HomeMy WebLinkAbout75B - 3321 SOUTH FAIRVIEW STREQUEST FOR
COUNCIL ACTION
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
OCTOBER 1, 2007
TITLE:
PUBLIC HEARING - AMENDMENT APPLICATION
NO. 2007-02, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 2007-
04 (COUNTY MAP NO. 17071) AND SITE PLAN
REVIEW NO. 2007-02 TO CHANGE THE ZONING
FROM ARTERIAL COMMERCIAL TO SPECIFIC
DEVELOPMENT NO. 81 AND TO SUBDIVIDE A LOT
INTO 47 PARCELS AT 3321 SOUTH FAIRVIEW
STREET - TON LLC, APPLICANT
r'
CITY MANAGER
CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY:
APPROVED
^ As Recommended
^ As Amended
^ Ordinance on 15f Reading
^ Ordinance on 2"d Reading
^ Implementing Resolution
^ Set Public Hearing For_
CONTINUED TO
FILE NUMBER
RECOMMENDED ACTION
1. Approve and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation
Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2007-37.
2. Adopt an ordinance approving Amendment Application No. 2007-02 and
Specific Development No. 81.
3. Adopt a resolution approving Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04 (County
Map No. 17071) as conditioned.
4. Adopt a resolution approving Site Plan Review No. 2007-02 as
conditioned.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
On September 10, 2007, the Planning Commission recommended that the City
Council approve and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2007-37; adopt an
ordinance approving Amendment Application No. 2007-02 and Specific
Development No. 81; adopt a resolution approving Tentative Tract Map No.
2007-04 (County Map No. 17071) as conditioned; and adopt a resolution
approving Site Plan Review No. 2007-02 as conditioned by a vote of 5:0
(Gartner and Leo absent) to change the zoning from Arterial Commercial (C-
5) to Specific Development No. 81 (SD-81) and to subdivide a lot into 9
parcels (six buildable lots and three open space parcels) at 3321 South
Fairview Street. The Planning Commission added a condition to the
tentative tract map that prohibited front and side yard fencing except
for those fences shown on the site plan and landscaping plan.
75B-1
REQUEST FOR
Planning Commission Action
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE:
SEPTEMBER 10, 2007
TITLE:
PUBLIC HEARING - AMENDMENT APPLICATION
NO. 2007-02, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 2007-04
(COUNTY MAP NO. 17071) AND SITE PLAN REVIEW
NO. 2007-02 TO CHANGE THE ZONING FROM
ARTERIAL COMMERCIAL TO SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT
NO. 81 AND TO SUBDIVIDE A LOT INTO 47
PARCELS AT 3321 SOUTH FAIRVIEW STREET
Prepared by Vince Fregoso
Executive Dire for
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Recommend that the City Council:
PLANNING COMMISSION SECRETARY
APPROVED
^ As Recommended
^ As Amended
^ Set Public Hearing For
DENIED
^ Applicant's Request
^ Staff Recommendation
CONTINUED TO
U~.vl
Planning Man ger
1. Approve and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation
Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2007-37.
2. Adopt an ordinance approving Amendment Application No. 2007-02 and
Specific Development No. 81.
3. Adopt a resolution approving Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04 (County
Map No. 17071) as conditioned.
4. Adopt a resolution approving
conditioned.
Site Plan Review No. 2007-02 as
DISCUSSION
Request of the Applicant
Manning Homes is requesting approval of an
the zoning of the property located at 3
Arterial Commercial (C-5) to Specific
Additionally, the applicant is requesting
map to subdivide the existing lot into
include 38 condominium lots.
EXHIBIT A
amendment application to change
321 South Fairview Street from
Development No. 81 (SD-81).
approval of a tentative tract
38 parcels of land that will
75B-2
Amendment Application No. 2007-02
Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04
Site Plan Review No. 2007-02
September 10, 2007
Page 2
Property Description
The subject property is a six-acre, rectangular shaped parcel of land
located on the southeast corner of Fairview Street and Alton Avenue. The
site is currently occupied by a 53,000 square foot warehouse building that
is being utilized by the Santa Ana Unified School District.
The property is currently zoned Arterial Commercial (C-5) and is
designated as Medium Density Residential (MR-15) at 15 units per acre on
the Santa Ana General Plan. Surrounding land uses include multi-family
residential to the north, commercial to the south, two-family residential
to the east, and industrial uses to the west (Exhibits 1 and 2).
Project Description
Manning Homes is proposing to build Alton Court, a privately gated,
single-family detached cluster development on the subject site. The
project will consist of six individual clusters that will contain a total
of 38 units. The clusters range in size from three units in Lot 3 to nine
units in Lot 1, with six units in a typical cluster. Units within the
clusters will access their garages through a shared 20-foot wide common
driveway (Exhibit 3).
As proposed, the houses have three different floor plans ranging in size
from approximately 1,810 square feet to 2,255 square feet. Each residence
will be a two-story, three-bedroom, two and a half bathroom home with a
two-car garage. All units, with the exception of the units fronting the
private street, have two uncovered parking spaces in the driveway that are
separate from the shared common driveway. Units fronting the private
street will be allowed to use the street for additional parking.
Three different architectural styles are proposed for the project:
Cottage, Spanish Colonial and Traditional. Each style will incorporate
unique elements, finishes and materials commonly found within each
architectural style. For example, the Spanish Colonial residence will
incorporate Spanish style roof tiles and a smooth stucco finish, while the
Cottage and Traditional models will incorporate flat roof tiles, sand
stucco finishes and decorative porches and posts (Exhibits 4 and 5).
75B-3
Amendment Application No. 2007-02
Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04
Site Plan Review No. 2007-02
September 10, 2007
Page 3
An extensive landscape palette will also be incorporated into the project.
A 10-foot wide landscaped planter will be provided along Fairview Street
and Alton Avenue that will contain a variety of 24-inch and 36-inch box
Afghan Pine, Brisbane Box and Queen Palm trees as well as vines planted on
the perimeter block wall to provide an enhanced project appearance.
Within the interior of the project, a combination of Evergreen Elm/New
Zealand Christmas Trees, African Sumac, Pistache Trees and Queen Palms
will be planted within the five-foot parkway and front yard setbacks.
Finally, a 6,000 square foot common open space will be provided for the
development. This space will also include a variety of 24 and 36-inch box
trees such as Afghan Pines, Evergreen Elms and Water Gums, shrubs, ground
covers and small turf areas. The space will contain a decorative shade
structure, gas barbeque, and park benches and picnic tables to serve as a
community space for the residences. The common space will also allow
access to Fairview Street and the adjacent commercial development by a
secured pedestrian gate at the west end of the open space (Exhibit 6).
Analysis of the Issues
Amendment Application
The Santa Ana Municipal Code establishes regulations for the creation of
specific development (SD) zoning districts. The purpose of the SD
districts is to protect the health, safety and general welfare of the City
by encouraging the use of innovative planning concepts, promoting and
enhancing the values of property, and encouraging orderly development for
a planned residential project. The site is currently zoned Arterial
Commercial (C5), which allows residential development that is limited to
two-family (duplex) dwellings. Although the existing C5 zoning permits
two-family dwellings, the development standards for this type of
development do not allow for detached cluster development. The proposal,
which provides detached single-family residences in a cluster setting,
maximizes open space in the project by clustering the units and allowing
them to share a common driveway.
Since the project is incompatible with the C5 residential design
standards, staff is recommending that the property be rezoned to a
specific development (SD) plan designation (Exhibit 7). The SD is a tool
that may be applied to allow for unique and innovative projects that are
75B-4
Amendment Application No. 2007-02
Site Plan Review No. 2007-02
Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04
September 10, 2007
Page 4
otherwise consistent with the General Plan, but which do not conform to
the adopted zoning standards for that area. The SD will contain the
development standards for the project, including setbacks, landscaping and
parking, while allowing development of an innovative project (Exhibit 8).
Approval of the SD will be consistent with the General Plan Land Use
Designation of Medium Density Residential (15 dwelling units per acre)
since the development will be built at a gross density of 6.3 dwelling
units per acre.
Tentative Tract Map
The applicant also proposes a tentative tract map for condominium
purposes. In order to subdivide the parcel, the proposed subdivision
needs to comply with all applicable development standards including lot
size, lot frontage and appropriate Public Works Agency standards. Based
on a review of the tentative map, the applicant has submitted a
condominium project that has been designed to be in compliance with the
applicable development standards found in Chapters 34 (Subdivision) and 41
(Zoning) of the Santa Ana Municipal Code. Additionally, the street,
proposed as private and maintained by a homeowners association, will be
designed to public street standards and will accommodate safety vehicles
as well as street parking. Approval of the tract map will also be
consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan. The General
Plan Land Use Element encourages a variety of residential land uses in the
City and development that provides a positive contribution to the
neighborhood character (Exhibit 9).
Site Plan Approval
Section 41-593.5 (c) of the Municipal Code requires that the Planning
Commission review all plans within a Specific Development Plan area to
ensure the project is in conformity with the approved Specific Plan. The
review also ensures that the buildings, structures and grounds are in
keeping with the neighborhood and will not be detrimental to the
development of the Specific Development area. After analyzing the
project, it was determined that the 38-unit single-family residential
cluster project is in compliance with all applicable development
standards, including Specific Development No. 81 (SD-81). Additionally,
the architectural concepts for the project are in keeping with the
surrounding community and will improve the desirability of investment in
the area. Finally, the project has been determined to be in compliance
with applicable parking, landscaping and fencing provisions governing the
project.
75B-5
Amendment Application No. 2007-02
Site Plan Review No. 2007-02
Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04
September 10, 2007
Page 5
On May 14th, the Planning Commission had a study session on the project.
The main issues raised by the Commission related to street trees on the
residential street, landscaping along the Fairview Street and Alton Avenue
perimeters and pedestrian access to the adjacent commercial center. The
applicant revised the plans and addressed the Commission's concerns by
providing canopy trees along the residential street, enhancing and
upgrading the tree and shrub palette at the project perimeter, and will
install a secured pedestrian gate at the west side of the open space.
The proposed project will enhance the image of the city through the
development of a single-family residential project and will provide a
positive reinforcement of the city's image around the county. The project
will also provide a direct benefit to the community by providing
additional housing opportunities in the city. Finally, the project will
achieve many goals and policies of the City's General Plan by assisting in
the development of a single-family project that promotes the community and
by encouraging the development of a variety of residential land uses. As
a result, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval
of Amendment Application No. 2007-02, Specific Development Plan No. 81 and
Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04 as conditioned (Exhibits 10, 11 and 12).
