Conservation Plan (FWCP) fees as applicable. F. 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? G. Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? H. 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? 8qA-415 No Impact The City's General Plan identifies that portions of Santa Ana are within the lOO-year flood Zone. Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish a zoning ordinance for a Specific District and any subsequent construction according to this zoning document shall not cause development to occur within areas subject to lOO-year flood risks. J. Result in significant alteration of receiving water quality during or following construction. K. Could the proposed project result in increased erosion downstream? No Impact Erosion refers to the removal of soil from exposed bedrock surfaces by water or wind. The effects of erosion are intensified with an increase in slope, the narrowing of runoff channels and by the removal of groundcover, which leaves the soil exposed. Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish a zoning ordinance for a Specific District and any subsequent construction according to this zoning document would not facilitate erosion impacts. Construction shall be evaluated for potential soil erosion impacts and shall be subject to the City's erosion control requirements. o. Tributary to other environmentally sensitive areas? If so, can it e~acerbate already e~isting sensitive conditions? P. Have a potentially significant environmental impact or surface water quality to either marine, fresh or wetland waters? s. Impact aquatic, wetland or riparian habitat? No Impact According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, there are no sensitive marine waters, fresh waters or wetlands in the Ci ty. However, the City does contain several drainage systems that convey drainage flows to sensitive marine resources. Pollutants conveyed through these drainage systems could adversely impact sensi ti ve marine resources. Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish a zoning 8QA-446 ordinance for a Specific District and any subsequent construction according to this zoning document would not result in any activities that would discharge pollutants into sensitive downstream marine resources. All new construction would be evaluated for potential water quality impacts and would be subject to the City's storm water protection requirements. VIII. LAND USE/PLANNING A. physically divide an established community? No Impact Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish a zoning ordinance for a Specific District and any subsequent construction according to this zoning document would not physically divide any established community. No residential community exists within this immediate or adjacent areas, and therefore, no impact would occur. 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 with mitigation measures incorporated The project area is in an urban setting that does not harbor any significant environmental resources. However, the project includes amendment of the Zoning Code and associated maps, and to create a Specific District with development standards. The project has been analyzed for consistency with all applicable planning documents, and meets the intent of the C3-A zoning district by including retail land uses at the ground level to augment the primarily commercial nature of the Downtown. Additionally, the General Plan Land Use Element District Center designation considers residential population density for this area. This mixed use project meets this requirement, and therefore, the project meets the intent of the all applicable planning documents. A Specific District zone will clarify and bring consistency to the zoning and General Plan in this location. C. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community plan? 80ArA7 No Impact According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, there are no habitat conservation plans or natural community conservation plans established wi thin the City of Santa Ana. Therefore, approval of the proposed ordinance amendment and subsequent project would not be in conflict with any habitat conservation or natural community conservation plan. IX. 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 The City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR identifies that there are no areas in Santa Ana that contains Significant Mineral Aggregate Resource Areas. Therefore, approval of the proposed ordinance amendment and subsequent proj ect would not result in adverse impacts to any significant mineral resource. X. NOISE 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. B. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. C. 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. 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 proj ect area to excessive noise levels? Less than significant impact The proposed amendment Specific District for to the Municipal Code mixed use development to at establish a the project 80Af'"A8 location, as well as subsequent implementation would not result in any long-term noise or ground borne vibration impacts, in that the proposed ordinance would not involve any activities that would emit long term operation noise impacts. The project's implementation will cause short term construction related noise impacts. This is a temporary and single-occurrence due to development, and will be mitigated through the requirement to meet the City's Noise ordinance and standards. The proposed Klaus Parking system for the residential component of this plan will not have any significant impact on ambient noise or vibration per the study submitted ("Klaus Parking Systems Sound Meter Measurements". According to the Orange County Airport Environs Land Use plan (ALUP) portions of Santa Ana are impacted by aircraft noise. Approval of a new zoning district within the City does not require Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) approval of development within areas identified as Noise Impact Areas by the ALUP and is not within a Planning Area established by the ALUC. XI. POPULATION/HOUSING A. Induce substantial population directly or indirectly through infrastructure. growth in an area, either extension of roads or other Less than significant The project includes the development of housing and would result in an increased population in the planning area. According to the 2006 United States Census, the City's average household size was 4.7 persons per household. Therefore, this project has the potential for 24 additional persons to be added to the overall population if household members were from outside the City. The direct and indirect impacts of this growth are less than significant with an overall City population to be approximately 337,977 according the 2000 U.S. Census. B. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 8QA-A9 No Impact The proposed' amendment to the Municipal Code to establish a Specific District for a mixed use project would not induce substantial growth in the City or displace substantial numbers of existing housing or population, in that approval does not displace homes and/or population. XII. PUBLIC SERVICES Fire Protection, Police Protection, Schools, Parks, Other Public Facilities Less than significant impact Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish a Specific District for mixed use development at the project location, as well as subsequent implementation, would not significantly increase the demand for additional public services over current levels of service being provided in the City. The project site is located in an urbanized area, and this relatively small scale infill development will not significantly impact the need for public services. XIII. 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? Less than significant impact. The proposed project will not result in a substantial or significant increase in residents and employees in the area. However, the proj ect does propose an onsi te courtyard at the street level, and may be used for passive recreation. Since this project is infill development, and is of a relatively small scale in a previously developed lot, the project does not affect long term City goals for recreational land uses. Impacts will be less than significant to the extent that the development for residential land uses increases park needs. As a mitigation measure, the applicant will be charged Parks In-Lieu fees. B. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, 8QA"4PO which might have environment. an adverse physical effect on the No Impact A roof deck is proposed that will recreational space for residents. No occur as a result of these new recreation allow for additional adverse impacts would facilities. XIV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC A. Cause an increase in traffic, relation to the existing traffic street system? which is load and substantial capacity of in the 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 impacts It is projected that implementation of this proposed project would result in an increase of 80 daily trips with a four A.M. peak hour trips and seven P.M. peak hour trips. This is not considered a substantial increase to existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. The Circulation Element minimum acceptable Level intersections in the City. required by the County's proj ect would have a less Service. of the City of Santa Ana states that of Service to be a "E" for major This is above and beyond what is Congestion Management Plan. This than significant impact to Level of C. Result in a change either an increase location that results in air traffic patterns, including in traffic levels or a change in in substantial safety risks? No Impact The project area is not within the John Wayne Airport's Planning Area, and does not include any proposed helipads/heliports. No impact will result. D. Substantially increase hazards to a design feature 8QA~?1 E. Result in inadequate emergency access Less than significant with mitigation measures incorporated According to the City of Santa Ana's Staff Policy for On-Site Circulation, the alley that serves this proposed structure is substandard because it is only ten feet in total width. Minimum standard alley width is twenty feet as established by SAMC Section 34-41. The alley provides the necessary access for the parking lift system within the proposed building. A traffic consul tant completed an access study ("Parking plan for Courtyard Lofts") which concluded that maneuverability into the parking lift will be satisfactory, provided the drivers use caution to avoid collisions with adjacent buildings and other vehicles in the alley. Residents will, overtime, become adept at maneuvering from alley to parking area. The driveway apron offers an additional IS' for access and turning radii into the parking lift. A mirror will be installed to allow those emerging from the parking area to see any oncoming traffic, and an alley/driveway warning light will be activated by the garage door opening. Any easements required for the mirror installation mitigation will be obtained. Another measure to ensure that residents of the new structure will be able to make use of the parking lift is to be included in Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) for the development. The CC&R' s will give notice to each prospective buyer/tenant that the parking lift and/or alley restricts the length and size of a vehicle that may gain access and park in this location. Emergency access will be adequate as there is front and rear access to the building. As recommended by the consultant report, the alley will be operated one-way only (west to east) to reduce the amount of potential of traffic and potential for collisions. F. G. Result in inadequate parking capacity Conflict with adopted policies supporting transportation alternative No Impact The project includes a parking lift to allow for eight parking spaces which includes: a. One (1) parking space for each unit with a size of one- thousand, six-hundred (1,600) gross square feet or less. 8QA:ip2 b. Two (2) parking spaces for each unit with a size of one- thousand, six-hundred and one (1,601) gross square feet up to three-thousand, two-hundred (3,200) gross square feet. c. Three (3) parking spaces for each unit with a size of three-thousand, two-hundred and one (3,201) and larger gross square feet. This measure will mitigate any effects for the need for additional parking capacity due to new residential development. New retail in the area must apply for a ministerial C3 Parking Waiver to seek permission to utilize the public parking structures. One such structure is located wi thin one block (within 200') of the proposed location at the northwest corner of Third Street and Birch Street. Guest and consumer parking will be supplied through existing street parking and existing parking structure facilities. No significant impact will occur. The proj ect transportation; of the proposed the site. does not directly involve alternative however, a major bus terminal is within 915 feet development, and a bus stop within 200 feet of xv. UTILITIES/SERVICE SYSTEMS A. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? B. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? C. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? D. Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources or are new or expanded entitlements needed? E. Result in the determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the proj ect' s proj ected demand in addition to the providers existing commitments. 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? 8QA'4S3 No Impact Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish a Specific District for mixed use development at the project location, as well as subsequent implementation will be evaluated for potential impacts to utility service systems. There are no difficulties related to capacity at this time in the City, and wastewater discharge related to this project would be negligible. Since is relatively small scale infill development, no impact would occur. XVI. 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. Potentially significant unless mitigation incorporated As previously analyzed in consultant report ("Courthouse Lofts proj ect - Historic Resources Impacts"), the proj ect may impact historic resources, but to a less than significant level. Impacts will be mitigated by setting the upper levels of the building back from the lower floors so as not to obscure the historic ghost sign on the adjacent building'S wall. Additionally, the building will be compatible with the Downtown National Register District in terms of massing and scale, and will set itself apart from older development by utilizing a more modern style of architecture and materials, thereby meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Standard Number Nine requiring new development to be differentiated from old. This proj ect also meets the Secretary of the Interior's Standard Number Ten because the project will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the adjacent historic properties and their environment would be unimpaired. The architecture and potential impact has been analyzed with the help of a qualified architectural historian. B. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? 8QAf-~4 Less than significant impact Approval of the proposed ordinance would not resul t in any significant cumulative impacts, since there are little or no opportunities for infill development in other areas of the Downtown National Register District, and due to the fact that the project conditions are zone-specific, with this small scale area being the scope of the project. C. Does the proj ect have environmental cause substantial adverse effects on directly or indirectly? effects, which will human beings either No Impact Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish a Specific District for mixed use development at the project location, as well as subsequent implementation would not cause any substantial adverse effects on human beings, in that the proposed ordinance would not involve any activities that would result in adverse effects to human beings or the environment. XVIII. DETERMINATION Based upon the evidence in light of the whole record documented in the above evaluation and cited references, I find that the proposed project would not have a significant impact on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared. XVIV. REFERENCES City of Santa Ana Citywide Design Guidelines, 2006 City of Santa Ana General Plan, 1997 City of Santa Ana, General Plan EIR, 1997 City of Santa Ana, Staff Policy for On-Site Circulation California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program 8QA-~5 South Coast Air Quality Management District Air Quality Management Plan California Department of Fish and Game Natural Diversity Data Base Orange County Airport Environs Land Use Plan Secretary of the Interior's Standards. National Park Service "Parking Plan for Courtyard Lofts". Kaku & Associates. August 3, 200S "Courthouse Lofts Project - Historic Resources Impacts". Kaplan Chen Kaplan, April 20, 2006 "Aesthetic Impact Evaluation". Kaplan Chen Kaplan, December 26, 2006 "Klaus Parking Systems Sound Meter Measurements". December 8, 2006 "Project Construction Vibration Recommendations". Snyder- Langston letter. December 12, 2006 "Geotechnical Recommendations for Settlement Monitoring of Adjacent Buildings". Albus-Keefe & Associates. December 20, 2006 XX. PRE PARER Hally Soboleske, Associate Planner, City of Santa Ana HS:\\West_End_Lofts\West_End_NegDec-FINAL.doc 8QA-4~6 MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN INTRODUCTION Section 15097 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines requires all state and local agencies to establish monitoring or reporting plans for projects approved by a public agency whenever approval involves the adoption of either a "mitigated negative declaration" or specified environmental findings related to environmental impact reports. The mitigation monitoring plan (MMP) contained herein is intended to satisfy the requirements of CEQA as they relate to the Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the West End Loft Project/Specific Development 80 (SD80). This MMP is intended for use by City staff to ensure compliance with mitigation measures during project implementation. Mitigation measures identified in this MMP were identified in the Subsequent IS/MND prepared for the proposed project. The Subsequent IS/MND presents a detailed set of mitigation measures that will be implemented throughout the lifetime of the project. Mitigation is defined by CEQA as a measure which: . Avoids the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action. . Minimizes impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation. . Rectifies the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the impacted environment. . Reduces or eliminates the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the project. · Compensates for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments. Note: Sections 21083 and 21087, Public Resources Code; Reference: Sections 21002, 21002.1,21081, and 211 OO(c), Public Resources Code. The intent of the MMP is to ensure the effective implementation and enforcement of adopted mitigation measures and permit conditions. The MMP will provide for monitoring of construction activities as necessary and in-the-field identification and resolution of environmental concerns. Compliance Checklist City staff will coordinate monitoring and document the implementation of mitigation measures. City staff will be responsible for fully understanding and effectively implementing the mitigation measures contained within the MMP. Table 1 of this report identifies the mitigation measure, the monitoring action for the mitigation measure, the responsible party for the monitoring action, and timing of the monitoring action. 