CEQA Compliance
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, a mitigated
negative declaration has been prepared for this project. The Mitigation
Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program were circulated for
a 20-day public review from August 10 through August 31 and no comments
were received. The report found that any potential environmental impacts
could be mitigated to less than significant levels. Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No.
2007-37 has been prepared for this project (Exhibit 13).
t.
Vince Frego o, ICP
Senior Plan
VF jm
of/reports/aa07-02&ttm07-04.pc
75B-6
_
~ ~~
I R2-P D
I~ I
Fall ~
Iltill R2-PRD
11~i~ cu
R2-P D
C5
/H3
.--
R1-
~RD
I__.
~4~ I
~~ NOD
~A
Al GENERAL AGRICULTURAL
-B PARKING MODIFICATION
C1 COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL
C1-MD COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL-MUSEUM DISTRICT
C2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL
C3 CENTRAL BUSINESS
C3-A CENTRAL BUSINESS-ARTISTS'VILLAGE
C4 PLANNED SHOPPING CENTER
CS ARTERIAL COMMERCIAL
CR COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL
C-SM SOUTH MAIN STREET COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
-F FLOOR AREA RATIO
GC GOVERNMENT CENTER
Mt LIGHT INDUSTRIAL
M2 HEAW INDUSTRIAL
MO MILITARY OPERATIONS
0 OPEN SPACE
-OZ OVERLAY ZONE
P PROFESSIONAL
PCD PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
PD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
PRD PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
Rt SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE
R2 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENCE
R3 MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE
R4 SUBURBAN APARTMENT
RE RESIDENTIAL ESTATE
SD SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT
SP SPECIFIC PLAN
AA 07-2/SD-81/TTM 07-4/SPR 07-2 ~
ALTON COURT
~~~'~ 3321 SOUTH FAIRVIEW STREET ~
- - = 500 FEET
1" = 1000 FEET
P L A N N I N G A N D B U I L D I N G A G E N C Y
VICINITY MAP
7IQ~T 1
INDUSTRIAL M U L T 1 F A M I L Y R E S I D E N T I A L
ALTON AVENUE
W J
W J
Q Q
-r ~ ~ I-
N Z Z
w W
Q ~ Q
~~II: ~
~
J J
ti
~ Q
~
Q ~
y
~ ~
W
~ C O M M E R C 1 A L
Z
LL
AA 07-2/S D-81 /TT M 07-4/S P R 07-2 ~
ALTON COURT ~,
3321 SOUTH FAIRVIEW STREET
P L A N N I N G A N D B U I L D I N G A G E N C Y
LAND USE MAP
75E,~HI~IT 2
~ee e+ ~~~ I ° ® O O Aeeae~ 33RYY
yp ppnGn c J ~r
S?44 ~~ 444 313 333 33 ~. ~ ~..
~.,._ arm _ R e~
Si ARtl$ ~ W~ ~S¢ 1yj CF`~J ~cY~
CCC Sf R.,Y ^pR kR kk ~ ~ ~. ea 1€€~j, ~ ~~ ~~9 a~ q9q =~ ~A~Ay~y ,~ ~d~jd~
^QL Q^ Stl ~q y ypy d AA J p
XkxxR E E. ~F S 94 k~ QA ~ OQR ~i
ax .ail ~ ! ~ ~~ [9 G~~~g~ R4~~~ y~ ia~~rB~ ~<a~d~~8~a
3A
' N~
9< $3" ~_ Hur
F s~
$ ---- -
-" i"sa „a ~,~
sz
I
w1 BR zl ~ qq Rb
~~#]}
~~~~~ b q
3 -a ~ qb qg au ~3~g
__ - ----J bgbb °~~~~ ~~~~~
" y~ 1 I §'s
=5 rvl--_ ~ ~~~~~ b b
LLLLLL q b
Fa
___ b
A~~R~ ~~J
® I I ~k~~~ ~~~~~
dq
..I I S b~$b -a -a
Yy
rn ~ ~ j ~ ^re~R3
vi
~.cl I
woo8 ~ ii
~,o j
zff
3
O=oa °11i~
ZsV~ -
~~
-
Z~ oN
~. ~ •
3
p
CC
OZ
G
~
_~~~zW¢$
°~oJ~~~
U pJ ~a~
~UFW~_~
Z Z ~
~~~~-~~
~u-,(n Q
>° g°
r-~ ~
Q
~a(~o~
Z LL LL U
F-~JR= Q
V Q
Z
~U
O
U
Q
Hiaorv $
R
}
~ ~^~-1
{~ ~_
III I I w ~ ~; ~ ~ L4 L~ ~ ~ ~
~. L~~y~L
~ ~~
-,
I -rr; - ------- -= ---- = -- -- ---= ---~ '-a --- --~-
rl
I I _ _.
Ir%~ e - - _ - - - - -_~ u
- ~
I ~
~ i ~ -i i i- I - o re ~IVa~ velilaF acc ss war easen,~nrr b ~ - - 4 ~ ~
`,
'~ I I ~ Z I'I I ~ - - ~ Y -- (FWE LANE). _ n a ~~ `' V ~I
I I O I I I `~ ~ _ T - ._ - _- _ - - - o
s
I I QIII /rY ~ ®~ ~ ®,t- ~ - I ®5N ® \ x
~ ~
I `
6- I I, x
I III _ w O I F- ° i
I I III - - -- - - -- - - - _ - -- _ -
I I - - ® F I J ® Q e'~ ® I I
<..
or I
I
------- --- ----- -
- «r-- '~
r L
--.-_i ~il ~__ -- --- -- ----- - _ ___----___
- ---I o. r _ --_ -- -- -- - - __-----_~ ~ eda~_
- -----
I ` - - - - x oxrol c es4m~ _ _ T-
' FAIRVIEW Q s STREET
------.\~ I i~------------ ----- --- --- --------- --- -----------------
~ i j j ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
'~I ~ m
~ i i i .~ n ~ ~ ~ ~ Ohs
I I I I ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ J~o
I ~ ~ I I AA 0,3~6~81~TM 07-4/
. ~~ ...~.
EXHIBIT 3
0
T~ ~~<
jZ ~}! i1
E' Si ~
_~3A~F
~~ ~,~A°
~ Nu.~~,,
=-~.b
~.-,Ft
~~~t~r
C W1!: ~i
3<A~ ~~
--- _~ ~
W - - ~ ! i
~~ ,r
~-
- - --. ~ _ Icy W
Y Y ~ ~ ` ~ ~
~ z _
< U. ~ u ~+ i
Z !~
O ~_ _,.~ ,
C_~
V 3j m - r.
~w'
~ Y
t ~ ~ ! f
_ ~' .-~
~~ ~~ a ~ ~~
t y
~ ~ 'Z` ~
m i.., __1~..
'~-_ f -1 ~
~ ~ 'n
u..Q ~ ~
N
o ~
O
O -
'~
V S
~
~ N Z
Z
Z m O Z
~
d N ~- Q
CO
M Q
i
AA 07-2/SD-81lTTM 07-4/
S~PR~07-2
Page ~of~3~ 0
0
N
i ~
-~r.._.~ -~,~ o
i
Z ( ,'~
r- it ~ ti
} ~ i
x -i < ~ o
U ~',
J _'~ 5 ~ o
I i'
f Z ry H
h O 1 ~ ~ i
_~~` ~
~_ - G
r , ~ ~ ~~,
4
_ ~
-- -~~-_~__ ~ ~ -f _~
Q
U
~ ~
cn Q
~ U
N CV
N m
Z lf~
g (V
~z
W
0
a
m
M
-~ ~Pr
~Z ~ ~Y
Q - 3 $ S ~
~~#+~8
I.~di~
~I~ES
.~g~ ~`
3^w2 y
O =-
U ~-
Z Z
O Z ~.
a
~ ~ =_
Q
i
7=~1
0
cYi
-~ ~~
~~Z
<- s ~A
.~. ~~~~
~~ N~~~
G~~if
• ~ u(
J J
C WP. ~>
L
is
I; ~ ~:
~ ~ ~~
~__._.-. .n .
4
,~
~1
i
z
if 5
~~ ~
I
m
x
N ~
- ~
~~ rv
4
m
r- .-------- Z
i' ~. O
~ ~ ~
„~ ,,, ` ~ W
~ l:
< ~
!.;1 ~ G
~, =„ '~
~~
Z
a ~ T A a
~__r x ~ •
~' _ - . W o
U
Z
Y Z
r O
i
'
~~ <
II ~
L.._~
~ U
.-
~ ~
~"~ ~ ~
~' o
Nu U ~
CV
M Z
-
Z m O Z
Z
d. ~
cv
J Q :'
~
m
`
i r
7 3~-~32
~' .i~l~~i ..
,1.} ^a~
.. , as
,I
j .z.
1 ~ ~' ^a^
~.~ ~ =` as I
rr t; ~
r'~,~;
i" .%
s: }jrt
.i:.ir
'~ ~
i ~i'.
~ 1
i i a~~ ~~~
^~~
~~ ~~,, '~
~3
t:
t • ~~
~}}~~ ^aa
_'1
=3~
?;~.=i.
^^^~',
,,:.•
~:~x y
f' 1,
r.
r ~ - -
i..
~~ nos
,. ~.
,~
i
w
r
2
V
s
ri~
1`
f,.
~" is
~' ..i
'-~~ `.~
t 're
:~~ ~~1
,~ .
~~s,
:q~
t
!~'
Z
0
LL
z
O
W
J
W
W
U
O
Q
z
J
r
.;~ ~,,
~; ~ :s
z
<-fix ''S
~~~g~'
_\ NV ~~r
ww~ a
S_a ~
~=fit
~r~fl~4
3a~€tYz
~ ~
o O
S
V ~
z
z
~-- a
~ f
Q
AA 07-2/SD-81lTTM 07-4/
SPR 07-2
7 ~ ~HII~I~
ge 12
N
IU ~FE
~Z ,~ i4
<`E~°5
IN~,~,
.~ ~~~~~
~~ u~k¢;~
_-~~.J
~=~{'s
<~ ~£
~c ~{; ~i
3<#~~ a.~
w
;C•:.~~~
_;.~
1C °t;•i
';ir{:r
.•{:I f
`` -
..
Z
~~
~~,. _ I~
f~
~ ..
.. ,•
~_~_
.; _ __
~ i ° a----
z ~~^^ p~.
~ ~~~~ < z
.. ~ r ~p ~~:...
_ ~
~¢
' ~z
iu w o
' uQ
U
Q Z
-" = U
w LL
' '
~M I W
(' I,
IZ
~~~~:
..
`/~ ' =ii=j ~_~
~ ____.
7CpP~e~of 12
z
0
c/')
Z
Q
W
J
W
J
Q
Z
J
0
U
Z
o
o m
Q
°-
U
Z
~ z
O Q
S
U ~
Z ?s
O Z
z:
~ a y
Q f
i'
~
LlS` ~
i
.- ~...
~
..
'i ;:
lof~-
(i
I ~}jr
;
'~
r {
~ ' ~~
jjj
~I~ ~ ~
~~~~
--- `~~
'i E
lr
{ ' ~-~
Ii'
'
~ Y~~~~~.
~(~
E ~~~~~
R ~'~~~i
i~
~° ,x I
i
~~ ':.~
i r'~
:. , ~ ,,
;~'. -
LY.~~ ~.
r'! -.. ~~_-~
y
i
__ __-
x
U
z
_~
~"'^
_ -
l t
~~.~~~Y ~
~,
III
~ F
~
t~ii
~,;
~
11{ i
~~
c
~~ '
z
F
, j
t ~
i~
jj
F~
I i
+
f tt. ~, -----q.
~ t
~ i i ~3 a^^
~~ ~., i,
Idf _..~ 5
. ~ ~
{ a ~~ ~ h ~.
~~:' f1
r
't '
a
f ~~~t.
1
~~~ ~~~~~
~~~~~~
1
1
I IL~,~~. :~~i~.
.9.9L
~,~....
I~,~.~
~~i~~
\\ I
r~, ._.
Z
Q
Q
w
J
W
J
Q
Z
0
O
F-
U
Z
g
M
r
~~~~ ~:y
<` ~x ~~
^~~~~
~~ g"3~z
~~ u~ ~ ~
=M ~i
~=~E1
~~ g~ ~~`
c wF
~iG ~a ~~
O Q
V ~
z=.
O z'
z
~ a.
J ~
Q
i
~~~=~15
I
{
~i:', !:
N'. is
.a'. si a-.
A '
4 't T
_k r
ai±~4
~ ;:
~t ~~
~~
•.
~~~~~.
k"
C ' ~ ~~~~%
~~~~i
/','
;. ~:" ~ IZ
,
I ~M
1 ILL
i ~~ C
t
i C^
r _ ,L1.._
~~
F
`
~
`~ «, ,
-
.' , _
r ~
'
j
,r `~
, i
~i i
i~~~
w
U
oe
£.1 / ..
y~,~ ~ ~ ..
-~;l~ ~
~~{_i.
~ }r,- H
_~~~ ~ ~
..~ 111111~~:^
~~ ~-~
~:. ~.
KF~ ^~~ fin;
l ^~~,
II
i
.0'.8Z
j;'+j~i
j'~
';: ,:~.{
}I ~ ~.a~
~!! G1:1
,V ~~.i
:a
~` F"~;
} ~'~~
I
Z
O
Q
W
J
W
W
U
0
U
Q
N
Z
J
r
N
ui:a~
-z~,
5~~?
u, S {A{yy ff~
_~ '13'
~~E',E
4`~# Sir
3<~s ~~
Li V7 -
O
S
V ~
Z Z
~ z
~ a
J f
Q
5 g
4
'~5~-~ 6
N
N
~"~.
S:'n 1~~
/;
a ~ ,r~ ~~~
~ l ~. .
{;,~ •,_
! ~'
~ i;~~ ;
f;; .+~. - ~iil
.. •:~
t' `1' -
;-
:j
~:
';.: ;~ ~Y
~.'I
~~
t . ;G ~o~
~~u
,:.:
~~t
~ ,
,;1 ~~
F~ it
~ ~ !1
n ~Y
i. r. ~i
~,ti,
1,
} •~:
E_.~
1
6
(W
~~
,~~:
~~~~
Z
Z
O
Q
U
Z
W
M
Z
z
z~
o ~'
yQj ~ N
u3
o->
zg
oLL
Q U
w Z
w Q
w~
z ay
4 v'
~ ~'
Z Q
~ Z
w ~
V Z
Z ~
= O
wQ
F-
2
U
L ;."
j}ts~
~ j~
1 .i}:?
,~,?
~ ~r;
i
1 ~~~
,/ :'~
~ >_~
~. ~.;i
~ :i,,,!
1 ,~
\. ~~
'~~:t
.~' ~~
~`
~i
I~
~LL
N
Z
Q
W
W
W ~y
U C7
zQ
~~
w°
Q
N
Z
Q
J
J~F.
~Z a'r' a1
G-.3 ):
N ~A ~P
E. ~
~~ ~ x ~ a'
__ u~~~ a
2~~~~
~~R
S
Eu?~ ~~
CHI: ~>
34 ~s s.,
v~
O O
S
V ~
Z ?~
O Zr
Z;
~ a-
J ~ -_
Q
9 ~
~~~~f~ /
M
N
rt„~~C
t .~
>• ~i
~' [` C
'i rt
~t ff~
y ,may
--~
;; c
~;
:,~4i~
~;<<: r
'' `!t;
c c ~t'.
~}~
tti..t ~.
{
l~l ~'~
-ir tt.Ii
t YN~
Ju:i4
!~;
~`,
'mss ~~"
1 . _t. , YMI
...`.
~'!..'§
~~~'.
i } ` `%~.
1"~~i±~'
='=";I
W
i u
L
~~ ~__
(~7
ILL
ii -----
I
~.~'..
~=}-"~
rC
r==i
__ '/
;~ I_
:.
'~ ^oi
1- -- -==
.~
O
t~
~_ 1H'.]13H ~
l i'.
'~NIOlIf1B
t~a,dy~{~^^{
l.w~ ~u
a1}t~
.
.
-_
r ' is
~ ` -. -
y ..~:
~
~
.Sr;
_~=
"
^ i
::r
,d
~ ='
x
U Z:..
^
dl~
'~~^^`
:/~^~
L
)
~ t~
~~
I~
i_
~_
,~,~_.
z
0
LL
Z
O
Q
W
J
W
J
Q
Z
0
J
U
z
oQ..
m
N
Z
J
a.
~Z~v~
a"- z~ ~s
.lw ~g ~E
~~ ~~~qq8~;
_~ NU?`id
:u u, k£i
S~~a~
fi~E
Q~~~~~
^s~',~
3<i~x :.
f
v3
O O
2
V ~-
Z
0 Z ,
z.
J ~ -
Q
i
~~~ ~f~ V
`}~~
.-- S. ~I
Jit -il
~_(~`
~r~`~.j~
:• 'r`'~
~~~1~
' ^ r)
~r, i
'~'(~
.<t 'r1_
._,:C ul
.t
rte', ',. . {
i r ~t *~
,~" 4
iiu~
Na
t '„
1'•rn.
,i
.~_`, #y
~ f :. ~,&
. '~ y i.~.~ 4.
'C'
'i`rk
~~
'~
I~~~
~~.____
E~
~LL
I
C~
~,,
~i .
~~
~LL
~.
~: 1
,- .'A
~~~r
K
x
V
K
r
3
V
Z
Q
1~ :y~
~. CS~ ~u
'Isit
Ti~ .l:
+ ...
'--
r L -~ ~~1
r¢
``,;
Y
C~ ~Y~~'
7
.~~~~~F
u!~u
',,,'"~~~"1
Z
O
Q
W
J
W
J
Q
pZ
W 0
V ~
Z ~
Q U
2 =
Z ~
w _
Z
d
m
N
Z
Q
J
N
T ~ ~: ~_
~z~iC.~.~
C-s$°S
~~~'~'
~~ ~"S. y
~~ NV ~~:
Ww~
S .-ay
~z~f
~U k y'$
C ~Y ¢Y
?ia$a_,~
~~/
{j V7
w ~
O O
U~
Z Z _
O Z .
~. Q
J ~ -
Q
7~'-~I ~
.~':
! ~ e-
r~' ~t i
:~ ~~
^~^
,
`li~~o-
~~~
: -:
,
~
~~~~. ~
r - w
..^; i4
~ :
:
,
,~"
i
..
r
=~~~l ti INN ,,-
:i ~ ~~. ~ t
i, ~f~ ~ Y_;.~;
;ri e~.;
f w::.
:x t {ir.
r r~'
{{
i
,S,i
~~`,
:,:
^
k
i ~
~.~ i
~~t
~, , ;~
•~ ~
# ' z
~~ it
'?' ! ~
~ .
1 i~°~ LL
Mfr ,. :'• '-7 ?
! ^\t ~p~
~ { ~;I 1 }
~ ' ` '` ~
,., ~
t
;{•y ~ ~
~~ ~~ i i
ltaic1t~;~ "~'~ ~i~i~
I
'v
~;
~~
4~i •~ I~1~ .._.__
y~•ii
1,~~~•,~
~
I{
_ - ~- C LL
' ..
~ ,fir ~~
~
t`
~`# .^ ^^
...~I .^^:~
"~
~~
z
0
Q
w
J
W
W
U
O
Q
M
Z
Q
J
d
~~
M
~zu;t;~
a-,~~~
ga ~a
~~ ~^aF~~
_~ vU ~~
i~~~~
~-RE i
~~~~~
3~y=
~ ~
O ~
U ~
z ? -
O z'
z:
~ a
J ~
Q
Pa9~~~~~0
t'•
1 .
i•tt
;`"'~
I w
.a
~~ .
+t.. _:
.
'
~.
i t'
~{~
, ~
t~+'~
~ ^r {
.
~ ~~
f
~
{
' O
t
O 111) _
~
~
, t
~Z±± F
1 ~ t~~Nj~ l
~ •~ ~ l u~
.
~: l
j•1-'.: ....~
i
~"
~ i
I'
~~ lu
fi~ t:
~;
t `~
~
~
'u ii^ ^
,:~~ __.
::,
iR~
~~
;~,
^~ ~~
~' i `` ~; ~'-`
i
1H'~13H'~NI4lIf18
.0-.Bi
1' .. i
4` y
~.
,?-'~
t 't~>
i;µj ~ LL
1 ~ ~~~~' ~ +
~~Y' ^ i J
C4~ i
~.;
~~ ~u ~~~
,, j ~-_
~i
~-.
e'
oaf 11
z
Q
w
D w
U U
zQ
Z U
Q
M
Z
Q
J
N
M
I
TJ~N. e'r
J Z YI
E-~35&
~~~ ~~
~~ ~^x~~
~~~ N~3<~a
m
2 .. d
y~ S
~ x red
<~ ~~ ~,
~ckf G
3a ps ~.'
w -
O ~ v
x
V ~
Z ?~
O Z `
Z
F- a ;
J ~ '-_
Q
~ ~,:;, f
,~
r
'
~~ MN
*
~
r:
~
i
'
~~
~.
t: y i
~
~ ~~~~
p t
I
1
'
~ t ~ ~
{ iiii
{ ~ ~ fy .3
~~r
~-•-
x ~' '
.