8QA-,i7 z ~ ...J a. G z a: o I- Z o ~ z o !d: G i= ~ o CO I- ~z OlW .a~ roo. 1-0 ...J W > W . C o - . ll. C3 W a. l:Q C/l l- ll. o ...J C Z W . I- C/l W 3: '" c c 0 <( "Ci) ro";;: CO "'0> OOc o'c >-c ~ '" 00:: '" '" c c c c <( .2 <( .2 ('lj.!'Q ro.!!? +-->--> c.- c.- ",0 ",0 00 00 0> .......c:_c 0::0 o:a >.= >.= ;=:: :::::l :t= :J 000000 '" c c <( .2 ('Ij.!'Q ~> c.- ",0 00 _c 0'- >,g :t::::;:J 000 .ill U) .ill U) .~ U) 'en c 'en c U) c " 0 .~B .2E '6 TI Ll " Ll " 0 0) 0 0) 0 0) .~ 0. "a5 0. -~ U) U) U) 0... .S 0.. c 0.. .~ c c c -'" 0 0 0 " n "u u 0) 2 2 ::J .<: ~ " ti ti ti c c c c '" D.'" 0 0 0 " " " 0>'" 0> 0> 0> cO) c c C "L: g ." ." .~ ::J ~ ::J ::J 00. 0 0 0 .8 Ll 0) ~ :t::: Q) Etii o~3: t 0 t- ",c", D...:J 0 oo.Q= '" ..0 '" O>::J 0) co. (I)+::;u - o 'c ~ 8. - Q.) C,)(lj I- E c " W",:':::.{g J:_cc I- 00)", cE- rn 0 0... - . W"ti)..Q g>~ <( ::::J Q) +::: ::J oii>mca ....::E"O r.n2 '" c c <(.2 (lj.!'Q ~ > c.- ",0 000> _ C 0'- >.;g :t::::J 000 '" c c <(.2 (tl.!Q ~> c .- ",0 (f)o> _c 0'- Ll >.= :~ :::::l 000 '" c c <(.2 ro.!'Q ~> c.- ",0 (f)o> _ c 0.- Ll >.= :t::: :J 000 ~CfJ '" c o.Q :00 00) .~ 0. 0) '" a...S 1l 'm " ~ 0) 0) LL >- 0) 2: ::J '" .~ .r::: 0. '" 0, o (5 .<: 0.. lii ::J o 2 ti >-~ .00) to) o C 0.'- 0)0> a: a3 0>0 - c .8 ~'o 5 ..... C 0):;::; .Q co: c Q) C a.~oo..g "O.!'Q ffi E g 2:!:::..c8~ ro:E+-'-U) :;:::;....."O+:::c .- Q) ceo J:: o..ctl:::::l () ~ E '" 0.0) o " ~ c ~ '" o ::J "C (J) 11..!'Q -'" " 0) .<: " c '" D.'" 0>'" C 0) 'C g ::J ~ 00. -'" " 0) .r::: " c '" D.'" 0>'" cO) .- " :J e 00. >- I- (J)~ ~gB.~ _~ ~ ~~ c_ 'oE. E"OOOOOO) +-'''Oro..c 100_0 2wc'L: "OQ)Q) ~cc.....U) (J)~~ ~~ ctl.c.-o _:J.~Q)Q)ctl:::::l_ c a - 0 Coo 0 5' ~ Cf.I <<i ..... ~ C1) 0 co (J)__"C C C "0 (f)_Q)'-a "Cl..C/).-:J'~E:::::lc.sC:::::lQ)o--c CD ..c.. '-()+-'''O .....o..cw ..co. LLo('lj 0000.....0 oE-;;;Q)g""w-:;;::;:::;oo"O+-':::l WOO CID.....Or- co~o....... +-'''''-('ljC\1>.''O I- ctl~o-~ --0:::::l00+-'0)00_"O+-,--_[::0> W ~~cO(J)~ ~ +-' OOC>>O"O-"O-ctlC ~o ~ .-Q.)u~,,'-(/} roroct;SctS..- ....... ffiQ)"OE~UJ~.c2~'c~t5"O.~o"O~~ ~~ c g.o ~~ :::! '+- .8 t? +-' .8 :J 0:0:- e >..... g.::.::: Q) > .~:o"O = Q) 0 0 en Q) E.~ e 8:: ~.S 0>2.i:: ~ 0.. >. ~- Q) c...c C/l >-0) !l'-.o=+=..c:; :::J.- .~ a5 0 >~ CJ ~ en.--:J.... >5.---CI)enEQ)0.... .t::.;> 0'" Q).6~{)~>-~....__en'....o ~ ........_Eec>. rn ""0 +::+::Q) :::J{)'>>'c~CI)$ '-:::JoQ):E...IQ) Q)"O () Q).J:JCJi CI) 2-..0 00 0lQ) C 55 E:S"E-20 ~ 0..$ co: ..c 0 0 -- co: ""0 +:: ~.s""O co: E E'U _ 0 0 a: c ""O_~ ~g ~~~~~>.~~~--_55E~c-C-o c () c CD c ...J 0... C CD Q) .... .....s Q) _ C C \U._ .... roo+::ro oroQ)-~Q)o.J:JE~O)O)"'~"oo>--c O)rn...c.....- ....00 Cl)cn Q)E 0> E c en .0 rn W 0> co 0... E Q) .....Q CI) Q) E c 2 ~ ::I: Q) ~CO:=i::~f"g~~O....~....orncQ)Q).__~Q) E .......c...c .$ 0'-' 0 ctl.;:: () Ct.__ Q).- E +:; "0 CI) Q)...c . >. rn CtLt::::t:::x..c...c Q)Q)Q)xlZl~cQ)Q)S5Q):::::=ctlQ) Q~~W >~o>.J:JEw~roQ)ooCl)..c{)~0>Q2 8Q~58 '" '" '" c c c C <( <( .Q <( J'Q ~ ctl.~ co: ~....1.. _>_ @Q @O@ oo~ 00 00 -"o-C- o'-co:oo >.::0 Q) >-= ~:::J :t:::: :::J.t::. 00..<(0000 .~ rn 2 rn C .00 o.Q 0 :013:0 00)0 .~ lZI.ai Q.~ Q c o t5 2 ti c o " 0> C ." ::J o c o t5 2 ti c o " c .~ o .$ .$ cwc "'~ '" ooa5UJ -E- 00)0 >-~ :t::::.S :'!::: o 0 0) 0) 0) .r:::~.<: ':::0'::: o ~ 0 _c_ (ij8(ij IDCID 0) 0 0) E'en E ~o~ '" ~ '" ::J 0) ::J E'6 E ~ '" ~ ~ ~lZI ~ .o~ '0 0:::<t:0::: z < ..J D.. el z a: o !- Z o :2: z o i= < el i= ~ o CD !- ~z <DW .0:2:- crlD.. !-O ..J W > W C o u:: C3 W D.. ~ Ii: o ..J C . Z W . !- m W 3= '" c ~c<( <(.Q~ E! .~ ~ .~ ~ ~O(f) 0 :J (f) _ g>"C "0 t5 fa _co._am(])._ Ou C'(f.jO~O >._ >- C._ (]).c +-' :t::: '5 :t::: ~ .2: CD e.~ omOa..O",<(I '" c <( c -Q .s'" c';:; ~O 0) ~c o'c C@ 00:: '" c <(c co:.Q - '" c.- ca.;::: fflO '" c c <(.Q ro.~ -> c-- ",0 fflO) ~c 0'- >,;g .'t:: :J om '" c Co <( '00 ro"> CO "'0) fflc ~-- o c >,c -'" 00:: '" c c <( .Q (lj.!.'1 -> c-- ",0 fflO) ~c 0-- >.g :t:::: :J om ~O) a.s Ll >.= ~:J om >, .$ .$ '" 2 2 '" '" > '" '" .en c -en c " -en c -en c .9E .22 '" .22 g2 Ll 0 Ll 0 ffl 0 Ll 0 Ll 0 0 '" 0 '" 0 '" 0 '" .~ 0. -" 0. m co .~ 0. "fii 0. '" '" '" <( 0 '" '" a...!; a.. .~ I ffl o....S a.. _E; 0) ,s 0 c c .E; c c 0 "" 0 :Q .~ 0 0 :g 0 t5 -5 '" t5 n 2 '" :J 0 c 2 :J .c ~ -" c 0 ~ en 0 en '" t5 ~ en en c c c :J '" C C ~ C 0 0 B '" :J- C 0 0 0 0.", 0 -<,2 'c~2 en 0 0 0) 0)'" 0) - 0) 0) c c <D c E o 0 Q) C C C -" .;::: g ." 0 Q ..... ..... 0 -" -" ~ c. 0.- :J :J ~ :J it '" c c..~ 13 :J :J 0 00. 0 0. _ro"Cctl 0 0 0'" OE"''''>' ~ .~ i:i: e:S ~ @ <(0 u..- -:Sco (j)c <COLC Q) Q):~' a:~~~rn :so t::::;e.9.8 --0 Z ~:sca co o c ..... Q) .....co Orn-a.8Cd Q) J-Ea> 0> -g.:g <c~Cijo'~ ..c c I- m.Qlt:-c 00 a:..c:t=.-ro 00 O,gEE~ +-' Q) .a. "@ CD (lj..c . ....... Cf.I In.....,..... +-' 0 ~'zo Z~"""'oEE:: WE <(.~= E~ en:J 0 (/)0: c'~ c-- _00+-'"'O!-2.QCJ>c O _ ~ 0 +-' C._ 0"0 co: C ('Ij -6> E Z Q) 0)""0 . Q...CJ)=..... '---'Cti c> >'"oo;g CD 8 .e-ro-cQ)ooEc >< a... ~ t5 >< <( -o.S Q) 0 C '0 E@o~1? Q) C/) ~ .......... CD c .2.g @ E+-' .......croco: 00)>0 CDa>-O>' cnO-o~ -~~li ~EU)OD =~ ~w;oU)co: ~~-~ =<(!=u ,ft~~ ~OQ)~U)Q) ECO:~~ .~ ~~Q) ~_c ~ -Q>o..c ~-~Q) >.Qo-c ZO<D EO: 0 > 0 +-' = ~............ '- +-' ....-..- CO ('J ...., .$<1>-C ..c::.=~'-' cO)R.....O>>"' -ZO ~~o--o ~c.C-O ._~O~U ':JOo..WW~ --ro"-C C1)---;:::J Z~-g W~~~w ~oCro ~I~CI)CI) ~oro '" W .0 ~ 0 ~ jg i3 ctS CI) CI) >'(/) ctJ ....J CO ~ _~-~ _c~S oroWrn . a o~=wmCl) ~roctSO ~~~<2~~E_5 :;::::;: S'~:E.o.......:~- ~ O'l~IC"S:WQ)C: o....Jc~ O(ijc..co;c.. o~UJ ~L EO Q)<Cc>>c>>E>.>OlO'lC~ -;::o.-(])E(])Wc.N ~~__CO_~_:J"_~ -o~(/)..c(])(/)~ e~CI)E~g UJeE~c~:Ern~"~CI) ~o =>~~..::.:::(])t.......~CJ)o"_"- < ~..:::.:::c 0)....... . ~~~CI)Oliro~~==UJ~UIccr~ >>.2 "* ..J -as.2 E CI) -a ~ g. -~ -g .~ E:;:8 ~ &: ~ ~ g ~ S' :J 0 0) O'l 8 - 0 -s: (])- ca s c (]) O'l g = Ctl ....J 0 2 ~ C1)O";::c.5o"5";::o~5.~Q)E_5~roc ~"~~ -ro . .8.~;g::;g .8~3 c..c (])~;g ~..cg -= g ~-:J c>"~Q):Jo:J.~:JroC>>Q)..co:Jo~ro-c.o~ <-I~.oc.oI~~~~~umo~z>(/)o~ O)c c '" ~o:: 80A459 To: Ms. Hally Soboleske, Associate Planner City of Santa Ana Planning Division From: David Kaplan Kaplan Chen Kaplan Re: Aesthetic Impact Evaluation 320 West Fourth Street - West End Lofts Project AESTHETICS Setting: Landform, Development and Building Form This memo is a review of the West End Lofts project proposed for 320 West Fourth Street to determine if there are any adverse environmental impacts related to aesthetic considerations. The site is in an older, generally flat urban area with a variety of buildings containing a range of uses, predominately commercial and office space. Building sizes and styles vary, but there is a continuous assemblage of commercial storefronts at the property line on both sides of West Fourth Street to the east and a continuous line on the South side to the west. Across the street to the north is a multi-storied office building, set back from the street on a very large parcel. Immediately adjacent to the west of the site is the West End Theater building at the southeast corner of Fourth Street and Birch. To the immediate east of the site is a two story Semi- Tropic Hotel Building. The two flanking buildings, both contributors to the historic district, were built with blank party walls facing the proposed site. Advertising signs were painted on the eastern side wall, repainted at various times and left intact when a building was built on the project site. When the building burned and was demolished around 1978, the remnants of the painted advertisements were uncovered. West Fourth Street at Main Street was the original commercial center of Santa Ana starting in the 1880s. Further growth and development occurred in the 1920s with the development of taller buildings such as the First National Bank Building and the Santora Building. The area was built up with a series of 4-6 story buildings mixed in with one and two story buildings. Later development along Fourth Street included the 10 story Ronald Reagan Courthouse Building and the mid-rise bank building further west. EXHIBIT 5 1 80A-60 Aesthetic Impact Evaluation West End Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California Building form The proposed project is to be built on an empty site within a historic district. The building design is a six story structure that fronts the sidewalk, rising directly from the north property line. The building would occupy most of the site, with a setback area along the front eastern side creating an outdoor court in order to allow views to a portion of the painted wall advertisements. Considerations of compatibility with the historic district have been discussed separately. Aesthetic compatibility is evaluated in terms of scale, massing and style. The proposed project, while six stories tall, follows a pattern already established in the area of a mix of taller four to six story buildings along with one and two story buildings. The proposed project would continue this pattern along the south side of the 300 block of West Fourth Street. The building's primary fat;:ade is divided into three bays with an opening into the setback on the eastern edge adjacent to the painted advertisements. Each floor is delineated with a line of spandrel stone up to the top of the third floor, a level that approximately matches the tops of the two adjacent buildings. The architectural composition of smaller bays and articulation of floors help relate the buildings to the overall scale of the neighborhood and especially to the pedestrian level view at the street. The proposed building design is not strongly stylized. The front facade is a relatively simple pattern and is low-key and neutral in appearance without mimicking any specific historic style but in part echoing the pilaster divisions on the West End Theater facade. The long solid side party- walls are neutral. The project's fat;:ade is to be finished in sandstone, a quality masonry building material. The ground floor level is designed for shops or gallery space with large glazed openings and doorways at the walk matching the general pattern of commercial storefronts in the district. The ground floor will also have canopies to create s sidewalk level view that is a continuation of the existing streetscape. The proposed project will fit into the existing pattern and aesthetic of the area and completion of the project will add to the continuity the streetscape. View Corridors There are no specific vistas, scenic outlooks or designated views of landmark or significant aesthetic elements from the area surrounding the site. Additionally, "party-wall" construction of nearby buildings and main Kaplan Chen Kaplan 2 80A-61 December 26, 2006 Aesthetic Impact Evaluation West End Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California fac;:ade orientation towards the east-west streets limits windows facing the site. There is a traditional view looking down the street of an urban commercial corridor that shows continuity of structures with a predominate image of ground floor storefront windows. West Fourth Street has a similar character, although the continuous line of buildings on the northern side of the street ends across from the site with the large landscaped parcel and setback for the 10 story Courthouse building. The proposed project will fill in an empty site and will maintain the overall continuity of the south side of West Fourth Street. Windows along with shade canopies at the ground floor will also provide continuity at the sidewalk level view. The proposed project will not impact any significant views or vistas and will contribute to the overall existing streetscape aesthetic. Lighting Current street lighting is provided by historic double canopy light poles and by general ambient light from stores. The proposed project does not appear to contain any light sources that would change the overall pattern of lighting. Any exterior lighting, including lighting used to illuminate the old sign age should be reviewed by the City of Santa Ana for glare and other non-compatible light sources so that there is no impact from the project lighting. Daylight and Shadow The building is located on the south side of the street so that its shadow will generally fall to the north over the sidewalk and street. The building is taller than its adjacent neighbors so that its shadow will also fall over their roofs at certain times of the day during the year. Neither adjacent bulding has an outdoor exterior court. A solar shadow study was prepared by Nestor + Gaffney indicating shadow patterns at three times of the day during the equinoxes and summer and winter solstices. During Winter months, due to the low sun angle, all of the buildings will cast shadows over the sidewalks. The shadow of the proposed project will extend further, sweeping across the opposite side of the street, mostly consisting of the outdoor area of the Courthouse building. Early morning sun will cast a shadow over the West End Theater Building and Birch Street, however, the sidewalk will already be in shade from the Theater Building. Kaplan Chen Kaplan 3 80A-62 December 26, 2006 Aesthetic Impact Evaluation West End Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California At the Spring and Fall equinoxes, the building shadows of all of the buildings along the street fall over the sidewalk while the proposed project's shadow will sweep further out over the street. At three in the afternoon, the proposed project's shadow will extend not quite halfway over the Semi-Tropic Hotel roof. During Summer, the shadows are very short although the proposed six story building will provide a little more additional shade at the sidewalk immediately before and after the noon period. Later in the day, the shadow from the setting Summer sun will project back to the southeast over the alley. Although the proposed building is slightly more than double the height of the immediately adjacent buildings, the shadows are mostly projected over hardscaped public right of ways and do not significantly impact the access to daylight. The limited skylights on the roof of the Semi-Tropic Hotel Building will be shaded from direct sunlight only during late afternoons. In some cases, the building will provide additional shading during the warmer Summer months. The proposed West End Lofts project at 320 West Fourth Street does not have an adverse impact on the aesthetics of the site and surrounding area and will contribute to the continuity of the district. Kaplan Chen Kaplan 4 80A-63 December 26, 2006 IKI.Avsl Parking Systems Inc. Report of Sound Meter Measurements Date: December 8, 2006 Location: Fine Arts Project, 2110 Haste St., Berkeley, CA Lift Type: P310 Manual Doors Sound Meter Data: Model 407727, Digital Sound Level Meter (Extech Instruments) Accuracy: :I:: 2dB @ 94dB sound level Sound Meter Settings: "A" Weighting, "Slow" Response Measurements: Performed by Norman W. Brudigam, PE, Civil Engineer Test No. Test Conditions Sound Levels I Background sound levels inside parking garage due to fluorescent 43 to 48dB lights and some traffic outside the garage door 80 ft away from test location (onen QTiIl door). 2 Lowering of a lower platform (motor does not operate). Reading 50 to 61dB taken 3 feet from moving platform. Lowering time approximately 20 seconds. 3 Raising of an upper platform (motor operates). Reading taken 3 feet 62 to 67 dB from moving olatform. Raising time aooroximatelv 20 seconds. 4 Lateral movement of 9 middle level platforms at once. Reading 63 to 69dB taken 3 feet from machine at middle of platform movements. Movement time aooroximatelv 20 seconds. Typical A Weighted Sound Level Data 135dB 120dB llOdB 100dB 90dB 80dB 72dB 68dB 62dB 58dB 48dB 42dB 32dB 24dB 20B.doc 3652 Chestnut St., Suite A, Lafayette, CA 94549, 925.284.2092 Fax: 925.284.3365 E~..E64 I'IIr SNYDER IIf' LANGSTON December 12, 2006 Mr. David DiRienzo President URBAN + WEST 936 East Santa Ana Blvd. Santa Ana, CA 92101 RE: West End lofts, a Proposed 6 Story Commercial loft Oevelopment 320 West Fourth Street, Santa Ana, CA David: In regards to your proposed six story commerclallolt building and a "construction protection" plan for the process to protect the historic properties adjacent to the Project from project-construction vibration, Snyder langston would recommend a photographic survey of the conditions of the existing structures to document existing design features both interior and exterior, The survey should be conducted by a firm that specializes in the preservation of historic structures and would note any current visible structural issues including existing stress cracking, seismic reinforcing, condition of wood and steel members, the condition of the existing mortar, brick, roofing and glazing systems. Any significant architectural features would be noted, and detailed in the survey. Horizontal and vertical controls would be established on the existing structures, noting the conditions and alignment of the existing structures prior to construction. All of the existing conditions would be identified and cataloged as a reference point to determine any building movement, and to have a reference point to repair any cosmetic damage to the existing structures that may have occurred during construction. Concurrent with the photographic survey, limited exploratory work would be conducted aimed at determining how the existing structures are built. The exploratory work would determine the depth and location of the existing footings, the condition and adhesion value of the existing mortar, along with the support for the existing floor and the roof systems. This information would be used to determine what temporary support measures would be required (if any) to support the existing structures during construction of the new buildings. Temporary support of the existing structure (if any) could include re- pointing the masonry, Installation of temporary wall support system to brace off the existing walls during construction, and shoring of the existing structures. Given the condition of the existing structure, the fact that the demolished structure on the existing lot was originally built with a basement, and that and the lot has remained partially excavated it is hoped that temporary support measures would be kept to a minimum. Final determination of the extent of the temporary support for the existing structure should be lelt to the structural engineer, working in concert with a historical preservation architect retained by the owner. Design of the new structure should take into account the existing condition and location of the two adjacent structures and any temporary support measures necessary to minimize any damage to the existing structures during construction. The design should take into account the effect of vibration, excavation, access, and construction techniques on the existing structures, and every effort should be made to negate any impact to the existing buildings. A firm specializing in monitoring vibration caused by construction operations should be retained by the owner to develop a testing regime that will monitor vibration caused by the construction activities. An acceptable threshold of vibration should be established and the existing structures monitored during demolition, excavation, Creating Value Through Leadership in Real Estate and Constructioll 8U1A5 11962 Cowan,IJVine. California 92614- Phone 949.863.9200 Fax 949.863.1087 www.snvder-Ianoston.&om .. SNYDER ." LANGSTON shoring, and foundation work. Additional monitoring may be required during key construction operations as determined by the historical preservation architect retained by the owner, The design and construction of the foundation system of the new structure must lake into account the integrity of the adjacent existing structures. If it is found that the depth of the existing footings are shallower than the new footings, design and construction procedures must be in place to fully support the existing buildings during construction of the foundation system. Slot cutting, temporary shoring or other methods must be employed to ensure that the structural systems of the adjacent buildings are not compromised by construction of the new structure. Care must be taken to ensure that the movement of the new building caused by wind or seismic events will not impact the existing adjacent structures. Tile design of the new building should not degrade the performance of the existing structures during a wind or seismic event; careful attention should be paid to isolating the new structure and the existing buildings. Given the in-fill location of the new building care must be taken to keep the public and construction personnel safe during construction activities. This may include the construction of a full pedestrian barricade over the existing sidewalk and alley way, (if required), A logistical plan for deliveries and hoisting of materials to the site must be deveioped taking into account the requirements of the adjoining uses, and the requirements of City Officials. The logistical plan should include queuing location for successive deliveries (concrete, steel, etc), temporary closing of the street and sidewalks for specific installation, parking for construction personnel, scheduled utility Sllutclowns, el11ei'gency service access, fire departlnent access, and installation of temporary standpipes. If you have any further '1uest e to contact me direct. rc/lw Creating Value Through Leadership in Real Estate and Construction 80A9!6~ 17962 Cowan, Irvine, California 92614 Phone 949.863.9200 Fax 949.863.1087 www.snvder.lanflslon.com ALBUS-KEEFE & ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS December 20, 2006 J.N,: 1369.00 Mr. David DiRienzo Urban+West 936 East Santa Ana Blvd, Santa Ana, CA 92701 Subject: Geotechnical Recommendations for Settlement Monitoring of Adjacent Buildings, Proposed Courthouse Lofts, 320 West Fourth Street, City of Santa Ana, California Dear Mr. DiRienzo; At your request, Albus-Keefe & Associates, Inc. has developed an overview of recommended settlement monitoring of the adjacent buildings for the site referenced above. Settlement monitoring of the two adjacent buildings on either side of the proposed construction will entail attaching settlement monuments onto the sides of these buildings at select locations. These monuments should be surveyed prior to grading of the site and immediately prior to foundation and building construction. During foundation and building construction, these settlement monuments should initially be monitored daily, then weekly, and then possibly biweekly or monthly. The monitoring schedule will depend on the actual measurements recorded at that time and the proposed loadings being placed. Settlement limits will depend on a structural evaluation of these adjacent buildings and recommendations from the project structural engineer. A settlement response plan may be developed to detail our response in reporting and alerting the project team based on review of field survey data measurements. If you should have any questions or need clarification regarding these recommendations, please do not hesitate to call this office. Respectfully submitted, Albus-Keefe & Associates, Inc., ~T Douglas T. Abernathy, G Senior Engineer 1011 North Armando Street, Anaheim CA 92806-2606 (714) 630-1626 FAX (714) 630-1916 8~1J6I7B Specific Development Plan No. 80 Section 1. Applicabilitv of Ordinance The specific development zoning district for a mixed-use (commercial land use with a residential component) project as authorized by Chapter 41, Division 26, Section 41-593 et seq. of the Santa Ana Municipal Code (SAMC), is specifically subject to the standards and regulations contained in this plan for the express purpose of establishing land use regulations and standards. All other applicable chapters, articles, and sections of the SAMC and any other regulations adopted by the City Council shall apply unless expressly stated or superseded by this ordinance. All terms contained herein shall be defined by the SAMC, unless specifically defined herein. Section 2. Purpose Specific Development Plan No. 80 (SD-80), consisting of standards and regulations, is hereby established for the express purpose of protecting the health, safety, and general welfare of the people of the City by promoting and enhancing the value of properties and encouraging orderly development. SD-80 sets the development and design criteria for a development consisting of approximately four thousand (4,000) square feet, within the Downtown Historic National Register District. The purpose of this specific development is to allow for flexibility in site planning and design to respond to market conditions while assuring high quality development in this architecturally significant location. SD-80 specifically establishes for the property the following: . Permitted uses. · Development and operational standards, including building height limits, require setbacks, parking, landscaping provisions, and enforcement policies, as well as a provision for the protection of historic resources. · Maximum authorized intensity. · Signage provisions. · Refuse collection. . Utility requirements. Section 3. Obiectives The objectives of SD-80 include provisions of the following: · A long-term development that is of the highest architectural quality and design, and that architecturally complements the Downtown National Register District. · A landscaping plan that is complementary to a mixed-use development and sensitive to the surrounding community. · A visually harmonious development as viewed both internally and externally. EXHIBIT B 80A-68 Specific Development Plan No. 80 September 2006 Page 1 of7 . A development that is consistent with the District Center designation of the General Plan and which implements the spirit and intent of policies of the General Plan. · A circulation system that is responsive to the needs of both vehicular and pedestrian travel. · The provision of a mixture of high quality housing and ground level commercial uses along Fourth Street so as to enhance the viability and vibrancy, and pedestrian-friendly qualities of the Downtown. · A mixed-use project complementing an adjacent historic resource "ghost sign" located on the structure immediately east of this site, as well as other culturally and architecturally significant structures in the area. · A mixed-use project blending with adjacent office and retail/service land uses. Section 4. Permitted Uses The categories of land uses to be included within the project area are retail and services uses, art galleries and studios, offices and a live work community. If a use is for any reason omitted from those specified as permissible or if ambiguity arises concerning the classification of a particular use within the meaning and intent of this Plan, the determination shall be at the discretion of the Planning Manager. Such decision may be appealed to the Panning Commission whose decision is final. A. Permitted uses on the first floor. The following land uses are permitted on the first floor: 1. Retail and service uses 2. The following creative art uses: a. Fine art galleries which may include a studio as an ancillary use. b. Fiber art galleries which may include a studio as an ancillary use. c. Photography studios. B. Conditionally Permitted Uses on the first floor only. The following uses may be permitted in the first floor subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit: 1, Printing, lithography, and calligraphy studios. 2. Glass blowing and sculpturing studios. 3. Ceramic and pottery studios. 4. Cyber cafes and subject to compliance with the requirements of SAMC Section 41-198.200. C. Permitted Uses on floors above the first floor: 1. Professional and administrative offices, design professionals, but excluding medical, dental, and massage therapy offices. 2. Fine art studio. 80A-69 Specific Development Plan No. 80 September 2006 Page 2 of 7 3. Fiber art studio. 4. Photography studio. D. Conditionally Permitted Uses on floors above the first floor: 1. Multiple-family dwelling. 2. Live-work community. 3. Printing, lithography, and calligraphy studios. 4. Glass blowing and sculpturing studios. 5. Ceramic and pottery studios. E. All other uses not expressly permitted or conditionally permitted in this ordinance are prohibited. Section 5. Maximum Permitted Buildina Density/Intensity for dwellina units Iiyelwork community units or commercial tenant spaces This development has specific constraints due to the limited site capacity and availability of parking, and therefore, there is a maximum of five (5) dwelling units, live/work community units or commercial tenant spaces within the floors above the first floor. Section 6. Deyelopment Standards A. Building height and basement. 1. Structures are subject to a height limitation of sixty-eight (68) feet above ground level, which is defined as the vertical distance measured from the curb level to the highest point of the roof surface. This excludes elevator override area, appurtenances, and rooftop railings. 2. The building shall incorporate a full basement, which shall be used solely for vehicular parking and storage. B. Setbacks. 1. Front setback (Fourth Street). Maximum setback is zero; however, any appurtenance such as awnings, canopy, flagpoles, signage must obtain an easement and/or encroachment permit in order to be located so as to project into or over the right-of-way. A step-back of not less than one (1) foot from the front property line shall be implemented for the floors over three (3) stories, excluding basement. 2. Side (west). Maximum setback is zero. 3. Side (east). 80A-70 Specific Development Plan No. 80 September 2006 Page 3 of 7 The historic "ghost sign" located on the adjacent building directly to the east of the subject site must be preserved and the north end of the "ghost sign" shall not blocked from public view. Therefore, the eastern side setback shall be a minimum of fifteen (15) feet for a length of thirty-seven (37) feet from the front property line so as to leave a clear view of the resources. Once at this thirty-seven (37) feet distance, no setback is required. 4. Rear (south). No setback required although, if parking is located off the alley, a minimum twenty-three feet, six inches (23'6") setback from the alley centerline shall be maintained to allow for driveway turning radius. C. Standards for dwelling units, live work community units, or commercial tenant spaces above first floor 1. A maximum of five (5) dwelling units, live work community units, or commercial tenant spaces for this project. 2. Each dwelling unit, live work community unit, or commercial tenant space shall be at least one-thousand (1,000) gross square feet in size. 3. Each dwelling unit, live work community unit, or commercial tenant space shall have bathroom facilities apart from other residential units, including a water closet, wash basin, and a bathtub or shower. 4. Each dwelling unit, live work community unit, or commercial tenant space shall have kitchen facilities apart from other units, including a kitchen sink, cooking appliances, and refrigerator. All such facilities shall have a clear working space of at least thirty (30) inches in front of and perpendicular to it. 5. Each dwelling unit, live work community unit, or commercial tenant space first floor shall have its own storage area in the in the basement of the building. D. Standards for commercial tenant space at first floor. 1. Each commercial tenant space shall space shall be at least one-thousand, one-hundred (1,100) gross square feet. 2. Each commercial tenant space shall be provided a minimum of seven hundred-eighty (780) square feet of storage space which shall be made available within the basement of the building. E. Parking. 1. Parking provided on-site shall be provided by interior garage and parking lift. 2. Units above ground/street level shall be provided at a minimum of standards defined as: a. One (1) parking space for each unit with a size of one-thousand, six- hundred (1,600) gross square feet or less. 80A-71 Specific Development Plan No. 80 September 2006 Page 4 of 7 b. Two (2) parking spaces for each unit with a size of one-thousand, six- hundred and one (1,601) gross square feet up to three-thousand, two- hundred (3,200) gross square feet c. Three (3) parking spaces for each unit with a size of three-thousand, two-hundred and one (3,201) and larger gross square feet 3. No additional parking shall be required on site. 4. No guest parking shall be permitted within the parking lifts. F. Walls and Screening. 1. Except as provided in Section 6(G)(1 )(c) below, any wall or fence shall be constructed in compliance with the SAMC and is subject to approval of the Planning Division. 2. Any equipment, whether on the roof, side of the building, or in the courtyard area, or on the ground, shall be screened. The method of screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building in terms of material, color, shape, and size. G. Landscape/Hardscape Standards. The final design satisfying the following requirements shall be subject to the review and approval of the Planning Manager: 1. A minimum of a five-hundred fifty-five (555) square foot courtyard shall be maintained at the front of the property so as not to obscure the historic "ghost sign" on the structure immediately east of the proposed building. a. This courtyard shall maintain a water feature, hardscape and landscape features to complement and highlight the historic "ghost sign". b. The courtyard area shall incorporate uplighting to highlight the historic "ghost sign" to enhance the visibility, attractiveness, and preservation of this cultural feature. This uplighting feature shall be on a timer so as to minimize the amount of exterior lighting from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. c. The courtyard area shall incorporate seating, seat walls, water feature, lighting, artwork (such as sculpture or sculpturally designed fence and gate) and landscaping to provide visual interest and additional amenities within the area. All seating, benches, and surfaces shall be made of a durable material such as concrete, stone, or painted iron, and be designed to minimize effects from vandalism, weather, and incorporate graffiti resistant coatings. d. Landscaped areas within the courtyard area shall be irrigated using an automatic sprinkler system. The project shall have an approved Landscape Plan prior to construction permits being issued, and shall be fully implemented prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. 2. First floor pedestrian amenities shall include lighting, and planters. These amenities shall be designed to minimize effects from vandalism, weather, and incorporate graffiti resistant coatings. Additional pedestrian amenities 80A-72 Specific Development Plan No. 80 September 2006 Page 5 of 7 are encouraged for the site. 3. Roof deck amenities shall be provided for the use of each dwelling unit, live/work community unit, or commercial tenant space. These amenities shall include seating, seat walls, and landscape planters. Any permanent landscape feature must be irrigated using an automatic sprinkler system. The rooftop amenities shall be maintained and shall be designed to minimize effects from vandalism, weather, and incorporate graffiti resistant coatings. H. Architectural Design Features. The final design satisfying the following requirements shall be subject to review and approval of the Planning Manager: 1. Exterior Materials: Exterior materials and finishes will comply with site plan review approvals granted through the Planning Commission or City Council. Exterior materials on the first three floors shall include real stone on the fac;:ade. Exterior enclosures and similar ancillary structures are to match the proposed structure in terms of texture, materials, and color palette. 2. Design Features: Any minor alterations and/or additions shall be in keeping with the original approved design of the structure in terms of scale, rooflines, materials, and color palette. Additionally, a written report shall be prepared by a qualified architectural historian and submitted to and approved by the Planning Manager demonstrating how the overall architectural design is compatible with the Downtown National Register District. 3. Lighting Standards/Fixtures: A minimum of one (1) foot candle of light shall be provided throughout the parking area and the parking apron. Specifications of light standards/fixtures and photometrics shall be submitted to the Planning Division and Police Department for approval prior to issuance of construction permits. 4. Except as provided in Section 4(G)(1 )(b) above, there shall be no glare or spillover lighting into adjacent properties. All exterior glass materials on the exterior of the building shall be non-reflective. 5. The ceiling of the parking facilities shall be painted white, and be maintained to improve illumination and enhance safety within this area. The Planning Manager may approve minor modifications to the standards specified in this SD-80, provided that such changes are consistent with the purpose, scope, and intent of this document. The Planning Manager has the sole and absolute discretion to determine what constitutes a "minor modification". Section 7. Sianaae A. All signage shall comply with the Santa Ana Municipal Code. A comprehensive sign program for the entire site, including, but not limited to, freestanding, wall, directional, addressing, permanent signs and graphics, shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Manager prior the issuance of any sign permit. 80A-73 Specific Development Plan No. 80 September 2006 Page 6 of 7 B. The elevation directly facing Fourth Street shall be considered the primary elevation for signage purposes. Section 8. Refuse Collection Area Areas to handle the refuse for the development site shall be integrated into the building. At minimum, the project shall provide two (2) refuse collection areas measuring a minimum of eleven feet by seven feet (11' x 7') each. One collection area is to be used for refuse, and the other shall be for recycle materials. Such collection areas shall be enclosed and viewable by refuse collectors, with exterior materials such as concrete block with metal doors. Additionally, each collection area shall provide "chutes" to allow refuse from upper floors to collect within these areas to the extent required by AB239 or City of Santa Ana Ordinance and that determined by the Planning Division. Section 9. Telephone. Electrical. Water. Gas. and Cable A. All on-site utilities shall be placed underground. B. Transformers of terminal equipment shall be visually screened from view from streets, and adjacent properties. C. There shall not be exposed downspouts, scupper drains, electrical or mechanical lines on the exterior of the building. All mechanical equipment shall be screened from view in an architecturally integrated manner, and shall not be visible from a distance of three-hundred feet (300') from ground level at a pedestrian height. D. Each unit shall be provided its own gas, electric, and water meters. 