!
t '
i~ I=
~
. .
_
C
~
Y ~ MN ~ w
~ 4
'1'1 Ott IW
`';~`;~;
," iii. ~~
:« (
rfi'~:F ~~
.^ ~~
~YY
~ ~
~
/~~~
~~U
~~
r"
i
=_-_.
s ~
~ __
,~
Y
~~ 2
~P,.
-' ~~~
.~
~~
~r
}~
}{{
ie~
f~$.!~i.-i. 3
1
~~
....
~~~\ ~4
.
~~~`.
,~-
....
z
~, ~~
!r••t: ~
~~~~^ 't
~
l;
d-
~'i
:
•~..
`.
t +.
}..
1 t"#q
~~ t,>#
~,f
a
t:1~.
+z ,;;
~~. ~~'
~~
'~~~~~
1~
4
o _ ..
!~*~^^~ ~r
h~~ !t~^
iiii'
;~~• •' IZ
.. ~"`
I
Pa / 1~~2 A A
Z
(/ 7
Z
Q
W
J
W
J
Q
Z
O
F-
0
I-
U
M
Z
g
~.
M
M
Z ~ ~x r.:
~Z~ 9~.
< - s :~:
=y# dJ
~~ ~~~tit
t~ H~tt~ .
=~t;ci
~~Gfs.
~~C ~Y
8 _
3<~S ~~
LL ~ -
O Q .
U~
Z }
Z Z i
O Z
~ a
J ~
Q
i
i~' ~~:
X31
:~
t d
a t:?"H
~ ~f ~
{,~~ ;:~~
jy7t, a~~- ~, ~~~..
fj ,. ~;
;;
p
~~ ~1
... ,
~.~~~~'
;t' t
!}},,t{,i
:)r
~~ '~^.~
.S
^'Y
. : ; .y y
~~. ~.[ li
is i,~ ~
~'~::1
<,~ -i
~,~~,~
~~_.:._:
w
z
Z
a
U
Z
U
r~i
Z
~- w
Z w
~ ~
0 N
~n w
CC ~
K
~ LL
Z Z
O~
.c
W~
r-
QO
~ Z
Z r
~ Z
w~
VZ
zp
=o
wz
a
~ ~:I !
~=~ j.
1.;
(.
~~~.. ~
z
z
O
Q
W
J
W
J
Q
Wz
z0
~.
2 ~
w ~
H
U
M
Z
Q
J
d
d'
c~
z~ ~e
~z~~~~
T-~~
N, ~.,
~~ ~'xkr
__~~~
i'~~Lx
~y~~#
<~ a# ~~
C &$ rya
3<~~ _.
CL
~ ~
O O
S
V ~z
z
z
z
~ a
J ~
Q
'I~
Page 11 of 12
75B-23
C%
Y
K
d
O
O
0
U
Z
Z
U
H
O
z
z
z
O
J
Q
W
z
U
F
` ~~
F
Cr
~$
~: ,
#a
;~.:
,•,.
?,.~,
'a~;~
`tr<.
y~'
'.`.f}
~ *:
~.
fi~
.;
f
`r~:
~.;
~~.
Ky
~~,,
~,~ . ,
.,~-
~~ ~~
~i -
~~f~a
fA ;'M"",
ia1
y Y
Y~ _ ~ ~'~i
? k.~~.
~~~
~'' a
Q ~ ,S i '~ ~i
#D ~d
~~ ~~~~r
~~ r~~d d
2 ~ d ~~~cc
~xe~$
<~ ~~ ~~
~cx~F $
'><~a;:R
W
f-
~ ~ h _.
3 ~ ~
'~ ~ ° a
U ~
~ z:
Z --
W 'j
U O Z
~n ~-- Q
w J ~
Q
75~e11°42
mcroseero wcu'r~ x~ree iamMaH ai ~~.s rows x~ne~ms isice ,a'.°., ~» aoso
NY1d 3dY~SONY1 S3WOH 9NINNVW ;~~`, ~ ~ ~ o~acoa' ~ ~ ~
AlIYNIWll3ad v[Haoa~~vo'vNVV~,HVS ~~ '"'xie;vwavn wW,,,,„ ~ '^
ixno~ uoszv »~ xN~~ _--- ~~..~ ~, b
$o
rya
ryWW
F
A
W
~,
a x
~~
w4w~
E~
r
~ ~
~~
3
r ~ I
~$~
~ ~
~25w
~~~ ,
oaa
~~~
a~ ~
~~
`~I ~3?
zl ~~~
~~ ~~
~~~~~~
c~ x333se$
8 I I
II
i~.
~i
' € ~ z 4'i~€'e _
-.,__. ._3.______ ]czar' :_;
_ ~ n ~ __
-_ iai _ -.
C £.:
J
~T Yf Sf S
SS ~ _
n ~+ n 4
~~ ~ 8
'~ ~ a~
~ ~ ~~
X ~~~ ~~~~ ~ §~~
~~~ ~~ I?~
~~
_ ~ R £ .. ,.
x
~ ~ ~ ~4
~ ~~ ~ ~~
~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~
~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~a; 4 ~~
~ I ~I
7 ~®"'yG~7
~~ AA 07-21SD-81/TTM 07-4/
SPR 07-2
EXHIBIT 6
OOZ6YISZ-6t6 099Z6'VJ HJtl391YOdM3N OSI'315133N1S NJN13'MSISIOZ
S3111N3W~ '? S3WOH 9NINN`dW ~~~~v~'~°~~~:'I°;°:,.wS;~ „' """° N
dINbQ~I7d~ ~dNd d,~,Hb$ ~JNI'S3IVIJOSStl u. ONC WI R ~ ' m
1N3W3JaVlN3 ~!!~d *~'~] n3xJVwova ~OL9"'"
,I.L2If100 NOJ+ 1 V 11 ~Ntl» ~~'°" ~ J °
Y2
~~
gg~
g~
wQ
Q
jb
w~
W F
N
ZO
3
A°
W
I~
13
W
LL
a
F F
w
w =
w ,q
Q
Y ~ N
v =
w
w
a LL
Z
QQ~ Qr
w
b F
WW J
Qw ,a. ~
~ w ~
ry
z
w
U Wp ~ d~ Q U~ 77
V ~'~
QZ
Oa Qµ~
y
7 WN W
r '~ pW~N
r J ?N
Q~UF
w~ ~ j ~
w
OJ
Q ~
J =
~Q U R
Q J
bpd J
Q Q
'~~wd
~
C
I
3 W
Q WW J
Q
~ CryW w Qw 3 J
p~~QQW
~Q i0 ~7 U i3 FQ m l7Q .D F3 ~-Q
Z
6
g
n W
~ ~
w ~
ww
0'N
~_ U
~
J
~
~L
w
~~
~~
~
~
N w
Q
W
~W
a~
o
m
t
pp
7J
~ Q
~
~
3
~ N N
z W
~'
~
Q~0 CQ LL-U. u~~
~ _N _N
~d
;/~`~`
o~
~ ~~
W~ ~
Z
zy~_
K
O~~
7~~ 6
iarroG. mM1 U992M1'V.l IUV381n(LM3N iri 3LS L?3lll5 x~nln'MSI410L ~~ w~ri ' ~p}p
S3WOH~JNINNVW w __ ` -"'..rn M
~,alN3 lo3road tlINN031'Itl^J'tlNV tlLNtlS l~~~-//~- ~N~ saivuoss I o+ac wr ~ ~ ~
.I.~nO/ ~~.j.~ ~ $.'~~r'"~ nax~vwasr ~ ,~~ nra a ~~. b nro
'^x>` MNVL I t h
~
N
Q
r
F
aPl _
W U
O
;.~,~ .._ ~ J
~ ~ }
H m
~(
O
m
4
F
a
Z
O
a
> ~
w ,
J =
W
Y
z
w
z
z
J
O
U
w
z
O
F
N b
H ,SL
3
Q
2
H
Z
W
7~L73 L
INDUSTRIAL M U L T I F A M I L Y R E S I D E N T I A L
ALTON AVENUE
' ~
W
W ~
~ F ~ ~
fA Z Z
CHANGE w
o o
_
~ w
ZONINf~ w w
_
~ FRQM
~ ~
Cir TD SD-81 Q ~
~ w
0 0
m g 3
~ ~
W
~ C O M M E R C I A L
Z ~
Lal.
AA 07-2/S D-81 /TT M 07-4/S P R 07-2 ~
ALTON COURT ~,
- 3321 SOUTH FAIRVIEW STREET
P L A N N I N G A N D B U I L D I N G A G E N C Y
ZONING MAP
EXHIBIT 7
75B-28
SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. 81
Alton Court
SECTION 1 - Applicability of Ordinance
The Specific Development zoning district No. 81 for Alton Court is
authorized by Chapter 41, Division 26 Section 41-593 et seq. of the
Santa Ana Municipal Code. SD No. 81 contains the specific standards
and regulations contained in the R1 and/or R2 residential districts,
as herein amended, for the purpose of establishing land use
regulations and standards. All other applicable chapters, articles,
and sections of the Santa Ana Municipal Code are in effect unless
superseded by regulations contained in this ordinance.
SECTION 2 - Purpose
The Specific Development Plan No. 81 for Alton Court consists of
standards and regulations established for the purpose of protecting
the health, safety, and general welfare of the people of the City of
Santa Ana by promoting and enhancing the value of property and
encouraging the orderly development of the property.
SECTION 3 - Uses Permitted in Specific Development No. 81
The following uses are permitted in the SD-81 district:
(a) One-family dwellings.
(b) One temporary real estate office devoted to the sale of real
estate in the tract in which it is located.
(c) Accessory structures.
(d) Child care facilities providing care to not more than 12
children, provided that if the number of children exceeds six
(6), a land use certificate must be first obtained pursuant to
Division 4 of Article V of this chapter.
SECTION 4 - Uses Subject to a Conditional Use Permit in Specific
Development No. 81
(a) Garages for four (4) or more vehicles.
(b) Accessory structures more than 15 feet in height or more than one
story.
AA 07-2/SD-81/TTM 07-4/
75B~T8
Page 1 of 4
SECTION 5 - Minimum Lot Area in Specific Development No. 81
Lots shall have an area of at least 17,999 square feet.
SECTION 6 - Minimum Street Frontage in Specific Development No. 81
Lots shall have street frontage of at least 100 feet.