80A-74 Specific Development Plan No. 80 September 2006 Page 7 of 7 C<J\KUASSOCIATES A Corporation - Transportation Planning Traffic Engineering Parking Studies MEMORANDUM TO: Jay Trevino Lucy Linnaus FROM: Pat Gibson SUBJECT: Parking Plan for Courtyard Lofts DATE: August 3, 2005 Kaku Associates has reviewed the site plan and operations plan for the parking at the Courtyard Lofts and we offer comments in the three areas where you had questions. Mechanical Parkinq We reviewed the mechanical parking solution and we find it to pe an acceptable solution in this case if the design provided is one of the options the developer showed us that allows direct access to the alley driveway' without moving another car. There were a few options that rotated cars within the site to provide outbound cars with direct access to the alley or inbound cars with direct access to an empty parking space. Any of these options would be acceptable. Adequacy of Desiqn There were concerns that the narrow width of the alley would be a problem for maneuvering in and out of the site. If the alley is operated as one-way, the maneuvering area should not be a problem. If this were a driveway to a parking area that served infrequent guests/customers to the site, I would be concerned about the turning movements, but since the drivers will be repeat residents, they should be able to get used to the maneuver and make the entrance and exit smoothly. The direction of traffic flow in the alley is up to the City Traffic staff since the project design can be "flipped" to provide access to either direction. The decision on direction of flow, however, needs to be made before final design approval of the site plan. - EXHIBIT C Page 1 of 2 201 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 500 Santa Monica, CA 90401 80A-75 (310) 458-9916 Fax (310) 394-7663 ParkinQ SupplV The proposed project should provide at least eight spaces to serve the residents of the project. This should be allocated one space each for the two one-bedroom units and two spaces each for the three two-bedroom units. Guests to the building would have to park on the street or in a nearby off-street lot or garage. If there are any questions on the above, please call. Page 2 of 2 80A-76 I, ~(~ Kaplan Chen Kaplan Architects & Planners 2526 Eighteenth Street Santa Monica CA 90405 November 1, 2006 TO: David DiRienzo FR: Pam O'Connor Kaplan Chen Kaplan RE: West End Lofts Santa Ana, California The purpose of this memo is to review the two Secretary of the Interiors Standards for Rehabilitation that apply to infill buildings in historic districts: Standards #9 and #10, The National Register nomination for the Santa Ana Downtown Historic District provides the basis for the findings that resulted in its designation as a National Register Historic District The Nomination notes that this Historic District is predominantly two-story business blocks ",,,complemented by a scattering of taller structures, the largest of which is six stories," The predominant character of the West Fourth Street corridor's roofline is that of buildings stepping up and down in height The nomination states that the significance of the District is based on its ability to show "major architectural phases of historic urban development in the county from the 1880s to the 1933 Earthquake," It goes on to note that "the district maintains design integrity that is reflected in the changes in architectural fashion over time and preserves key individual examples of important periods of architectural development" The eras represented include: . Victorian, only a few with exterior focades extant . Pre World.War IjProgressive Era (new and remodels) including the 1915 West End Theater . 1920's Expansion with two periods of growth 1922: mostly new construction including the 6-story First National Bank Building (1923) 1928: use of Spanish Colonial Revival styles . Early 1930s, PosHarthquake remodeling. Victorian cornices lost, building facades stucco added over original brick in Moderne styles; due to the Depression designs were simple and inexpensive such as the Semi-Tropic Hotel remodel Telephone 310.452.7505 Facsimile 310.452.1494 EXHIBIT 0 Page 1 of 2 80A-77 Mr. David DiRienzo West End Lofts, Santa Ana, California - Historic Evaluation November 6, 2006 Poge 2 The most common style used in the Historic District is the Spanish Colonial Revival. However, as noted in the nomination, the range of styles from a number of periods, downtown's early 20" century development evolution, is the basis of the designation, Standard #9 states that "new additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction sholl not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment." Standard #10 states that "new additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that is removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired." The building to the west of the infill property is the 1915 Beaux Arts style West End Theater (one of the few Beaux Arts style structures in the Historic District). The structure to the east is the Semi-Tropic Hotel with its 1933 Moderne fa,ade. Each is representative of a different period and architectural style from the early 20" Century. Thus, there is no single design from any historic period that bridges the two styles. A design could mimic one, but not both of the styles, As noted in the National Register nomination, one of the hallmarks of this Historic District is that the contributing buildings reflect changes in architectural fashion over time while preserving key individual examples of important periods of architectural development. Standards #9 ond #10 do not mandate that infill construction mimic or echo the styles of the contributing historic buildings. And specifically, Standard #9 states that "new work shall be differentiated form the old," An infill building with a contemporary design is acceptable (especially in this district where the nomination is based on a variety of styles built over several decades) as long as it is compatible with the form and character of the Historic District. The National Register nomination also clearly states that taller buildings (up to six stories) complement the shorter structures which vary from 1 to 3 stories in height. The proposed project fits within the development envelope that is recognized as historic within the Santa Ana Downtown Historic District. With the proposed mitigations, the project can be constructed such that if removed ever in the future, the adjacent historic structures would not be negatively impacted. DCD Kaplan Chen Kaplan Architects & Planners Page 2 of 2 80A-78 Courthouse Lofts Project Historic Resource Impacts 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California April 20, 2006 Submitted to: Urban West Strategies Submitted by: Kaplan Chen Kaplan 2526 Eighteenth Street Santa Monica, CA 90405 David Kaplan, Principal Pam O'Connor, Architectural Historian 80A-79 Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California The purpose of this report is to assess the potential impacts of construction of a new mixed.use (commercial and residential uses), known as the Courthouse Lofts, building in the Downtown Historic District in Santa Ana, California. Since the parcel is located in a National Register Historic District, an evaluation of potential impacts of this infill project must be conducted to comply with environmental review procedures of the City of Santa Ana and the California Environrnental Quality Act (CEQA). The purpose of the review is to determine whether the proposed structure will cause any significant environmental impacts (as defined by CEQA guidelines, Section 15064.5). The Courthouse Lofts project consists of new construction of a mixed use building on the empty parcel located at 320 West Fourth Street in Santa Ana's Downtown Historic District. The property owner, Urban West Strategies, has proposed construction of a structure with commercial and service uses at the street level and "live-work" lofts on the upper levels. The proposed project is located mid-block flanked on each side by buildings which have been designated "contributing buildings" to the historic district. The proposed project, a six-story building, would encompass the entire lot and include a basement, a ground floor dedicated to commercial uses and five stories of housing in the form of residential live-work lofts. Physical and Historical Context of Downtown Historic District The parcel known as 320 West Fourth Street is Orange County Assessor Parcel Number 398-591-02 located in the City of Santa Ana. The project is proposed for this 41 by 100 foot parcel which is located mid-block on the south side of West Fourth Street between Broadway and Birch Streets within the Santa Ana Downtown Historic District. The Historic District is divided into two sections. The smaller portion lies primarily to the north of Santa Ana Boulevard (Sixth Street) to Civic Center Drive (Seventh Street) between Broadway on the west to just east of Bush Street on the east. The southern portion of the Historic District has irregular boundaries. The principal intersection is that of Broadway and Fourth Streets. The District runs along portions of both the east and west sides of the Broadway from just south of Second Street to the south side of Fifth Street. At the District's southern end it runs along Second Street from just west of Broadway to the west side of Main Street and jogs to the south touching First Street at Sycamore. Most of Third Street is excluded from the Historic District. The Historic District also runs east-west along Fourth Street. From Main Street east, only the south side of Fourth Street (the 100 East block) is in the District, creating a stub end. Between Main Street and Broadway, both sides of the 100 and 200 West Fourth Street are within the Historic District. Kaplan Chen Kaplan EXHIBIT E 1 April 20, 2006 80A-80 Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California West of Broadway, on the 300 West block, the easternmost two-thirds of both sides of the street are within the Historic District. The north side of Fourth Street contains a contributing building on the east end that is within the District boundaries. Adjacent to the Historic District (on the west) is the large parcel that contains the 11-story Ronald Reagan Federal Courthouse, built in 1997. The Historic District boundary stops on the north side of Fourth Street at the eastern end of the Courthouse lot which is across the street frorn the subject parcel at 320 West Fourth Street. The building to the west of the subject property, at 322-326 West Fourth Street and the eastern half of the south side of the 400 block of West Fourth Street, lie within the Historic District. The National Register Nornination for the Downtown Historic District provides the basis for its designation as well as its historic context regarding developrnent of the cornrnercial center of Santa Ana. The City was founded in 1869 by Williarn Spurgeon as a speculative townsite on land that had been part of the Spanish land grant known as Rancho Santiago de Santa Ana. Spurgeon and a partner, Ward Bradford, acquired land to layout a 24-square block townsite bounded by Broadway on the west, Spurgeon Street on the east, First Street on the north, and Seventh Street on the south with the comrnercial center developing at Fourth and Main Streets. Growth and development was stimulated by arrival of the Southern Pacific Railway in 1878 and the Santa Fe Railroad in 1886. By the end of the 1880s a downtown business district had been established at the intersection of Fourth and Main Streets consisting of five city blocks of brick business buildings. Only a few exterior examples remain from Santa Ana's first wave of downtown development in the Victorian era. With the railroads came expansion of agriculture and related packing and shipping operations. The early years of the 20th century saw residential growth. The regional prosperity of pre-World War I years resulted in numerous new business blocks sprouting up along Fourth Street as and new civic buildings were constructed to the north (near Civic Center Drive and Main Street). Downtown grew again in the 1920s with new construction along north/south arterials such as Main Street and Broadway, extending the footprint of the downtown. The commercial center along Fourth Street served the larger county population as growth in the county's smaller cities spurred Santa Ana's commercial prominence. By the 1920s Santa Ana had become the professional center of Orange County with lawyers and doctors located in "prominent new high-rises" such as the First National Bank Building and executive offices in the Santora Building. (National Register Nomination) The National Register Nomination states that "the primary historic significance of downtown Santa Ana is found in its 1920s commercial and architectural identity." It goes on to note that the predominant architectural style of the 1920s was Spanish Colonial Revival with numerous regional adaptations Kaplan Chen Kaplan 2 April 20, 2006 80A-81 Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California ranging from Churrigueresque to Mission-influenced during two distinct growth periods centering around the years 1922 and 1928. During this period the area was infilled with two-story and larger buildings designed in a variety of styles including Beaux Arts and Renaissance Revival. New construction of the late 1920s featured Art Deco and Moderne influences, The resulting aesthetic of the downtown was a distinctly urban pattern of corridors of buildings constructed to the street lot line and encompassing most or all of their lots. Many of the buildings were used for retail or commercial services at the street level and many of the structures featured storefronts with display windows at the street level. The National Register Nomination observed that the 1933 Long Beach earthquake "left more visible physical alterations than any other event in Santa Ana's history. The earthquake came at a time of economic collapse, so the reconstruction of the physical fabric of the city was simple in design and inexpensive in character... [and] elaborate cornices on classical facades were replaced by simple Moderne geometric designs...the post-earthquake materials were predominantly stucco and concrete." The Nomination notes that a "great number of fayade alterations" date from this period. The Nomination in describing the resources observed that funds for repair were limited during the Depression and "many buildings [sic] owners who were left to provide their own funding simply performed inexpensive remodels on the facades and left the Victorian interiors alone." Other than earthquake repair, the decade of the 1930s and 40s saw little change to Santa Ana's downtown. After World War II Orange County underwent suburbanization with commercial real estate investment directed away from the city center toward automobile oriented shopping malls and business parks. The Downtown Historic District underwent changes along West 4th Street in the period 1955-1958, but limited funds".. .prevented severe modernizations on upper floors, interior and exteriors." Fayade alterations were generally neo-modern panels of aluminum or stucco covering original facades. The last decade of the 20th Century saw the beginning new investment and rehabilitation in Santa Ana's downtown spurred by City sponsored improvement projects such as the Fourth Street retail corridor streetscape enhancements and new in-fill development projects. In 1997, the high-rise Ronald Reagan Courthouse, a civic institution and major employment center was developed across from the west end of the Downtown Historic District. The National Register Nomination identifies the character of the Downtown Historic District stating that "the predominantly two story business blocks with ground level retail uses and upper story residential or offices uses are complemented by a scattering of taller structures, the largest of which is six stories," The main east-west axis of the District is Fourth Street and Kaplan Chen Kaplan 3 April 20, 2006 80A-82 Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California encompasses a portion of the south side of the 200 East block, the south side of the 100 East block, and the north and south sides of the 100 and 200 West blocks, the south side of the 300 West block and a portion of the 400 West block. Four taller structures are located along this span. One, the 4-story Otis Building (1889) is located on the north side of the 100 West Block of Fourth Street at Main Street (# 187 on Downtown Historic District Map). The other three buildings are located on the south side of the 100 and 200 blocks of West Fourth Street. The First National Bank Building (1923), 6-stories and 83 feet tall, is located on the southwest corner with Main (# 234 on Downtown Historic District Map). Two structures are located on the south side of the 200 West Block: the 4-story Spurgeon Building (1913) at the corner of Sycamore (# 20 on Downtown Historic District Map) and the 4-story Moore Building (1923) at the corner of Broadway (# 182 on Downtown Historic District Map). Numerous one-story buildings are also iocated along West Fourth Street. The National Register Nomination also noted that the historic district's .....buildings date from the late 1870's to the post earthquake reconstruction of 1934 and include commercial buildings, churches, fraternal halls and civic buildings which remain as a collection of historically and architecturally significant buildings that typify a complete small city urban environment as it would have exited in the first third of the century. The district is represented by several stylistic eras, but the dominant image is set by the preponderance of 1920s Spanish Colonial Revival influenced commercial architecture." The National Register Santa Ana Downtown Historic District was added to the National Register of Historic Places based on four reasons: 1. The district has retained its historic integrity from the period of significance as the professional and commercial center of Orange County. 