SECTION 7 - Building Height in Specific Development No. 81
No primary structure shall exceed 27 feet nor two stories in height,
as measured from the lowest adjacent grade of the structure to the top
of the structure.
SECTION 8 - Lot Coverage in Specific Development No. 81
No more than 40 percent of the lot shall be covered by structures.
SECTION 9 - Front Yards in Specific Development No. 81
There shall be a front yard of not less than 13 feet from the street.
Porches may encroach into the front yard a maximum of six feet.
SECTION 10 - Side Yards in Specific Development No. 81
Each side yard shall be not less than five feet for each main
building.
SECTION 11 - Rear Yards in Specific Development No. 81
There shall be a rear yard of not less than 15 feet for each dwelling
unit. Such rear yard may be reduced to not less than five feet for
open patio covers.
SECTION 12 - Development Standards in Specific Development No. 81
Lots in the SD No. 81 district shall comply with the following
standards:
(a) Front and street oriented side yards shall be landscaped with the
exception of approved driveways and sidewalks.
(b) Accessory structures shall not exceed 35 percent of the required
rear yard area and shall not exceed 66 percent of the main
structure square footage.
75~=~~``
SECTION 13 - Building Separation in Specific Development No. 81
(a) The building separation between primary structures shall be at
least 10 feet.
(b) The building separation between primary and accessory structures
shall be at least five feet.
SECTION 14 - Open Space Standard for Specific Development No. 81
A private open space shall be provided for the project. The lot shall
be a minimum of 6,100 square feet in size and contain the following
amenities:
(a) Decorative shade structure
(b) Two gas barbeques
(c) A minimum of six benches
(d) Two picnic tables
(e) Pedestrian access gate on the west perimeter wall
SECTION 15 - Landscape Standards for Specific Development No. 81
In the SD No. 81 district, all yards shall be landscaped. Each
residential unit shall meet the following minimum requirements:
(a) Front Yard:
(1) Two 24-inch box canopy trees.
(2) All trees shall be double-staked.
(3) Six five-gallon size shrubs and 10 one-gallon size herbaceous
perennials/shrubs as a foundation planting.
(4) Turf or acceptable dry climate ground cover:
i. Turf shall be drought tolerant variety and planted as
sod or hydroseed.
ii. Ground cover shall be well-rooted cuttings from flats
and planted at appropriate spacing for that particular
plant material.
Page 3 of 4
75B-31
(b) Side Yard:
(1) Corner lots shall require one 15-gallon size tree for every
30 linear feet of property abutting a street plus six five-
gallon size shrubs as a foundation planting. Root barriers
shall be required on all trees planted along the street
oriented yards.
(c) Project Perimeter Walls:
(1) Flowering vines shall be provided and secured to a
decorative masonry wall.
(2) The vines shall be five-gallon size and be planted at a
maximum 20-foot interval. They shall be secured to the
walls with eye hooks and wire.
(d) Irrigation Systems:
(1) A pop-up sprinkler type irrigation system shall be provided
for all yards for each residential unit.
(2) The use of "xeriphytic" or dry climate type plant materials
is encouraged. Irrigation systems may require special
fittings to properly water dry climate plantings.
(e) Screening:
(1) All meters shall be appropriately screened from public view
with trellis work and vines or a hedge type shrub or they
shall be incorporated into the residential structure.
(2) Any enclosed structure for utilities must not encroach into
any required setback.
(f) Maintenance:
(1) All plant material shall be maintained per Section 41-609 of
the Santa Ana Municipal Code.
75~g~`2~ a
~~
S
l~
T~ ~Qa e
~ Q QQ
'~ e~9y ~~~
~~ ¢~~~ rQOH `~ J~ 6
woo8 j iv ~je~~~ ~ U QO~?V ~
~ ~~~Op jlaf4 ~LJ ~-O
1 0~ op ~,~,~ O~QI-'~~
~~°~ - v~ZU~~
z~s~ ~pg~~~ F.-W~O~~
~ ;a
~ a~Z~ _ -a~ ~. W~~z~
~ ~~~~~~~ >r o~
~~W~~
Z~?~~
~~~" z
~Q Q
a
~~~~
~~~0.~ ~~LI~ i ~~~ i io~'= ~
,,
AA V / -lJ ~71./~O 1 / 1 I IYI V / ~Y/
7 .{~ 0$~
~~ ~~
~~~~
~ I
~a I I ~ 4~p ~~~
~ ~ ~~
~~ ~~ ~~
~~~~~~~~s~~E~~~~~~~ ~
~ ~f~f11fB'1~y
Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04
September 10, 2007
Page 1 of 2
Findings of Fact
A. The proposed project, as conditioned, and its design and improvements
are consistent with the Medium Density Residential designation on the
General Plan and are otherwise consistent with all other elements of
the General Plan.
Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04 (County Map No. 17071) is
consistent with the land use designation and density prescribed
in the General Plan and will have no adverse affect on the
surrounding land uses in the area.
B. The proposed project, as conditioned, conforms to all applicable
requirements of the zoning and subdivision codes as well as other
applicable City ordinances.
Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04 (County Map No. 17071) is in
keeping with the provisions of the site plan review (DP No. 06-
77) and Chapters 34 and 41 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, all
of which pertain to the subdivision of land and development
standards for the site.
C. The project site is physically suitable for the type and density of
the proposed project.
Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04 (County Map No. 17071) is
proposed for a six-acre parcel of land within an area that is
proposed to be rezoned to Specific Development No. 81 (SD-81).
The site has been determined to be capable of supporting the
type and density of the proposed project.
D. The design and improvements of the proposed project will not cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably
injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
No fish or wildlife will be affected by the approval of this map
or by the design and improvements of the project. Environmental
Review No. 2007-37 has been prepared for this project and has
identified mitigation measures aimed at reducing any
environmental impact associated with this project.
7~~~4~0
Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04
September 10, 2007
Page 2 of 2
E. The design or improvements of the proposed project will not cause
serious public health problems.
The design and improvements associated with this project have
been prepared to comply with minimum City standards. The street
system, although to be private and maintained by a homeowners
association, has been designed to public street standards and
will accommodate emergency vehicles. All other improvements
have been designed to mitigate any serious problem resulting
from this project.
F. The design or improvements of the proposed project will not conflict
with the easements acquired by the public at large for access through
or use of property within the proposed project.
Approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04 (County Map No.
17071) will not create conflicts with any easements necessary
for public access through the subject property, as no such
easements currently exist. Public access will be allowed to the
site through the entrance and with homeowner authorization.
75B-35
SEPTEMBER 10, 2007
PAGE 1 OF 2
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04 (County Map No. 17071) 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 tentative tract
map.
The applicant must remain in compliance with all conditions listed below
throughout the life of the tentative tract map. Failure to comply with
each and every condition may result in the revocation of the tentative
tract map.
A. Planning Division
1. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) for this
project must be reviewed and approved prior to approval of the
final tract map.
2. The CC&R's must include language that requires all required
landscaping must be installed within a specified time period.
3. A fencing plan showing the location of all project fencing and
the materials to be used must be submitted to the Planning
Division prior to submittal into building plan check.
4. The perimeter fencing for the project cannot exceed eight feet
in height, as measured from the height of the street sidewalk.
5. All real estate signage must be removed from the site within one
year from the date of installation. An extension of time may be
granted as determined by the Planning Manager.
6. The final map must be approved and recorded prior to issuance of
building permits.
7. The final map and all improvements required to be made or
installed by the subdivider must be in accordance with the
design standards and specifications of the Santa Ana Municipal
Code and the requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act.
~~'=~~„
SEPTEMBER 10, 2007
PAGE 2 OF 2
8. Development within the area of the map is subject to development
and permit fees in effect at the time of permit issuance.
9. Development within the area of the map is subject to design and
development standards in effect at the time of permit issuance.
10. The project must be in compliance with the provisions of Site
Plan Review (DP No. 06-77).
11. Two copies of the recorded final map and CC&R's shall be
submitted each to the Planning Division, Fire Department,
Building Division, and Public Works Agency within 10 days of
recordation.
75B-37
SEPTEMBER 10, 2007
PAGE 1 OF 1
Conditions for Approval
Site Plan Review No. 2007-02 is approved subject to compliance, to the
reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Manager, with all applicable
sections of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, the California Administrative
Code, the Uniform Fire Code, the Uniform Building Code and all other
applicable regulations.
The applicant must comply in full with each and every condition listed
below prior to exercising the rights conferred by this site plan approval.
The applicant must remain in compliance with all conditions listed below
throughout the life of the site plan approval. Failure to comply with
each and every condition may result in a building permit not being issued.
A. Planning Division
1. All proposed site improvements must conform with the Site Plan
Review approval of DP No. 06-77.
2. Any amendment to this site plan must be submitted to the
Planning Division and Police Department for review. At that
time, staff will determine if administrative relief is
available or the Planning Commission must amend the site plan
approval.
7~~~ 38 2
Alton Court
Initial Study and Proposed
Mitigated Negative Declaration
Prepared fora
City of Santa Ana, Planning and Building Agency
20 Civic Center Plaza, Ross Annex M-20
Santa Ana, CA 92702
Contact: Vince Fregoso, Senior Planner
714/667-2700
Prepared by:
Jones & Stokes
17310 Red Hill Avenue, Suite 320
Irvine, CA 92614-5600
Contact: Chad Beckstrom
949/260-1080
August 2007
EXHIBIT 13
75B-39
Jones & Stokes. 2007. Alton Court Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated
Negative Declaration. July. (J&S 00635.07.) Irvine, CA.