2. The district strongly conveys a sense of time and place as the commercial heart of Santa Ana. 3. The district shows the major architectural phases of historic urban development in the county from the 1880s until the time of the 1933 earthquake, 4. The district constitutes a significant architectural assemblage containing numerous individually distinguished buildings and the works of notable regional and local architects. The City of Santa Ana established the Santa Ana Register of Historical Properties in 1998. This local register identifies historic and architecturally significant resources that have been determined to be significant local cultural resources. Resources within the boundaries of the National Register Kaplan Chen Kaplan 4 April 20, 2006 80A-83 Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California Downtown Historic District have been evaluated and categorized as either "Contributive", "Key", or "Landmark" (with "Landmark" as the highest rating) resources in terms of their historic and/or architectural significance to the local Santa Ana Register. A resource is categorized a "Landmark" if the building, structure, object or site: is on the National Register or appears eligible to be placed on the National Register; is on the State Register or appears to be eligible to be placed on the Register; or it has an historical/cultural significance to the city; or it has a unique architectural significance. A resource is categorized as "Key" if the building, structure, object or site: has a distinctive architectural style and quality; or is characteristic of a significant period in the history of the city; or is associated with a significant person or event in the city. A resource is categorized as "Contributive" if the building, structure, object or site contributes to the overall character and history of a neighborhood or district and is a good example of period architecture. In 2001 an Intensive Survey Update was conducted for the Downtown Historic District by Leslie Heumann of Science Applications International Corporation. This update identified changes (demolitions and rehabilitations) that occurred in the District since it was originally designed as a National Register Historic District. Physical and Historical Context of 300 Block of West Fourth Street West Fourth Street, a portion of the Birch Addition which lay west of Spurgeon's townsite, was piatted in 1876 by Albert W. Birch who came from Illinois. Early construction on the block included a general store and carriage shop. The period between 1880 and the 1920s saw several waves of construction. The north side of the 300 block of West Fourth Street contains the Phillips Block Building located on the northwest corner of West Fourth and Broadway at 301-309 West Fourth Street (# 11 on Downtown Historic District Map). This two-story structure was originally three buildings now covered by a common fac;:ade. The earliest portion of the building, the first floor of 307-309 was constructed around the turn of the 20th Century. In 1909 two buildings were erected to the east and the buildings appear to have been combined in the early 1920s. The stucco clad building features Italian Renaissance Revival features. The first floor also had a later remodel that removed transoms and altered storefronts. The Phillips Block is listed on the Santa Ana Register of Historic Properties as a "Contributive" structure. The Freeman Block was located at 311-315 West Fourth Street. This structure was demolished in 1986. No other historic structures are located Kaplan Chen Kaplan 5 April 20, 2006 80A-84 Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lolls Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California along the North side of the 300 block of West Fourth Street. In 1997 the 11- story (176 foot tall) Ronald Reagan Courthouse Building was constructed. The high-rise building is set in a landscaped area. The development history of the south side of the 300 West Fourth Street block occurred over the first half of the 20th century. On the southeast corner is 302-308 Y, West Fourth Street (also listed as 324 North Broadway) known as the Gilmaker Block (# 244 on Downtown Historic District Map), This one- story commercial building is of brick construction. Piers divide the primary (north) elevation into four bays each with glazed storefronts. The focus of the design is the white glazed brick trim that outlines the piers and door surrounds, defines the frieze and parapet. The parapet is punctuated at the tops of the piers. The building became a contributing structure to the National Register Historic District in 1987 following completion of a certified rehabilitation. it is listed on the Santa Ana Historic Register as a "Key" building. The first substantial structure to be constructed on the south side, the Semi- Tropic Hotel, is located at 316-318 West Fourth Street (# 243 on Downtown Historic District Map; note that footprint illustrated on the map does not reflect the full footprint size of the structure) which was constructed in 1888 by Levi Gildmacher. The two-story brick Victorian structure contained retail establishments at the street level and a hotel on the upper level. The Semi- Tropic's fayade was damaged by the 1933 Earthquake. All original Victorian features including the cornice and bay windows were removed. The second floor was remodeled with casement windows set along a simple stucco clad exterior with slight Streamline Modeme influence in the use of simple parapet band and a horizontal band just below the comice, a lintel connecting the upper windows and simple banding between the windows. The first floor has a basic retail storefront framed by tile squares. This exterior remodel, an inexpensive and basic repair, was made due to damage incurred by the 1933 Earthquake. The remodel was marked departure from the original Victorian design; gestures to contemporary Art Deco/Streamline Modeme style were included in the simple new facade,. At that time the Victorian hotel interior remained fairly intact. In the 20th century the building was converted to retail and office uses, This building is listed as a "Key" building on the Santa Ana Register of Historic Properties. To the east of the Semi-Tropic Hotel is the Bon Ton Bakery Building at 310 West Fourth Street (# 237 on Downtown Historic District Map). This one- story structure was constructed in 1915 but was remodeled in 1933. The earthquake repair included stuccoing over the original fa<;:ade similar to the Semi-Tropic Hotel buildings remodel. The parapet banding and stringcourse impart a slight reference to the Streamline Modeme style. A retail storefront, divided into three bays, is set over tiled bulkheads. This building is listed as Kaplan Chen Kaplan 6 April 20, 2006 80A-85 Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California "Contributive" on the Santa Ana Register of Historic Properties based on its exterior design and lack of historic interior features. Also constructed in 1915 was the Beaux Arts style West End Theater at 322- 326 West Fourth Street (# 218 on Downtown Historic District Map). This theater was one of Santa Ana's earliest movie houses and served as a community playhouse. The building is clad in white ceramic brick, accented by green colored bricks on both the front fayade of West Fourth Street and the side elevation along Birch Street. The symmetrical fayade is divided into three bays by raised, two-story piers delineated in green ceramic brick. The central and largest bay contains the recessed theater entrance at the ground level and above features a large arched window divided into six vertical panels. A stringcourse and cornice define a second-story frieze. This frieze consists of a diamond pattern in green brick over the side bays with onion- shape ornaments above the piers and a panel inscribed with the theater's name above. Mid-century alterations included a metal screen over the fayade. In the early 1980s the metal screen was removed and the structure's decorative ceramic brick fayade was rehabilitated. The West End Theater is listed as a "Landmark" building on the Santa Ana Register of Historic Properties. The lot on which the subject project is proposed, now known as 320 West Fourth Street, has contained a number of buildings since it was first developed. In the late 19th century shed and warehouse structures stood on the lot but were replaced by one-story frame buildings by the early 20th century. In the second quarter of the 20th century, these frame structures were replaced by a two story brick commercial structure that filled the lot which subsequently burned and was demolished in 1978. The demolition exposed the west wall of the Semi-Tropic Hotel building, which contains ghost-like remnants of earlier painted advertisements that appear to date from the first few decades of the 20th Century. Description of Proposed Project The Courthouse Lofts project consists of new construction of a mixed use building on the empty parcel located at 320 West Fourth Street in Santa Ana's Downtown Historic District. The property is owned by Urban West Strategies who has proposed construction of a structure with commercial uses at the street level and residential on the upper levels. The proposed project, a six-story building with basement, would encompass the entire lot with a ground floor dedicated to commercial and service uses and five stories of housing in the form of condominium "live/work" lofts. The building is "L" shaped in plan and takes up most of its 41 x 100-foot lot. The proposed building is six stories high with a flat roof. The building's height, to Kaplan Chen Kaplan 7 April 20, 2006 80A-86 Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California the top of its parapet, is 68 feet. A central elevator and stair tower is another 7.5 feet high. At the street level, a small courtyard is located at the northeast corner, which is the main entry into the building. A paved driveway at the rear of the building leads to a parking lift. The main fayade along West Fourth Street is built out to the lot line, thus aligned with the other structures on the block. The fayade is basically divided into three bays. The easternmost bay frames the entry to the courtyard. There is a slight separation between the easternmost edge of this frame and the adjacent building. This design is purposeful to reveal the ghost advertisements painted on the west wall of the adjacent Semi-Tropic Hotel. This design also allows viewing of the water element located along the east side of the courtyard. The other bays at the ground level consist of plate glass display windows topped with flat metal canopies, The first three levels of the easternmost bay are not glazed while the fourth level is glazed revealing an angular portion of the loft space. At the fifth floor the structure is set back. The sixth floor the fayade is set back approximately 10 feet. The 6111 floor bays feature full-bay glazing. Other bays combine glass paneled roll-up doors with aluminum railings and aluminum framed fixed window walls. The exterior is clad with smooth cut red sandstone veneer panels for the first three levels. The upper three levels are finished with clear glass spandrel panels. Overlooking the courtyard, the upper three floors of the east wall feature clear glass panels with aluminum framed window walls that have aluminum muntins. Also overlooking the courtyard will be full width balconies clad with red sandstone fascias and aluminum railings. The elevator tower, located to the rear or the courtyard, will also be clad in sandstone. The east and west elevations will be clad with reddish jumbo brick in a stacked bond pattern. On the west elevation there is a shallow recess that extends to the roof which will be covered with ceramic tile. A stair tower, also clad with stacked bond jumbo bricks, is located at the west end of the south rear elevation. The rear elevation features five levels of aluminum framed windows with painted aluminum spandrels. Full width balconies with painted aluminum panels and railings as well as half-width balconies at the mezzanine level, will be featured on the rear fayade. On the ground level there is a wide metal roll-up door to provide access to the parking lift. Environmental and Historic Review Thresholds In 1984 the Downtown Santa Ana Historic District was added to the National Register of Historic Places, the federal list of historic resources. Under California law, National Register listed buildings and districts are Kaplan Chen Kaplan 8 April 20, 2006 80A-87 Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California automatically listed in the California Register of Historical Resources. The subject parcel, although empty, is within a designated historic district. The City of Santa Ana has maintained the Santa Ana Register of Historical Properties since 1998. Resources within the boundaries of the National Register Downtown Historic District have been evaluated as "Contributive", "Key", or "Landmark" resources in terms of their historic and/or architectural significance. The subject property, as an vacant parcel, is not rated in the Santa Ana Register. In addition, the City of Santa Ana Municipal Code requires that the City's Historic Resources Commission (HRC) review and approve proposed projects including new construction located within and/or adjacent to an historic district that has the potential to result in changes to the exterior of designated structures or to their setting. Changes which do not substantially change the character and identity of the historic property or district are allowed. Since the Downtown Historic District is listed on the National Register of Historic Places and the California Register of Historical Places, the project is also required to be evaluated to determine if it would result in a substantial adverse change in the significance of the historical resource. According to CEQA Guidelines a substantial adverse change in significance would occur if the project would cause demolition or materially alter in an adverse manner: --the physical characteristics of the historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its inclusion in, or eligibility for, inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources; --the characteristics that account for its inclusion in a local register of historical resources pursuant to local ordinance or resolution; --the physical characteristics of a resource that convey its historical significance and that justify Its eligibility for inclusion on the California Register as determined by a lead agency. The City of Santa Ana's Planning and Building Department has adopted the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation from the United States National Park Service to guide rehabilitation of historic structures and new construction in historic districts. Projects that comply with these Standards are determined to have a less than significant impact under CEQA. There are ten Standards for Rehabilitation of which two apply to new construction. Standard 9 states: "New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work will be Kaplan Chen Kaplan 9 April 20, 2006 80A-88 Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment." Standard 10 states: "New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in a matter that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired," The National Park Service also provides technical monographs and briefs to aid in applying the Standards. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (1995) factors to consider in assessing compatibility of new construction: materials; features; size; scale and proportion; massing; spatial relationships; and differentiation of historic construction from new construction. Evaluation of Compatibility of Proposed Design with the Downtown Historic District The proposed project is new construction on a lot that has been vacant for almost 30 years. The district context, analyzed earlier in this report, is that of a central business district urban development pattern (built to the lot line) of commercial and mixed-use buildings. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation specifies that new construction should be compatible with the historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the District. The new work should be differentiated form the old and should be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. One of the most significant criteria to evaluate for compatibility within the Santa Ana Historic District are the size, scale and proportion, and spatial relationships of the proposed building relative to other structures in the Historic District. The National Register Historic District Nomination stated that the District's structures are predominantly two story buildings ".. .complemented by a scattering of taller structures, the largest of which is six stories." The First National Bank Building at 102-106 West Fourth Street is the tallest at 6 stories and 83 feet in height. The buildings of the Historic District include buildings one-, two, three-, four- and six-stories high. The 2001 Survey Update categorized buildings by Resource Attributes and the buildings along West Fourth Street were HP6, "1-3 story commercial building", or HP7, "3+ story commercial building". (Note: the West End Theater received a theater specific attribute) Kaplan Chen Kaplan 10 April 20, 2006 80A-89 Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California The predominant character of the West Fourth Street corridor's roofline is that of buildings stepping up and down in height. Photograph 1 shows the corridor of West Fourth Street looking east from the 200 West block. The six-story First National Bank building is clearly visible rising up from the one and two story buildings located between it and the four-story Spurgeon Building (which has a tall clock tower element). Photograph 2 shows the south side of the 200 West block of Fourth Street with the 4-story Moore building in the foreground. Photograph 3 shows the north side of the 200 West block of Fourth Street with the three-story Rankin Department store building and the step down to one-story buildings. Photograph 4 shows the south side of the 300 block of West Fourth Street looking east. The two-story West End Theater and two-story Semi-Tropic Hotel are in the foreground. Street trees obscure the one-story Bon Ton Building and the one-story Gilmaker Block. The building to the east steps up to four stories (Moore Building). Photograph 5 shows the south side of the 300 and 400 blocks of West Fourth Street. The end of the street Oust outside of the Historic District boundary) is a five-story modern building. Photograph 6 illustrates the north side of the 200 (portion of) and 300 blocks of West Fourth Street with the 11-story Ronald Reagan Courthouse on a parcel just north and west of the Historic District boundary. A landscaped area, Photograph 7, is located between the Phillips Block Building and the Reagan Courthouse. Photograph 8 shows the Reagan Courthouse Building. This area, where the size steps from the one-story Phillips Block to the street level of the open space to the 176 foot tall Reagan Courthouse Building which is across the street from the subject property at 320 West Fourth Street. Only one block of West Fourth Street, the south side of the 400 block, features a fairly consistent 2-story roof line (Photograph 9). The subject block does not have a consistent roof line. On the subject block, the east end features two one-story buildings. The Gilmaker Block (Photograph 10) has a long frontage on West Fourth Street while the adjacent one-story Bon Ton Bakery (Photograph 11) has a narrow frontage. The size steps up to two- stories with the Semi-Tropic Hotel (Photograph 12) with a frontage that is wider than the Bon- Ton's, but narrower than Gilmaker's Block. Looking east from the Semi-Tropic Hotel (Photograph 13) the rooflines of the one-story buildings are obscured by the street trees while the four-story Moore Building is a strong presence. At the west end of the 300 block of West Fourth Street, the West End Theater (Photogarph 14) is a little more than two-stories tall. Designed as a theater, its building form differs from those of the mixed-use and office buildings that line the Fourth Street corridor, While the buildings on the south side of the 300 block of West Fourth are historic (contributing to the National Register District and listed on the Santa Ana Historical Register) they form an eclectic set as they differ in style, height, massing and use (retail, mixed-use, theater). Kaplan Chen Kaplan 11 April 20, 2006 80A-90 Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California The Courthouse Lofts building is proposed to be six stories high, The structure will be located along the historic Fourth Street corridor which features one other six-story building, and three four-story buildings all located within two-and-one-half blocks of the subject site, all which are contributing buildings to the