75B-40
Contents
Page
Chapter 1 Introduction and Overview ..................................................................1-1
Overview ............................................................................ .....................1-1
Authority ............................................................................. .....................1-1
Scope of the IS/MND ......................................................... .....................1-2
Impact Terminology ........................................................... .....................1-3
IS/MND Organization ......................................................... .....................1-3
Chapter 2 Project Description .......................................................... .....................2-1
Project Overview ................................................................ .....................2-1
Project Background ........................................................... .....................2-1
Project Location ................................................................. .....................2-2
Existing Conditions and Surrounding Land Uses .............. .....................2-3
Proposed Project ............................................................... .....................2-3
Internal Remodeling ..................................................... .....................2-3
Exterior Architecture and Signage ............................... .....................2-4
Driveway Access and Parking ..................................... .....................2-4
Landscaping ................................................................ .....................2-4
Project's Relationship to General Plan and Zoning ........... .....................2-4
General Plan ................................................................ .....................2-4
Zoning .......................................................................... ..................... 2-5
Discretionary Approvals Required ............................... .....................2-5
Chapter 3 Environmental Checklist ................................................. .....................3-1
I. Aesthetics ................................................................. ...................3-15
II. Agricultural Resources .............................................. ...................3-15
III. Air Quality ................................................................. ...................3-16
IV. Biological Resources ................................................ ...................3-18
V. Cultural Resources ................................................... ...................3-19
VI. Geology and Soils ..................................................... ...................3-19
VII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ............................ ...................3-20
VIII. Hydrology and Water Quality .................................... ...................3-22
X. Mineral Resources .................................................... ...................3-24
XI. Noise ......................................................................... ...................3-24
XVII. Mandatory Findings of Significance ..................:........ ..................3-31
Chapter 4 Mitigation Monitoring Plan and Report ...............................................4-1
Introduction ......................................................................... ....................4-1
Project Overview ................................................................. ....................4-1
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ~
J&S 00635.07
75B-41
Monitoring and Reporting Procedures ....................................................4-2
Mitigation Monitoring Plan Implementation .............................................4-2
Verification of Compliance ......................................................................4-3
Chapter 5 References ............................................................................................5-1
Chapter 6 List of Preparers ...................................................................................6-1
Appendix A. Air Quality Calculations.
Appendix B. Report of Geotechnical Exploration,
Appendix C. Phase I and Phase II Environmental Site Assessment
Report,
Appendix D. Water Quality Management Plan, and,
Appendix E. Focused Noise Study.
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ii
J&S 00635.07
75B-42
Tables
Table Page
3-1 Table 3-1. Forecast of Regional Construction Emissions ........ ............3-18
3-2 City of Santa Ana Exterior Noise Ordinance Criteria ................ ............3-31
3-3 Existing Roadway Traffic Noise Levels ..................................... ............3-33
3-4 Remaining Capacity of Existing Landfills Serving the
Project Area .............................................................................. ............ 3-40
4-1 Summary of Mitigation Monitoring Plan .................................... ..............4-3
Alton Court
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
August 2007
J&S 00635.07
75B-43
Figures
Figure
1 Regional Location ........................
2 Project Vicinty ..............................
3 Existing Conditions ......................
4 Proposed Site Plan ......................
5 Improvements ............................. .
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration jV
J&S 00635.07
75B-44
~I
~'~
n
i~
i~
i~
Acronyms and Abbreviations
City City of Santa Ana
IS initial study
MND mitigated negative declaration
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
GC General Commercial
NHSP North Harbor Specific Plan
SR-57 Orange Freeway
SR-55 Newport Freeway
SR-22 Garden Grove Freeway
FMMP Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Project
Basin South Coast Air Basin
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
CO carbon monoxide
03 ozone
PM 10 particulate matter 10 microns in diameter or less
PM2.5 particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter or less
AQMP Air Quality Management Plan
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
RCPG Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide
NESHAPS National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Cal/OSHA California Occupational Safety and Health Administration
CCR California Code of Regulations
PCBs polychlorinated biphenyls
BMPs best management practices
WQMP Water Quality Management Plan
SMARA Surface Mining And Reclamation Act of 1975
d13A A-weighted sound level
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
STC Sound Transmission Class
CMP Congestion Management Plan
TIA traffic impact analysis
OCTA Orange County Transit Authority
RWQCB Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board
MMP mitigation monitoring plan
NESHAPS National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Cal/OSHA California Occupational Safety and Health Administration
CCR California Code of Regulations
PCBs polychlorinated biphenyls
Alton Court
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
August 2007
J8S 00635.07
~ 75B-45
75B-46
n
II
LU
Chapter 1
Introduction and Overview
Overview
The City of Santa Ana (City) has prepared this initial study (IS) and proposed
mitigated negative declaration (MND) to evaluate the potential environmental
consequences associated with the Alton Court Project. The proposed project
consists of demolishing and removing an existing warehouse, preparing the site,
and constructing 38 single family detached residential units. The proposed
project includes a zoning ordinance amendment from Arterial Commercial (CS)
to Specific Development No. 81 for this site. The project site is located at 3321
Fairview Street on the southeast corner of the intersection of Alton Avenue and
Fairview Street in Santa Ana.
As part of the City's permitting process, the proposed project is required to
undergo an environmental review in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The initial study is a preliminary analysis
prepared by a lead agency to determine whether an environmental impact report
or a negative declaration is required. If the initial study concludes that the
project may have a significant effect on the environment, an environmental
impact report must be prepared. Otherwise, a negative declaration or mitigated
negative declaration is prepared. The information in this initial study and related
special studies supports the conclusion that a mitigated negative declaration is the
appropriate CEQA compliance document.
Authority
The preparation of an IS/MND is governed by two principal sets of documents:
CEQA (Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq.) and the State CEQA
Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Section 15000, et seq.). Specifically,
Section 15063 of the State CEQA Guidelines and Sections 15070-15075 of
Article 6 guide the process for the preparation of a negative declaration or a
mitigated negative declaration. Where appropriate and supportive to an
understanding of the issues, reference will be made either to the statute, the State
CEQA Guidelines, or appropriate case law.
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 1-1
J&500635.07
75B-47
City of Santa Ana
Chapter 1. Introduction and Overview
This IS/MND, as required by CEQA, contains 1) a project description; 2) a
description of the environmental setting, potential environmental impacts,
mitigation measures for any significant effects, and consistency with plans and
policies; and 3) names of preparers.
The mitigation measures included in this IS/MND are designed to reduce or
eliminate the potentially significant environmental impacts described herein.
Where a mitigation measure described in this document has been previously
incorporated into the project, either as a specific feature of design or as a
mitigation measure, this is noted in the discussion. Mitigation measures are
structured in accordance with the criteria in Section 15370 of the State CEQA
Guidelines.
Scope of the IS/MND
This IS/MND evaluates the proposed project's effects on the following resource
topics:
^ aesthetics,
^ agricultural resources,
^ air quality,
^ biological resources,
^ cultural resources,
^ geology and soils,
^ hazards and hazardous materials,
^ hydrology and water quality,
^ land use and planning,
^ mineral resources,
^ noise,
^ population and housing,
^ public services,
^ recreation,
^ transportation/traffic,
^ utilities and service systems, and
^ mandatory findings of significance.
Alton Court August zuu i
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 1_2
J8S 00635-07
75B-48
City of Santa Ana Chapter 1. Introduction and Overview
Impact Terminology
The following terminology is used to describe the level of significance of
impacts:
^ A finding of no impact is appropriate if the analysis concludes that the
project would not affect the particular topic area in any way.
^ An impact is considered less than significant if the analysis concludes that it
would cause no substantial adverse change to the environment and requires
no mitigation.
^ An impact is considered less than significant with mitigation incorporated if
the analysis concludes that it would cause no substantial adverse change to
the environment with the inclusion of environmental commitments or other
enforceable measures that have been agreed to by the applicant.
^ An impact is considered potentially significant if the analysis concludes that
it could have a substantial adverse effect on the environment. For the
proposed project, no impacts were determined to be potentially significant.
IS/MND Organization
The content and format of this report are designed to meet the requirements of
CEQA. The IS/MND consists of the proposed findings that the project, as
mitigated, would have no significant impacts. The bulk of this IS/MND consists
of the initial study and supporting studies. The report contains the following
sections.
^ Chapter 1, "Introduction and Overview," identifies the purpose and scope of
the IS/MND and the terminology used in the report.
^ Chapter 2, "Project Description," identities the location, background., and
planning objectives of the project and describes the proposed project in
detail.
^ Chapter 3, "Environmental Checklist and Analysis," presents the checklist
responses for each resource topic. This section includes a brief setting
section for each resource topic and identifies the impacts of implementing the
proposed project.
^ Chapter 4, "Mitigation Monitoring Plan and Report," presents a list of the
mitigation measures, identifies the time frame for implementation, identifies
the responsible monitoring agency, and includes a reporting form for
verification of compliance.
^ Chapter 5, "References," identifies all printed references and individuals
cited in this IS/MND.
^ Chapter 6, "List of Preparers," identifies the individuals who prepared this
report and their areas of technical specialty.
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 1-3
J&S 00635-07
~ 75B-49
City of Santa Ana
Chapter 1. Introduction and Overview
Appendices present data supporting the analysis or contents of this IS/MND.
The appendices are:
^ Appendix A. Air Quality Calculations,
^ Appendix B. Report of Geotechnical Exploration,
^ Appendix C. Phase I and Phase II Environmental Site Assessment Report,
^ Appendix D. Water Quality Management Plan; and,
^ Appendix E. Focused Noise Study.
Alton Court August ~uu i
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ~~
J&S 00635-07
75B-50
1
Chapter 2
Project Description
Project Overview
The project proponent, Manning Homes, proposes to demolish and remove the
existing warehouse located at 3321 South Fairview Street in Santa Ana and
prepare the site for the construction of 38 single-family detached residential
units. In addition, the proposed project includes widening and restripping of
Alton Avenue to its ultimate planned design and improving South Fairview
Street. The proposed project includes a zoning ordinance amendment from
Arterial Commercial (CS) to planned residential district (SD) with a Specific
Development No. 81 designation for this site and a tract map to allow the sale of
the units as condominiums.
Project Location
The proposed project is located in the south-southwestern part of the City of
Santa Ana, which is located in central Orange County. Figure 2-1 shows the
regional location of the project area. The project site encompasses 6.03 acres
located at 3321 South Fairview Street on the southeast corner of the intersection
of Alton Avenue and South Fairview Street. Figure 2-2 shows the local vicinity
of the proposed project site.
Existing Conditions and Surrounding Land Uses
The existing site is currently developed with an approximately 53,000 square-
foot concrete tilt-up warehouse used by the Santa Ana Unified School District
(SAUSD) as a maintenance facility for school district supplies and equipment.
The warehouse serves as the SAUSD's Distribution and Support center, which
provides pupil support services, computer labs, student testing, teacher training,
and printing/publication services. SAUSD also uses the parcel for landscape
maintenance storage in an unpaved area next to the warehouse. Approximately
two-thirds of the existing site is paved, and one-third is the unpaved landscape
maintenance and storage yard. In addition, a former railroad spur exists in the
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 2_~
J&S 00635.07
75B-51
City of Santa Ana
Chapter 2. Project Description
northeast corner of the site. Approximately 130 paved parking spaces are on site,
as well as approximately 30 unpaved parking spaces, for a total of approximately
160 onsite parking spaces. Several trees and planters exist at the main building
entrance in the southwest corner of the property and at the northwest corner of
the building. Access to the site is provided via four driveways along South
Fairview Street and one driveway along Alton Avenue.