Downtown Historic District. The subject block has buildings of varying heights, which is the norm along the historic corridor. Only the south side of the 400 block of West Fourth has a consistent roofline height. The National Register District is based on the eclecticism of architectural styles, building types and clearly stated that the taller buildings "complement" the body of two-story business blocks. The proposed Courthouse Lofts would add only one taller structure to the Historic District. It is not located on the one single block (the south side of 400 West Fourth) that has the only consistent two-story roofline along the Fourth Street corridor. Rather, the proposed project is on a typical block that has a range of building heights and massing. Each of the two blocks to the east, the 200 and 100 West Fourth Streets on the south sides have at least one taller building as does the 100 West block on the north side. The height of the proposed building is consistent with the patterns within the Historic District, which as the National Register Nomination states is "predominantly two story business blocks... complemented by a scattering of taller structures, the largest of which is six stories." This project, at 6-stories and 68 feet tall would be shorter than the contributing 6-story First National Bank Building (83 feet tall). It is a single building and it is within the historic de facto height limit of the Downtown Historic District. In terms of massing, there is a wide range of buildings in the Historic District. Some are one-story buildings on narrow lots, others are tall buildings on narrow lots, yet others are one-story buildings on double lots with broad frontages. The proposed building rises directly from the lot line like the typical building on the commercial blocks. Located on oa varied block in terms of street frontage and lot coverage, the massing of this building is within the range of building envelopes in the Historic District. The massing of the Courthouse Lofts project steps back from the street at the upper floors to help lower the apparent height at the street. These step backs should be composed so that the overall building retains simplicity of massing. The design of the proposed building features three lower floors, roughly corresponding to the height of adjacent buildings, fronted at the street with a fayade of red sandstone, the masonry cladding echoing other buildings in the district. The facade is divided into three bays at a scale similar to other storefronts along the street. To allow access and view to the painted wall slgnage, there is a small gap between the Courthouse Lofts street fac;:ade and the adjacent building to the east. The purpose of this design feature is to reveal a portion of the ghost advertisement on the adjacent Semi-Tropic Hotel Kaplan Chen Kaplan 12 April 20, 2006 80A-91 Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California building's party wall. While the gap is not a common feature of the area, the spacing between facades is very narrow and does not interrupt the continuous reading of the frontage along the south side of Fourth Street. A gap for a passageway or courtyard is not unusual in other urban commercial areas and in this location, provides a full glimpse of the exposed side wall of the Semi-Tropic Hotel. The understated overall fayade treatment will provide a more neutral influence along the street, without competing with the many older storefronts and allowing more decorative buildings such as the West End Theater to continue to stand out. The proposed building will have party walls on its east and west sides. These walls are typical, un-fenestrated party walls. In the proposed building several stories of unadorned party walls will be visible. This condition is not without precedent in the Historic District. In fact, the exposed party wall of the adjacent Semi-Tropic Hotel was used for advertising and this feature has become a historic character-defining feature (and one which the proposed building is partially designed around). The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation state that new construction should not destroy historic materials or features that characterize the property. Since the proposed project is sited on vacant property, no historic materials or features exist on site. However, the "ghost" billboard, layers of paint from previous advertising (Photograph 15) remains on the west elevation of the upper floor of the party wall of the Semi-Tropic Hotel, the building sited adjacent to the east of the subject property. This feature has been identified as a character-defining feature in the 2001 Survey Update of the Semi-Tropic Hotel. Rather than having the street fayade of the proposed Courthouse Lofts run from the two side lot lines, it is stepped back at the upper stories at the east lot line. This feature was designed to pull the proposed building away from the ghost billboard. As a result, a portion of the ghost billboard will remain visible. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation states that new additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in a matter that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. The Courthouse Lofts project is an in-fill project within the Historic District. As such it can be removed in the future (unless, of course, after 50 years it is considered to be a contributing building to the Historic District). If demolition would be undertaken in the future, the demolition would have to take care to protect all adjacent contributing historic buildings. The CEQA Guidelines state that a substantial adverse change in significance would occur if the proposed project would cause demolition or materially alter in an adverse manner the physical characteristics of the historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its inclusion in, or Kaplan Chen Kaplan 13 April 20, 2006 80A-92 Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California eligibility for, inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources. While the most common building height is two-stories, there is no consistent roofline in the Historic District. Rather, contributing buildings step up and down regardless of the height of adjacent buildings. The proposed building is within the height envelope of the Historic District that includes a few four and six story buildings. The proposed project's height is within physical characteristics as defined for the Historic District which recognizes and includes a few buildings up to six stories tall. As an addition on an empty site it will not cause demolition of any historic building. The CEQA Guidelines state that a substantial adverse change in significance would occur if the proposed project would cause demolition or materially alter in an adverse manner the characteristics that account for its inclusion in a local register of historical resources pursuant to local ordinance or resolution. The proposed project is sited on a rare vacant site in a built-out downtown. The empty lot is not a character-defining feature of the Downtown Historic District or a contributing feature to the District. Thus, construction of a building that falls within the development patterns of the existing Historic Downtown building types will not cause change in status of the vacant site in terms of the Santa Ana Historic Register. Construction of the Courthouse Lofts building will not have any negative impacts on the Santa Ana Downtown Historic District. The addition of the proposed building would not result in a de-listing of the Historic District since the infill building is designed within the development norms and patterns of the Historic District's eclectic set of architectural styles and its varied building sizes and massing. The one historic feature that will be impacted by the construction of the Courthouse Lofts is the "ghost billboard" on the Semi-Tropic Hotel's exposed west party wall elevation. The painted element was not a mural which might have been intended to be a permanent fixture. Rather the wall was a billboard for changing advertisements and, as such, none of the images were meant to be a permanent feature of the building. They were revenue generating vertical real estate available for rental. As an exterior feature, the ghost billboard has been exposed to climactic elements for almost 30 years, without protection. Arguably, the construction of the Courthouse Lofts could delay further deterioration (west elevation exposure to sun) or it could result in further deterioration based on some aspect of construction (moisture trapped). Regardless, a portion of the ghost billboard (the upper 42 feet of the sign age) will be obscured by the infill Courthouse Lofts project. The loss of visibility of a portion of what is a transitory and ephemeral feature would not likely result in an adverse impact. As part of a party wall, it was reasonably expected that one day an adjacent building would be constructed. However, the following measure is recommended: Prior to construction, the Kaplan Chen Kaplan 14 April 20, 2006 80A-93 Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California ghost billboard on the west wall of the Semi-Tropic Hotel building should be photographed using Historic American Building Survey (HABS) Level II type documentation. In addition, to these archival quality black and white photographs, a set of color photographs should be taken. The documentation should also include a brief written report on the historic use of building walls for advertising and signage (a practice that is currently banned or regulated by city governments). These documents should be compiled into a report that will be deposited at the Santa Ana Public Library History Room. Copies of the report should also be deposited with the City of Santa Ana Planning Department. Implementation of the above as a mitigation measure would reduce any potential adverse impact to this single transitory feature (only one aspect of the existing building) to a level of insignificance. In conclusion, the proposed Courthouse Lofts Project is designed within the height envelope of the existing Downtown Historic District whose character is defined by a predominant building height and style (two-story, Spanish Colonial Revival). The Historic District includes buildings between one and six stories high, sited on either single or multiple joined lots, and designed over a 40-50 year period in a wide variety of styles (from Victorian to Moderne). The proposed project, as new construction on a vacant lot, will not remove any contributing historic building from the district. The proposed building is designed to accommodate the transitory feature, the ghost billboard advertisement, on the party wall of the adjacent Semi-Tropic Hotel. However, a portion of the ghost billboard will be obscured since it is on a party wall. The ghost billboard has been fading over time, as is the nature of images meant to be transitory, but as a feature that is reminiscent of an earlier age, a report documenting (by photographs and narrative) the extant image should be prepared before construction activities occur. The proposed Courthouse Lofts Project is an infill structure that is compatible with the existing Historic District. It complies with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and will not result in any adverse impact to the designated Santa Ana Downtown Historic District. . Kaplan Chen Kaplan 15 April 20, 2006 80A-94 Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California References City of Santa Ana Planning documents including: Santa Ana Downtown Historic District National Register Nomination (1984); 2001 Historic Resources Survey Update; Santa Ana Register of Historic Properties Grimmer, Anne E., and Kay D. Weeks. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards For Rehabilitation and Illustrated Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings. Washington, D.C.:U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Heritage Preservation Services. 1991 Longstreth, Richard. City Center to Regional Mall: Architecture, the Automobile, and Retailing in Los Angeles, 1920-1950. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 1997 Longstreth, Richard. The Buildings of Main Street: A Guide to American Commercial Architecture. Washington, D.C.: The Preservation Press. 1987 Weeks, Kay D. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Historic Preservation Services. 1995 Whiffen, Marcus and Koeper, Frederick. American Architecture, Volume 2: 1860-1976. Cambridge: The MIT Press. 1981 Kaplan Chen Kaplan 16 April 20, 2006 80A-95 Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California Appendix A: Maps and Documents CENl'Q DR(8TH ST) I DOWNTOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT I " 8THST CIVIC CENTER DR . ...-- . KaY III :COti'rNBU1M! -, -- L_ ~'" .<'- ... ~ I 5TH5T CIVIC CENTER DR .- -.. CIVIC CBfJ'ER DR (7 J .---- I ~ ~ I " "I ~L-_ ~ I i ------- ---- ,- ---- I I rl _I;~i, -..- t; ~ I -"',",;:",r' " f ,.... I III t ;r "T.' ,lV:; .. I 4THST I 4THST -~1.1 ~..::iij~-'~I]~j i ... : ~ -__1- ,. ~ I ,~-- ~-~ j j'o,. i LiI.,..r' -. ~ :~~ ~,. ~ -- eoi'RIGHT ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ~ 5THST 1ST5T ~ Map of Downtown Historic District in Santa Ana. Project site is on south side of Fourth Street, just east of Birch Street. Kaplan Chen Kaplan 17 April 20, 2006 80A-96 Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California Aerial view of Downtown Historic District in Santa Ana. Project site is on south side of Fourth Street, .ust east of Birch Street em parcel left of center). Close-up aerial view of site at 320 West Fourth Street. Kaplan Chen Kaplan 18 April 20, 2006 80A-97 Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California 1. West Fourth Street corridor looking east from the 200 West block. 2. South side of the 200 block of West Fourth Street looking east. Note mix of building heights. Kaplan Chen Kaplan 19 April 20, 2006 80A-98 Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California Kaplan Chen Kaplan 20 April 20, 2006 80A-99 Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California Kaplan Chen Kaplan 21 April 20, 2006 80A-100 Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California 7. Landscaped area east of Ronald Reagan Courthouse Building on north side of 300 block of West Fourth Street. 8. Ronald Reagan Courthouse Building on north side of 300 block of West Fourth St. Kaplan Chen Kaplan 22 April 20, 2006 80A-101 Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California I ~ i' \..~ /~ -='").'--' '-~ ,~ 9. South side of 400 block of West Fourth Street 10. Gilmaker Block Building at 302-308 West Fourth Street. Kaplan Chen Kaplan 23 April 20, 2006 80A-102 . Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California 11. Bon-Ton Bakery Building at 310 West Fourth Street. 12. Semi-Tropic Hotel Building at 312-316 West Fourth Street. Kaplan Chen Kaplan 24 April 20, 2006 80A-103 Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California ) ) .I / 13. Semi-Tropic Hotel Building at 312-316 West Fourth Street, with ghost billboard on west elevation. Infilllot is adjacent to west elevation. 14. West End Theater at 322-326 West Fourth Street. InfiUlot is just east of Theater. Kaplan Chen Kaplan 25 April 20, 2006 80A-104 , Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California 15. Ghost billboard on west elevation of Semi-Tropic Hotel. Kaplan Chen Kaplan 26 April 20, 2006 80A-105 . ' Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California 4TH ST ELEVATION Proposed project Fourth Street (north) elevation. EAST ElEVATION Proposed project side elevation showing alternate stepping back at upper floors. Fourth Street is on the right in drawing above. Kaplan Chen Kaplan 27 April 20, 2006 80A-106 . Historic Resource Impacts Courthouse Lofts Project 320 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California COURTHOUSE lOFTS, SANTA ANA . :,,,~,~"" URIAN.. WEST + STR"HGiES Proposed project rendering illustrating vertical scheme without stepping at upper floors. Simpler massing as shown may be preferable. Kaplan Chen Kaplan 28 April 20, 2006 80A-107 ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCil OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA ADOPTING SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT NO. 80 (SD-80) AND REZONING THE PROPERTY lOCATED AT 320 WEST FOURTH STREET FROM CENTRAL BUSINESS ARTIST'S VillAGE (C3-A) TO SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT NO. 80 (SD-80) (AA NO. 2006-04) 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. Applicant is requesting approval of the amended Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2004-234, Amendment Application No. 2006-04 rezoning the property from Central Business - Artist's Village (C3-A) to Specific Development No. 80 (SD-80), Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-14 to allow a live-work community and approval of Site Plan Review No. 2006-07 to allow the construction of a new 16,000 square foot mixed-use building with 1,189 square feet of retail on the first floor, 3,544 of basement that includes parking and storage, as well as five live-work community units occupying the remaining upper floors for the property located at 320 West Fourth Street. B. On September 25, 2006, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing and unanimously voted to recommend that the City Council: 1. Approve and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2004-234. 2. Adopt an ordinance approving Amendment Application No. 2006-04. 3. Adopt a resolution approving Site Plan Review No. 2006-07 as conditioned. 4. Adopt a resolution approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-14 as conditioned. C. On January 22, 2007, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve and adopt the amended Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2004-234. 