As shown on Figure 2-3, surrounding land uses include commercial
developments to the south and single-family attached residential units to the east.
Both of these uses are separated from the project site by a masonry block wall.
Light industrial businesses are located across South Fairview Street from the site
to the west; a mobile home park is located across Alton Avenue and beyond the
Southern Pacific Rail Road track to the north of the site.
Proposed Project
Manning Homes proposes to develop 38 single-family detached residential units
and related improvements on the project site. The project includes the
construction of private drives, common landscaped areas, a common recreational
area, and other residential development improvements.
The proposed physical improvements related to the project include:
^ Development of 38 single-family detached residential units (4.3 acres).
^ Realignment and/or closure of existing driveways and new onsite parking.
^ Landscaping improvements and open space (0.2 acres).
^ Common recreational area (0.14 acres).
^ Improvements to Alton Avenue and South Fairview Street (1.39 acres).
Figure 2-4 shows the overall conceptual site plan. These activities are described
in detail below.
Single-Family Detached Residential Units
The proposed residential units will consist of three single-family detached plan
types located within six lots. Proposed units will range from 1,810 square feet to
2,255 square feet. All residential units will be two stories, and private garages
will be provided for each unit. There are three proposed architectural designs for
the residential units, which include a Cottage design, a Spanish Colonial design,
and a Traditional design. None of the two story residential units will have a
second story balcony.
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 2_2
J&S D0635.07
75B-52
1
J
City of Santa Ana Chapter 2. Project Description
Driveway Access and Parking
The proposed project would remove the four driveways along South Fairview
Street and replace them with appropriate gutters, curbs, sidewalks, and
streetscaping. A single driveway would provide access to the site via Alton
Avenue through a gated entrance. The proposed project would include 76
covered parking spaces as garages and 54 parking spaces on the proposed
driveways for a total of 130 off-street parking spaces. Additionally, 23 on-street,
uncovered parking spaces will be designated along the private drive as part of the
proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project will have a total of 153
parking spaces.
Landscaping & Common Recreational Area
Total landscaping will encompass approximately 20% of the site area. These
areas include common open space areas located between proposed units and Lot
7, which is designated solely as an open space lot for recreational use for the
residents of the project. Landscaping includes planted trees and shrubs, as well
as potted ornamental plants.
Off-Site Improvements to Alton Avenue & South
Fairview Street
The proposed project includes the widening and restripping of Alton Avenue to
its ultimate planned width (Figure 2-5). This will involve widening the road
shoulders and restripping, but it will not include additional traffic lanes on Alton
Avenue. The Alton Avenue improvements also include the installation of the
associated curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and landscaping. Additionally, South
Fairview Street will be improved along the project frontage with a new median
and a relocation of utilities to below ground. The four existing driveway cuts on
South Fairview will be removed and replaced with new sidewalks, curbs, and
gutters.
Construction
The entire project is has a construction schedule of approximately 18 months,
extending from the fall 2007 to spring 2009. Demolition and removal of the
existing structures on the proposed project site is expected to begin in November
2007 and continue approximately 1.5 months until December. This will include
razing the existing structures and concrete parking lots and crushing the concrete
on site to use as fill material. Grading the site to appropriate specifications is
expected to begin after razing the existing structures and will continue
approximately 1 month. Finally, the street improvements to Alton Avenue and
South Fairview Street would occur concurrently with the construction of the
',' Alton Court
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
2-3
August
J&5 00635.07
~ 75B-53
City of Santa Ana Chapter 2. Project Description
residential units and is expected to take approximately 14 to 16 months. The
proposed project is anticipated to import a total of 6,638 cubic yards of fill
material.
Project's Relationship to General Plan and Zoning
General Plan
The site has an existing general plan designation of Medium Density Residential
(MR-15). The proposed project is consistent with the MR-15 General Plan
designation, and therefore the proposed project is consistent with the General
Plan.
Zoning
The existing zoning designation for the site is Arterial Commercial (CS). The
proposed project will require a zone change to accommodate the proposed use as
a planned residential district (SD). A specific development plan is proposed to
reflect the proposed design and development standards for the proposed project.
Discretionary Approvals Required
The City of Santa Ana is the lead agency under CEQA and is responsible for
planning and implementing the project. The applicant requests the following
discretionary actions to implement the project:
^ Zone Change.
^ Specific Development Plan Approval.
^ Tract Map approval.
Alton Court Augustluu/
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration 2-4
J&S 00635.07
75B-54
..Y..61..y ~V.. Y~i04..
~_
5
J t?
Newport
3 ~~Beach
Y
Y ::. _.
~ _ ~
.._.. ..., ..._. 1. ,~.'
J
L
Pacific Ocean
z
L
~ N
A
' Pacific
0 1 2 4 Ocean
' Miles
S
SOURCE: ESRI Streetmap USA (2006)
4 S^ Jones & Stokes
Figure 2-1
Regional Vicinity Map
Alton Court
75B-55
75B-56
_. _ .- ~
„ '^ -
~ .-. ~ 3~• ~ w r FAA ~ y •
:~ . ~_. ~r
Z„~.i~~~ ! USCOVBRNM~lirt' Y~-Y c5 •.~N •~'
ti .~ ~~' ~ RESBRVATtON ~ ,~~~ ~ ~ ~ q 1
,A ~ ~~
~~
'= 1~
k
;~
;i _~ 4._~~' a %~~ sa
_.
s ~ ^ _ __
~.
.~
,.
.. ss".
Pari,
~~
`' ~ / ~ a
i ~ _
i fff
_ Ilil r G
~ ~
, _
/ ^ - ~ *• •
c
r /~ •I'~ _ ~ 1 s~ ' ~~ =a ° ~ ; . ~YcFaddea 24 ~r~ .
} f ,,:
i,~ i
_, _, ,~
~~
' ~~~; ~ r ~~ a 1 .•.' I' • . ~•
• ~ Y.
1 ,
i .1 ~ ~ d • ~~ ! ir•+ier ~ ~ ~ i d ~~~~ r r P
t r, ~ t ,.
~~~
^
~.,b~ ; ' ~' . w ~ SO! . HER _., Pack ~ %.,~ ~ ~ ~ ~!}r,(fi,~~ ~~~G y -~_+ `'..
.. .~.. .
v
..
_.. - _
~ r~e.BER~ -w ~. ~ ~ 1,3, f .. • . ' M
:. _
r ~ ~~ 1
..: _ ~ -
_____
. ~ ,~
x ~_ _ . _ ~._...,.....__ t
~,
___
~: ~ .
~ -~~~-~Z1HC:ER VE ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~`
~._J:. H
_._ b ~ u ~
,s
~ ~ .~
.,.
i f
~1
s-
_4 • .
.Y
' ~t
.rr~
ti ^
. + L.1h£
L
cl
i
_s A
a r'i
~Alt~ aE ra •
MENOL PA~
.w #«.~ J
z ~ .
~~ ~
A~~.: '_
-.
~tii~o 1~q"i"ff"'.~yy~} -n-..
- ~ +a I 11
~ ~~
wear St ~ • I
~M t
i I 'sy
..
_ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~ `ice .~ z ~ E
SOURCE: USGS 7.5' Quad., California: Newport Beach (Digital)
95~ Jones & Stokes
Figure 2-2
Project Site
Alton Court
75B-57
75B-58
75B-59
SOURCE: NAIP (2005) Figure 2-3
~ Project Site
9555 ~ Jones & Stokes Alton Court
75B-60
3~~
~~ ~ n
y
L V ' ~ ~
W
31M3A0 NOlI'J'
~4 1
U
V W
Z
„
,,,,
~i ~ Q a
~ O
Z~
. ~ S
~ W
W 0
~
~ ~~
u
LL 3
u
~
U Gi LL
~
/ \
~/ \\ /
! / iii y ., ~ ,
~
y ~ ~, ~
Y
`
'
~ ~~/ J }
k
~
O~ ~
~ 1
~I~
1 j
~, a
~ ;~ O m
~~ f ~ ~
's
i T~'
~
- 1
,
~ I
-
y
. a ~
,~ iR.. ~ '
y / •
:
/ y
y `
~" u ~ a
' S,x
x
n
l
~
~ $ ~
- 4
, - ~.
~ -
,, ;, ;~..
t
~
~
r ~;
°
~. ~w .~ r , i
_ ~" I
e u
~ i:~ -~ ~n~ ~ ,~ -C
,;
w 4~F' '
y"~:
w
>
'~ ~ I
~, a
"t 8 I
_
1 ~ .
~
_ _ ___
_
\ ,~+`
/
~% i•>
~~% Y
f $
i
.
._
a
~
,
_
Eh ~
~
~ ~
~
~
, .
~~ ~
i ~ f. _
~f
_
~
~.
;~
~
j
~.
:
,\ ~:. ,/
(LO-£l/_0) WAS 17NVldCASOdOHd\~O4dVW\L0 S£900\tlNdtl1NHS jOAIIJ `Sll3fOlid\S19 ~N
~ ~ ~
N C
~ ~ U
~ ,}A1 ~
N O
Q.
v
C
O
,~,`~
AV
W
•O
a
a~
N
O
a
0
a
Q
m
vJ
N
C
O
U ~
O ~
U ~~
O {a,
75B-61
75B-62
~f ~~1pYf33~
~~6f~f-f~ N"dam
~-~
~l
~I
~~~~
~-~~~~r~r~s~
~a€xr_ ~-an~.~.
s~s-as
~ "ice
p ~ L O
>` ~~V
v~a3~
~om~.,
±'' •~ Q
aLL
O
...~ ~
~ 3
C p
p N
~ ~
~ C
O ~
L
a
E
~13AV NO1~H
~~~--ri~~~~ 11
~~~ I
II
II
~ II
II
I II
II
~ 11
I I m-a
II
T~L
II
# II
II
~ II
II
II
.~srtaivr7
II r--ifv
II
II
I l
~~-----
----
f - -
/f---
~I
II
N
O
U C/1
~ ~
U ~,
~ ~I
O ~,
lL0-£t-LOl WlS IVS1N3W3AOiidWl', ~OQdtlW ~ LO S£900 `~ VNV V1NHS d0 .111 `, S1~3f021d `~ SI~'~. ~N
75B-63
75B-64
i~
i~
Chapter 3
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
PLANNING DIVISION
I. Project Title: Alton Court
II. Project Numbers: Amendment Application No. 2007-02/Specific Development No. 81/Tentative
Tract Map No. 2007-04
III. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Santa Ana, Planning and Building Agency
20 Civic Center Plaza, Ross Annex M-20
P.O. Box 1988
Santa Ana, CA 92702
IV. Project Planner and Phone Number: Vince Fregoso (714) 667-2700
V. Location: 3321 South Fairview Street, Santa Ana, CA.
VI. Environmental Determination. On the basis of this initial evaluation, I find that:
A. ^ The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
B. ® Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant
effect in this case because revisions to the project have been made by or agreed to by the applicant. A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
C. ^ The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT is required.
D. ^ Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially
significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR (EIR No. -)pursuant to applicable
standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation
measures that are imposed upon the project, nothing further is required.