80A-108 D. The amended Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2004-234, Amendment Application No. 2006-04, Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-14, and Site Plan Review No. 2006-07 came before the City Council of the City of Santa Ana for a public hearing February 5, 2007, and at that time considered all testimony, written and oral. E. Amendment Application No. 2006-04 has been filed with the City of Santa Ana to adopt Specific Development No. 80 (SD-80) and to rezone the property located at 320 West Fourth Street from Central Business - Artist's Village (C3-A) to Specific Development No. 80 (SD-80). (AA No. 2006-04) F. SD-80 would allow on the first floor retail and service uses; fine art galleries which may include a studio as an ancillary use; fiber art galleries which may include a studio as an ancillary use; photography studios; printing, lithography and calligraphy studios (with a Conditional Use Permit); glass blowing and sculpturing studios (with a Conditional Use Permit); Ceramic and pottery studios (with a Conditional Use Permit); and cyber cafes (with a Conditional Use Permit). On the floors above the first floor, SD-80 would allow professional and administrative offices, design professionals, but excluding medical, dental and massage therapy offices; fine art studios; fiber art studios; photography studios; multiple-family dwellings (with a Conditional Use Permit); live-work communities (with a Conditional Use Permit); printing, lithography and calligraphy studios (with a Conditional Use Permit); glass blowing and sculpturing studios (with a Conditional Use Permit); and ceramic and pottery studios (with a Conditional Use Permit). G. Amendment Application No. 2006-04 is consistent with the General Plan, including but not limited to its goals and policies: 1. To promote a balance of land uses to address basic community needs. Goal 3.0 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan. 2. To promote land uses which enhance the City's economic and fiscal viability. Goal 2.0 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan. H. The City Council has weighed and balanced the general plan's policies and has determined that based upon this balancing that the project at 320 West Fourth Street is consistent with the purpose of the general plan. I. The City Council also adopts as findings all facts presented in the Requests for Council Action dated February 5, 2007 accompanying this matter. For these reasons, and each of them, Amendment Application No. 2006-04 is hereby found and determined to be consistent with the General Plan of the City of Santa Ana and otherwise justified by the public necessity, convenience, and general welfare. J. The resolution approving and adopting the amended Mitigated Negative 80A-109 Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for Environmental Review No. 2004-234 which came before the City Council on February 5, 2007. This ordinance incorporates by reference, as though fully set forth herein, that resolution and mitigated negative declaration and mitigation monitoring program. Section 2. The real property located at 320 West Fourth Street is hereby reclassified from Central Business - Artist's Village (C3-A) to Specific Development No. 80 (SD-80). (AA No. 2006-04) Amended Sectional District Map number 12-5-10 showing the above described change in use district designation, is hereby approved and attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by this reference as though fully set forth herein. Section 3. Specific Development No. 80 (SD-80) as set forth in Exhibit "B", attached hereto and incorporated as though fully set forth herein, is approved and adopted in its entirety. 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 ,2007. Miguel A. Pulido Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joseph W. Fletcher City Attorney By: Kylee O. Otto Assistant City Attorney 80A-110 AYES: Council members 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 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 80A-111 EXHIBIT A TO FOllOW 80A-112 Specific Development Plan No. 80 Section 1. Applicability of Ordinance The specific development zoning district for a mixed-use (commercial land use with a residential component) project as authorized by Chapter 41, Division 26, Section 41-593 et seq. of the Santa Ana Municipal Code (SAMC), is specifically subject to the standards and regulations contained in this plan for the express purpose of establishing land use regulations and standards. All other applicable chapters, articles, and sections of the SAMC and any other regulations adopted by the City Council shall apply unless expressly stated or superseded by this ordinance. All terms contained herein shall be defined by the SAMC, unless specifically defined herein. Section 2. Purpose Specific Development Plan No. 80 (SD-80), consisting of standards and regulations, is hereby established for the express purpose of protecting the health, safety, and general welfare of the people of the City by promoting and enhancing the value of properties and encouraging orderly development. SD-80 sets the development and design criteria for a development consisting of approximately four thousand (4,000) square feet, within the Downtown Historic National Register District. The purpose of this specific development is to allow for flexibility in site planning and design to respond to market conditions while assuring high quality development in this architecturally significant location. SD-80 specifically establishes for the property the following: . Permitted uses. · Development and operational standards, including building height limits, require setbacks, parking, landscaping provisions, and enforcement policies, as well as a provision for the protection of historic resources. . Maximum authorized intensity. . Signage provisions. . Refuse collection. . Utility requirements. Exhibit B Specific Development Plan No. 80 Page 1 of 8 80A-113 Section 3. Objectives The objectives of SD-80 include provisions of the following: . A long-term development that is of the highest architectural quality and design, and that architecturally complements the Downtown National Register District. . A landscaping plan that is complementary to a mixed-use development and sensitive to the surrounding community. . A visually harmonious development as viewed both internally and externally. . A development that is consistent with the District Center designation of the General Plan and which implements the spirit and intent of policies of the General Plan. . A circulation system that is responsive to the needs of both vehicular and pedestrian travel. . The provision of a mixture of high quality housing and ground level commercial uses along Fourth Street so as to enhance the viability and vibrancy, and pedestrian- friendly qualities of the Downtown. . A mixed-use project complementing an adjacent historic resource "ghost sign" located on the structure immediately east of this site, as well as other culturally and architecturally significant structures in the area. . A mixed-use project blending with adjacent office and retail/service land uses. Section 4. Permitted Uses The categories of land uses to be included within the project area are retail and services uses, art galleries and studios, offices and a live work community. If a use is for any reason omitted from those specified as permissible or if ambiguity arises concerning the classification of a particular use within the meaning and intent of this Plan, the determination shall be at the discretion of the Planning Manager. Such decision may be appealed to the Panning Commission whose decision is final. A. Permitted uses on the first floor. The following land uses are permitted on the first floor: 1. Retail and service uses 2. The following creative art uses: a. Fine art galleries which may include a studio as an ancillary use. b. Fiber art galleries which may include a studio as an ancillary use. c. Photography studios. B. Conditionally Permitted Uses on the first floor only. The following uses may be permitted in the first floor subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit: Specific Development Plan No. 80 Page 2 of 8 80A-114 1. Printing, lithography, and calligraphy studios. 2. Glass blowing and sculpturing studios. 3. Ceramic and pottery studios. 4. Cyber cafes and subject to compliance with the requirements of SAMC Section 41-198.200. C. Permitted Uses on floors above the first floor: 1. Professional and administrative offices, design professionals, but excluding medical, dental, and massage therapy offices. 2. Fine art studio. 3. Fiber art studio. 4. Photography studio. D. Conditionally Permitted Uses on floors above the first floor: 1. Multiple-family dwelling. 2. Live-work community. 3. Printing, lithography, and calligraphy studios. 4. Glass blowing and sculpturing studios. 5. Ceramic and pottery studios. E. All other uses not expressly permitted or conditionally permitted in this ordinance are prohibited. Section 5. Maximum Permitted Building Density/Intensity for dwelling units live/work community units or commercial tenant spaces This development has specific constraints due to the limited site capacity and availability of parking, and therefore, there is a maximum of five (5) dwelling units, live/work community units or commercial tenant spaces within the floors above the first floor. Section 6. Development Standards A. Building height and basement. 1. Structures are subject to a height limitation of sixty-eight (68) feet above ground level, which is defined as the vertical distance measured from the curb level to the highest point of the roof surface. This excludes elevator override area, appurtenances, and rooftop railings. 2. The building shall incorporate a full basement, which shall be used solely for vehicular parking and storage. Specific Development Plan No. 80 Page 3 of 8 80A-115 B. Setbacks. 1. Front setback (Fourth Street). Maximum setback is zero; however, any appurtenance such as awnings, canopy, flagpoles, signage must obtain an easement and/or encroachment permit in order to be located so as to project into or over the right-of-way. A step-back of not less than one (1) foot from the front property line shall be implemented for the floors over three (3) stories, excluding basement. 2. Side (west). Maximum setback is zero. 3. Side (east). The historic "ghost sign" located on the adjacent building directly to the east of the subject site must be preserved and the north end of the "ghost sign" shall not blocked from public view. Therefore, the eastern side setback shall be a minimum of fifteen (15) feet for a length of thirty-seven (37) feet from the front property line so as to leave a clear view of the resources. Once at this thirty-seven (37) feet distance, no setback is required. 4. Rear (south). No setback required although, if parking is located off the alley, a minimum twenty-three feet, six inches (23'6") setback from the alley centerline shall be maintained to allow for driveway turning radius. C. Standards for dwelling units, live work community units, or commercial tenant spaces above first floor 1. A maximum of five (5) dwelling units, live work community units, or commercial tenant spaces for this project. 2. Each dwelling unit, live work community unit, or commercial tenant space shall be at least one-thousand (1,000) gross square feet in size. 3. Each dwelling unit, live work community unit, or commercial tenant space shall have bathroom facilities apart from other residential units, including a water closet, wash basin, and a bathtub or shower. 4. Each dwelling unit, live work community unit, or commercial tenant space shall have kitchen facilities apart from other units, including a kitchen sink, cooking appliances, and refrigerator. All such facilities shall have a clear working space of at least thirty (30) inches in front of and perpendicular to it. Specific Development Plan No. 80 Page 4 of 8 80A-116 5. Each dwelling unit, live work community unit, or commercial tenant space first floor shall have its own storage area in the in the basement of the building. D. Standards for commercial tenant space at first floor. 1. Each commercial tenant space shall space shall be at least one-thousand, one-hundred (1,100) gross square feet. 2. Each commercial tenant space shall be provided a minimum of seven hundred-eighty (780) square feet of storage space which shall be made available within the basement of the building. E. Parking. 1. Parking provided on-site shall be provided by interior garage and parking lift. 2. Units above ground/street level shall be provided at a minimum of standards defined as: a. One (1) parking space for each unit with a size of one-thousand, six-hundred (1,600) gross square feet or less. . b. Two (2) parking spaces for each unit with a size of one-thousand, six-hundred and one (1,601) gross square feet up to three- thousand, two-hundred (3,200) gross square feet. . c. Three (3) parking spaces for each unit with a size of three- thousand, two-hundred and one (3,201) and larger gross square feet. . 3. No additional parking shall be required on site. 4. No guest parking shall be permitted within the parking lifts. F. Walls and Screening. 1. Except as provided in Section 6(G)(1 )(c) below, any wall or fence shall be constructed in compliance with the SAMC and is subject to approval of the Planning Division. 2. Any equipment, whether on the roof, side of the building, or in the courtyard area, or on the ground, shall be screened. The method of screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building in terms of material, color, shape, and size. G. Landscape/Hardscape Standards. The final design satisfying the following requirements shall be subject to the review and approval of the Planning Manager: Specific Development Plan No. 80 Page 5 of 8 80A-117 80A-118 1. A minimum of a five-hundred fifty-five (555) square foot courtyard shall be maintained at the front of the property so as not to obscure the historic "ghost sign" on the structure immediately east of the proposed building. a. This courtyard shall maintain a water feature, hardscape and landscape features to complement and highlight the historic "ghost sign". b. The courtyard area shall incorporate uplighting to highlight the historic "ghost sign" to enhance the visibility, attractiveness, and preservation of this cultural feature. This uplighting feature shall be on a timer so as to minimize the amount of exterior lighting from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. c. The courtyard area shall incorporate seating, seat walls, water feature, lighting, artwork (such as sculpture or sculpturally designed fence and gate) and landscaping to provide visual interest and additional amenities within the area. All seating, benches, and surfaces shall be made of a durable material such as concrete, stone, or painted iron, and be designed to minimize effects from vandalism, weather, and incorporate graffiti resistant coatings. d. Landscaped areas within the courtyard area shall be irrigated using an automatic sprinkler system. The project shall have an approved Landscape Plan prior to construction permits being issued, and shall be fully implemented prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. 2. First floor pedestrian amenities shall include lighting, and planters. These amenities shall be designed to minimize effects from vandalism, weather, and incorporate graffiti resistant coatings. Additional pedestrian amenities are encouraged for the site. 3. Roof deck amenities shall be provided for the use of each dwelling unit, live/work community unit, or commercial tenant space. These amenities shall include seating, seat walls, and landscape planters. Any permanent landscape feature must be irrigated using an automatic sprinkler system. The rooftop amenities shall be maintained and shall be designed to minimize effects from vandalism, weather, and incorporate graffiti resistant coatings. H. Architectural Design Features. The final design satisfying the following requirements shall be subject to review and approval of the Planning Manager: 1. Exterior Materials: Exterior materials and finishes will comply with site plan review approvals granted through the Planning Commission or City Council. Exterior materials on the first three floors shall include real stone on the fagade. Exterior enclosures and similar ancillary structures are to match the proposed structure in terms of texture, materials, and color palette. Specific Development Plan No. 80 Page 6 of 8 80A-119 2. Design Features: Any minor alterations and/or additions shall be in keeping with the original approved design of the structure in terms of scale, rooflines, materials, and color palette. Additionally, a written report shall be prepared by a qualified architectural historian and submitted to and approved by the Planning Manager demonstrating how the overall architectural design is compatible with the Downtown National Register District. 3. Lighting Standards/Fixtures: A minimum of one (1) foot candle of light shall be provided throughout the parking area and the parking apron. Specifications of light standards/fixtures and photometries shall be submitted to the Planning Division and Police Department for approval prior to issuance of construction permits. 4. Except as provided in Section 4(G)(1 )(b) above, there shall be no glare or spillover lighting into adjacent properties. All exterior glass materials on the exterior of the building shall be non-reflective. 5. The ceiling of the parking facilities shall be painted white, and be maintained to improve illumination and enhance safety within this area. The Planning Manager may approve minor modifications to the standards specified in this SD-80, provided that such changes are consistent with the purpose, scope, and intent of this document. The Planning Manager has the sole and absolute discretion to determine what constitutes a "minor modification". Section 7. Signage A. All signage shall comply with the Santa Ana Municipal Code. A comprehensive sign program for the entire site, including, but not limited to, freestanding, wall, directional, addressing, permanent signs and graphics, shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Manager prior the issuance of any sign permit. B. The elevation directly facing Fourth Street shall be considered the primary elevation for signage purposes. Section 8. Refuse Collection Area Areas to handle the refuse for the development site shall be integrated into the building. At minimum, the project shall provide two (2) refuse collection areas measuring a minimum of eleven feet by seven feet (11' x 7') each. One collection area is to be used for refuse, and the other shall be for recycle materials. Such collection areas shall be enclosed and viewable by refuse collectors, with exterior materials such as concrete block with metal doors. Additionally, each collection area shall provide "chutes" to allow refuse from upper floors to collect within these areas to the extent required by AB239 or City of Santa Ana Ordinance and that determined by the Planning Division. Specific Development Plan No. 80 Page 7 of 8 80A-120 Section 9. Telephone, Electrical, Water, Gas, and Cable A. All on-site utilities shall be placed underground. B. Transformers of terminal equipment shall be visually screened from view from streets, and adjacent properties. C. There shall not be exposed downspouts, scupper drains, electrical or mechanical lines on the exterior of the building. All mechanical equipment shall be screened from view in an architecturally integrated manner, and shall not be visible from a distance of three-hundred feet (300') from ground level at a pedestrian height. D. Each unit shall be provided its own gas, electric, and water meters. Specific Development Plan No. 80 Page 8 of 8 80A-121 KG - 1/30107 RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 2006- 07 AS CONDITIONED AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-14 AS CONDITIONED FOR LIVE-WORK COMMUNITY FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 320 WEST FOURTH STREET WHICH IS WITHIN SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT NO. 80 (SD-80) 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 the amended Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2006-234, Amendment Application No. 2006-04 rezoning the property from Central Business - Artist's Village (C3-A) to Specific Development No. 80 (SD-80), Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-14 to allow a live-work community, and approval of Site Plan Review No. 2006-07 to allow the construction of a new 16,000 square foot mixed-use building with 1,189 square feet of retail on the first floor, 3,544 of basement that includes parking and storage, as well as five live-work community units occupying the remaining upper floors for the property located at 320 West Fourth Street. B. On September 25, 2006, the Planr' public hearing and unanimously \' 'mission held a duly noticed 'Tlend that the City Council: 1. Approve and ado' Mitigation Monitr 234. ltive Declaration and 'I Review No. 2004- 2. Adopt an ordinanl. 04. ...;ation No. 2006- 3. Adopt a resolution app. conditioned. .1 Review No. 2006-07 as 4. Adopt a resolution approving ~onditional Use Permit No. 2006-14 as conditioned. C. On January 22, 2007, the Planning Commission recommended that the Resolution No. 2006- Page 1 of 11 80A-122 City Council approve and adopt the amended Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2004-234. D. The amended Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2004-234, Amendment Application No. 2006-04, Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-14, and Site Plan Review No. 2006-07 came before the City Council of the City of Santa Ana for a public hearing February 5, 2007, and at that time considered all testimony, written and oral. E. Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-14 has been filed with the City of Santa Ana seeking to allow a live-work community for the property located at 320 West Fourth Street. 1. Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-638 authorizes the City Council to grant a conditional use permit upon making certain findings. i. Will the proposed use provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood or the community? The proposed new building will contribute to the general well being of the area by providing new pedestrian friendly commercial space along the predominantly commercial Fourth Street corridor on a lot that has been vacant for a long period of time. Further, the proposed residential land use in the upper floors of the proposed building will only enhance the vibrancy of the Downtown by bringing additional consumers and entrepreneurs directly to the area. ii. Will the proposed use under the circumstances of the particular case be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity? The proposed residential land use in the upper floors of the proposed building will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity. The parking garage is secured via remote control access only to allow for secure use of the parking area for residents. Additionally, the alley will be well-lit to as to offer increased safety and more visibility to drivers. The parking area will also be enhanced through a mirror to allow drivers backing into the alley to see oncoming Resolution No. 2007- Page2of11 80A-123 Resolution No. 2006- Page 3 of 11 traffic. Oncoming traffic will be notified when a vehicle is backing out of the parking area through the use of a flasher light triggered by the garage door opening. The front courtyard area of the building will be enclosed with a safety gate to prevent vandalism and graffiti. iii. Will the proposed use adversely affect the present economic stability or future economic development of properties surrounding the area? The new building, in conjunction with high quality landscape, hardscape and architectural style and materials, will be visually pleasing and offer a highly improved appearance from the vacant lot. The overall economic stability of the area will be strengthened as a result of new commercial services being added to the area. iv. Will the proposed use comply with the regulations and conditions specified in Chapter 41 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code for such use? The proposed building with commercial on the ground floor/street level and residential uses on the upper floors will operate in compliance with Specific Development No. 80 and the Santa Ana Municipal Code. The courtyard which will be visible from the public right-of-way will be landscaped and provide visual interest through the use of high quality hardscape, seating, seat walls, and water feature. The proposed project meets the intent of live/work projects that are allowed via C3-A zoning. v. Will the proposed use adversely affect the General Plan or any specific plan of the City? The proposed use is in keeping with the density and uses identified by the General Plan designation of District Center. The project supports General Plan Land Use Policy Number 1.0 which calls for the promotion of a balance of land uses to address basic Land Use Policy Number 2.0 which calls for the promotion of land uses to enhance the City's economic and fiscal viability. The mixed use project accomplishes both these goals simultaneously. 80A-124 F. Site Plan Review No. 2006-07 has been filed with the City of Santa Ana seeking to allow the construction of a new 16,000 square foot mixed-use building with 1,189 square feet of retail on the first floor, 3,544 of basement that includes parking and storage, as well as five live-work community units occupying the remaining upper floors for the property located at 320 West Fourth Street. Section 2. The City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the initial study and the amended mitigated negative declaration and mitigation monitoring program, Environmental Review No. 2004-234, prepared with respect to this Project. The City Council has, as a result of its consideration and the evidence presented at the hearings on this matter, determined that, as required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the State CEQA Guidelines, a mitigation 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 amended 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") ~ 735.5(c)(1), the City Council has determined that, after considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have the potential for any adverse effect on wildlife resources or the ecological habitat upon which wildlife resources depend. The proposed project exists in an urban environment characterized by paved concrete, roadways, surrounding buildings and human activity. Therefore, pursuant to Fish and Game Code ~ 711.2 and Title XIV, CCR ~ 735.5(a)(3), the payment of Fish and Game Department filing fees is not required in conjunction with this project. Section 3. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby, approves Site Plan Review No. 2006-07 as conditioned in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein and Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-14 as conditioned in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein. These decisions are based upon the evidence submitted at the abovesaid hearing, which includes but is not limited to: the Request for Planning Commission Action dated February 5, 2007 and exhibits attached thereto; and the public testimony, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference. Section 4. This Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review is expressly conditioned upon adoption by the City Council of an Amendment Application rezoning the property located at 320 West Fourth Street from Central Business - Artist's Village (C3-A) to Specific Development No. 80 (SD-80) (AA No. 2006-04). The rights of the applicant under this Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review shall not vest until the effective date of such ordinance. Should no such zoning ordinance amendment become effective, then this Resolution is null and void and of no effect. Resolution No. 2007- Page4of11 80A-125 ADOPTED this _ day of ,2007. Miguel A. Pulido Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joseph W. Fletcher City Attorney By: Kylee O. Otto Assistant City Attorney AYES: Council members 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. 2007- 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- Page5of11 80A-126 Conditions for Approval for Site Plan Review No. 2006-07 Site Plan Review No. 2006-07 is approved subject to compliance, to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Manager, with applicable sections of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, the California Administrative Code, the Uniform Fire Code, the Uniform Building Code, and all other applicable regulations. In addition, it shall meet the following conditions of approval: The applicant must comply with each and every condition listed below prior to exercising the rights conferred by this site plan review. The applicant must remain in compliance with all conditions listed below throughout the life of the development project. Failure to comply with each and every condition may result in the revocation of the site plan review approval. A. PlanninCl Division 1. Site Plan Review No. 2006-07 shall become void at such time as Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-14 becomes void pursuant to the Santa Ana Municipal Code, Chapter 41. EXHIBIT A Resolution No. 2007- Page 6 of 11 80A-127 Conditions for Approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-14 Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-14 is approved subject to compliance to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Manager, with all applicable sections of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, the California Administrative Code, the Uniform Fire Code, the Uniform Building Code, and all other applicable regulations. The applicant must comply in full with each and every condition listed below prior to exercising the rights conferred by this conditional use permit. The applicant must remain in compliance with all conditions listed below throughout the life of the conditional use permit. Failure to comply with each and every condition may result in revocation of the conditional use permit. B. Plannina Division 1. Comply with all conditions and requirements from the Development Review Committee (DRC) for the development project (DP2004-91). 2. Any amendment to this conditional use permit must be submitted to the Planning Division for review. At that time, staff will determine if administrative relief is available or the conditional use permit must be amended. 3. The buildings shall be of wood or steel construction with a quality and durable exterior materials as shown on the architectural plans, material boards and material specifications submitted for this project. Exterior materials shall include a real stone product on the fac;:ade of the first three floors of the building. 4. The exterior east wall shall be reviewed in detail for potential aesthetic improvements, and/or the potential for temporary signage. Additionally, plant material should be included on the roof deck that may spill over the wall to soften the hard edges of the top floors of the architecture. 5. Prior to issuance of building permits, the interior building amenities shall be submitted for review by the Planning Division. The amenity package submitted for review shall include but not be limited to flooring, staircase railings, doors and hardware, kitchen appliances and cabinetry, dual bowl sinks and fixtures, tile walls, tiled showers enclosures and kitchen countertops of stone tile or stone slab, or their equivalent. At minimum, the amenities will include the equivalent or higher grade of a General Electric Monogram Series product line for the kitchen appliances. Exhibit B Resolution No. 2006- Page 7 of 11 80A-128 6. Prior to issuance of building permits, size specifications and details regarding each unit's access to elevators, shall be provided to the Planning Division. 7. The project shall include eight parking spaces utilizing a Klaus P310 parking lift. Detailed drawings and specifications shall be provided regarding the parking lift's operation, size, and mechanics. Each residential unit shall be allotted parking per the standards stated in Specific Development 80. 8. The parking garage shall provide insulated garage door(s) with automatic opener, transmitter and remotes. 9. Prohibit all first levels from any encroachment for use as bedroom space. The first floor (street level) is to be used for retail/gallery area as defined in Specific Development 80. 10. Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) must be approved by the Planning Manager prior to the issuance of any building permit. Such CC&Rs must contain at a minimum, the following: a. Project and site maintenance. b. Standards shall be established for the exterior maintenance of each unit within the community. c. Graffiti removal will be required within 48 hours. d. Assignment of repair of perimeter walls/fencing will be specified in the CC&Rs in the event of damage. e. CC&Rs are to be in effect in perpetuity. f. Any proposed modifications to the CC&Rs will require approval by the City of Santa Ana. g. The use of professional management to ensure a quality operation and maintenance. h. The site restrictions regarding to number of parking spaces. i. The site restrictions regarding the turning radius into the garage area. j. Types of commercial/businesses allowed in the residential areas. k. Number of employees to be limited to two per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area of the unit. I. No more than one business per residential unit. m. Standards shall be established for the ongoing maintenance of the parking lift. n. The use of a unique parking facility (parking lift) shall indemnify the City of Santa Ana for any liability for any potential accidents or injuries resulting from this facility. Resolution No. 2007- Page 8 of 11 80A-129 o. A covenant establishing the City of Santa Ana's release of liability regarding the unique parking facility (parking lift) shall be recorded with the County of Orange Recorder's Office. 11. A tentative tract and final tract map shall be approved prior to the applicant exercising the rights conferred by this conditional use permit. 12. This conditional use permit shall be null and void and of no force and effect unless and until the City Council, in the exercise of its sole discretion, approves a tentative tract map for this project. 13. The proposed structure shall be built to all applicable commercial codes established by the 2001 California Building Code, and shall be compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act to allow for the commercial uses on upper floors. 14. Prior to issuance of building permits, the exterior building amenities, materials and finishes, and balcony railings shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division. Exterior glass shall be Class "A" and blue or green non-reflective, safety material. 15. Prior to issuance of building permits, specifications and details of the rollup window covers shall be provided to the Planning Division for review and approval. 16. Prior to issuance of building permits, the exterior building amenities, specifically the courtyard area at street level, water feature, street furniture and seating, security fencing, as well as materials and finishes shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division. 17. The applicant shall provide a plan for lighting and landscape maintenance. The lighting and landscape plan and design will be reviewed by the Planning Division during the plan check phase. 18. Prior to issuance of building permits, the exterior building amenities, specifically for the roof deck area, as well as materials and finishes, and roof deck railings, and accessibility shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division. This submittal shall include landscape and hardscape details, as well as furniture, any proposed water feature, and/or any recreational amenity. Resolution No. 2006- Page9of11 80A-130 19. Prior to issuance of building permits, details regarding each unit's access to the roof deck, as well as elevator specifications, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division. 20. Prior to issuance of building permits, details of the building's security feature for visitors to contact individual units for entry shall be submitted to the Planning Division and Police Department for review and approval. 21. Prior to issuance of building permits, submit for review a plan outlining the design of the fire access location, as well as automatic fire sprinklers, fire alarms, and standpipe systems. 22. Prior to issuance of building permits, submit a plan for review indicating the location of utility vaults, transformers, check valves, air conditioning units, and gas and water meters. These appurtenances shall be screened from public view and be integrated into the building's architecture. 23. Prior to issuance of building permits, submit a plan for review indicating the location of all water heaters. These mechanical items are to be within the footprint of the building. 24. Prior to issuance of building permits, submit a Historic American Building Survey (HABS) related to the historic ghost sign on the easterly adjacent building that is completed by a qualified Architectural Historian to the Planning Division for review and archival purposes. 25. Prior to issuance of building permits, submit a proposal for an interpretative sign and display to be mounted on the Fourth Street building fac;:ade at street level related to the historic ghost billboard for review and approval by the Planning Division. This interpretative sign shall include photographs of the billboard, as well as a narrative description of the billboard's historical aspects. 26. Prior to issuance of building permits, an address directory/plan with accompanying floor plan must be submitted to the Planning Division for approval. 27. Prior to issuance of building permits, an on site mailbox location for all units must be submitted to the Planning Division and approved by both Planning and the United States Post Office for location and method of operation. Resolution No. 2007- Page 10 of 11 80A-131 28. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, a mirror shall be installed in such a way to allow those backing into the alley from the project's parking garage, to see oncoming traffic from said alley. This mirror may not project into the right-of-way. Should the mirror be required to be installed on an adjacent property, an easement shall be obtained from the owner of said adjacent property. 29. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, a flashing traffic/warning light shall be installed to alert drivers headed east in the alleyway that a vehicle is emerging from the project's parking garage. Should the flasher be required to be installed on an adjacent property, an easement shall be obtained from the owner of said adjacent property. 30. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, the building address number shall be posted on the building's fayade, facing Fourth Street, in a minimum of four-inch letters. 31. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, a sign program shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval which includes a building address directory. Resolution No. 2006- Page 11 of 11 80A-132 Won Cha 314 West 4th St Santa Ana, CA 92701 Tel: 714-647-0536 Fax: 714-647-0218 Email : wonpluscorp@yahoo.com January 30, 2007 Mr. Vincent Samiento - Council Member 20 Civic Center Plaza P.O. Box 1988 Santa Ana, CA 92702 REF: REQUEST TO POSTPONE THE PUBLIC HEARING FROM PROJECT 320 W. 4TH STREET Dear Mr. Samiento: Thank you for your notice of public hearing on February sth 2007 related to the Amended Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review NO. 2004-234, adopt an ordinance approving Amendment Application No. 2006- 04 related to the New Building project located at 320 W 4th Street, Santa Ana, CA 92701. I would highly appreciate if you could postpone the Public Hearing since I would like to have more time for my attorney to do all the research and study necessary to prove to the Council Members about the critical situation. It is hard to imagine what benefits the City of Santa Ana would get from this plan, as well as our community as whole. Please, reconsider the situation and I look forward to discuss this matter at the council members pretty soon. Would you please give me a call at my cell phone number 714-474-5550 to let me know if you could postpone or not this public hearing. Thank you in advance for your kind concern. Sincerely, ~ WonCha 80A-133 80A-134