E. ^ Pursuant to Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR (EIR No. -)has been prepared earlier and only
minor technical changes or additions are necessary to make the previous EIR adequate and these changes do
not raise important new issues about the significant effects on the environment. An ADDENDUM to the EIR
shall be prepared.
F. ^ Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR (EIR No. -)has been prepared earlier; however,
subsequent proposed changes in the project and/or new information of substantial importance will cause one
or more significant effects no previously discussed. A SUBSEQUENT EIR shall be prepared.
.~.
S ~' 07
Signature Date
Printed Name
Alton Court
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
3-1
August 2007
J8S 00635.07
75B-65
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
Manning Homes
20151 SW Birch Street, Suite 150
Newport Beach, CA 92660
General Plan Designation:
Medium Density Residential (MR-15)
Description of Project:
The project consists of the demolition and removal the existing warehouse and associated onsite parking
lots and walkways located at 3321 South Fairview Street in Santa Ana for the construction of 38 single-
family detached residential units. In addition, Alton Avenue would be widened to its ultimate planned
designated width and South Fairview Street would be improved.
The project includes a Zone Change from Arterial Commercial (C5) to the Specific Development No. 81
designation and a tract map to allow the sale of the units as condominiums.
Surrounding Land Uses:
The project site is surrounded by commercial developments to the south, single-family attached
residential units to the east, light industrial separated from the project site by South Fairview Street to the
west, and light industrial separated from the project site by Alton Avenue and a South Pacific Railroad
track to the north.
Zoning:
The project site is designated Arterial Commercial (C5). The City of Santa Ana Municipal Code states
that permitted uses include offices, retail and service uses, churches, government buildings, restaurants,
schools, childcare facilities, and cyber cafes. Planned residential districts are not permitted within C5
land uses. The project would need a zoning amendment to accommodate the proposed use as a
Specific Development No. 81 project site. The SD includes specific design guidelines for the proposed
project that would be reviewed and approved.
Alton Court August Zo177
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-2
J&S 00635.D7
75B-66
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected:
The en vironmental factors checked below reflect potentially significant impacts associated with the
proposed project, as indicated by the checklist on the following pa ges.
O Aesthetics O Mineral Resources
O Agricultural Resources O Noise
O Air Quality 0 Population /Housing
O Biological Resources O Public Services
0 Cultural Resources 0 Recreation
O Geology /Soils 0 Transportation /Traffic
O Hazards and Hazardous Materials 0 Utilities /Service Systems
O Hydrology /Water Quality 0 Mandatory Findings of Significance
O Land Use and Planning
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-3
J&S 00635.07
75B-67
- ~ - Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts:
I. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately
supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each
question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources
show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls
outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on
project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project would not expose sensitive
receptors to pollutants, based on aproject-specific screening analysis).
All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including offsite as well as onsite,
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? ^ ^ ® ^
B. Damage scenic resources, including but not limited ^ ^ ^
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. Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area? ^ ^ ® ^
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-4
J$5 00635.07
75B-68
i~
1 ~~-
- ~ Environmental Checklist
' For CEQA Compliance
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues 8~ Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
II. Agricultural Resources - In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Ag ricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an opt ional model to use in
assessing impacts on agricultural farmland. Would the project:
A. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or ^ ^ ^
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) to
non-agricultural use? (The Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program in the California Resources
Agency, Department of Conservation, maintains
detailed maps of these and other categories of
farmland.)
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?
III. Air Quality -Where available, the significance criteria established by th e 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 exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
D. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ^ ® ^ ^
concentrations?
' Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-5
J8S 00635.07
75B-69
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Issues & Supporting Information Sources
E. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
IV. Biological Resources -Would the project
A. Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly
or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive or special
status species in local or regional plans, policies or
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services?
B. Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian
habitat or natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the
California Department of fish and Game or U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service?
C. Adversely impact federally protected wetlands
(including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) either individually or in combination
with the known or probable impacts of other
activities through direct removal, filling hydrological
interruption, or other means?
D. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
V. Cultural Resources -Would the project:
A. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
Section 15064.5?
B. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a unique archaeological resource
pursuant to define Section 15064.5?
C. Directly or indirectly disturb or destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site?
Alton Court
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-6
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
^ ^ ® ^
^ ^ ^
^ ^ ^
^ ^ ^
^ ^ ^
^ ^ ^
^ ® ^ ^
^ ^ ^
Jgust 2007
J$S 00635.07
75B-70
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Issues 8~ Supporting Information Sources
D. Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
VI. Geology and Soils -Would the project:
A. Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury, or death involving:
1. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
map issued by the State Geologist for the
area or based on other substantial evidence
of a known fault?
2. Strong seismic ground shaking?
3. Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
4. Landslides?
B. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion
or the loss of topsoil?
C. Would the project result in the loss of a unique
geologic feature?
D. Is the project located on strata or soil that is
unstable or that would become unstable as a result
of the project and potentially result in on-or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
E. Where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater, is the soil capable of supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems?
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
^ ® ^ ^
^ ^ ^
^ ^ ® ^
^ ® ^ ^
^ ^ ^
^ ^ ® ^
^ ^ ^
^ ® ^ ^
^ ^ ^
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-7
J&S 00635.07
75B-71
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Issues 8~ Supporting Information Sources
VII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials -Would the project:
A. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use or
disposal of hazardous materials?
B. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substance or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
C. Be located on a site which is located on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 659662.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
D. For a project located within an airport land use
plan or where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles where of a public airport or public
use airport, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the project
area?
VIII. Hydrology and Water Quality -Would the project
A. Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board
water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
B. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing
nearby wells would drop to a level which would not
support existing land uses or planned uses for
which permits have been granted)?
Less Than
Significant
Potentially v~ith Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
^ ® ^ ^
^ ^ ® ^
^ ^ ® ^
^ ^ ^
^ ® ^ ^
^ ^ ^
Alton court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration g_g
J&S 00635.07
75B-72
~ ~ ~ Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues 8~ Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
C. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of ^ ^ ® ^
the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of stream or river, or substantially
increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in flooding on or off-
site?
D. Create or contribute runoff water which would ^ ^ ® ^
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of polluted run-off?
E. Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as ^ ^ ® ^
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
F. Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which ^ ^ ® ^
would impede or redirect flood flows?
G. Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as ^ ^ ® ^
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
IX. Land Use and Planning -Would the project:
A. Physically divide an established community? ^ ^ ^
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?
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3.9
J&S 00635.07
75B-73
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues 8~ Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
X. Mineral Resources -Would the project:
A. Result in the loss of availability of a locally- ^
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or
other land use plan?
XI. Noi se -Would the project result in:
A. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise ^
levels in excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
B. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ^
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise
levels?
C. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise ^
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
D. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ^
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without project?
E. For a project located within an airport land use ^
plan or where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project expose people residing or
working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
^ ^
® ^ ^
^ ® ^
^ ® ^
^ ® ^
^ ® ^
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-10
J&S 00635.07
75B-74
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Issues Z3<Supporting Information Sources
XII. Population and Housing -Would the project:
A. Induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and business) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
B. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
C. Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
XIII. Public Services
A. Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered governmental facilities,
need for new or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service rations, response
times or other performance objectives for any of
the public service:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
^ ^ ® ^
^ ^ ® ^
^ ^ ® ^
^ ^ ® ^
^ ^ ® ^
^ ® ^ ^
^ ® ^ ^
^ ^ ^
Alton Court August 2007
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration 3-11
J8S 00635.07
75B-75
- ~ - Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues & Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
XIV. Recreation
A. Would the project increase the use of existing ^ ® ^ ^
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated.
B. Does the project include recreational facilities or ^ ^ ® ^
require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
XV. Transportation /Traffic
A. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in ^ ^ ® ^
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of
the street system (i.e. result in a substantial
increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the
volume to capacity ration on roads, or congestion
at intersections?)
B. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level ^ ^ ^
of service standard established by the county
congestion management agency for designated
roads or highways?
C. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including ^ ^ ^
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
D. Substantially increase hazards to a design feature ^ ^ ® ^
(e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)?
E. Result in inadequate emergency access? ^ ^ ® ^
F. Result in inadequate parking capacity? ^ ^ ^
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 5.12
J&S 00635.07
75B-76
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
G. Conflict with adopted policies supporting ^ ^ ® ^
alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle
racks)?
Issues & Supporting Information Sources
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?
F. Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient
permitted capacity to accommodate the project's
sold waste disposal needs?
G. Comply with federal, state and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
^ ^ ® ^
^ ^ ^
^ ^ ® ^
^ ^ ® ^
^ ^ ® ^
^ ^ ® ^
^ ^ ^
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-13
J&S 00635.07
75B-77
~ ~ ~ Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues & Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
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?
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-14
J&S 00635.07
75B-78
i~
i~
n
i~
i~
i~
r~
i~
G
i~
i~
it
i~
i~
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Aesthetics
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not have a substantial affect on
a scenic vista. The proposed project would result in ales-than-significant impact to a scenic
vista because it would ultimately enhance the visual elements along the Fairview Street
intercity corridor. The Scenic Corridors Element of the Santa Ana General Plan (City of
Santa Ana 1982:27) 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 located at 3221 South Fairview Street, at the intersection
of Alton Avenue and South Fairview Street. South Fairview Street is designated as an
intercity corridor. Intercity corridors act as major image-makers for the City of Santa Ana.
Although the proposed project is located along an intercity corridor as designated by the
general plan, the project is proposing to replace a 53,000 square foot concrete tilt-up
warehouse with paved and unpaved parking areas with landscaped single family residences
that would meet appropriate City of Santa Ana design requirements. Sound reducing walls
along with landscape improvements would surround the proposed project site and would
blend in appropriately with the streetscape. The proposed project would be a visual
enhancement along the intercity corridor when compared to the existing land use. A less-
than-significant impact would occur.
B. No Impact. 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 proposed project is a developed area and does not include any scenic resources
(including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, etc.), nor is the project located on a
state highway or a scenic highway. No impact would occur.
C. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not impact the existing visual
character or quality of the site and its surroundings because the proposed project would
improve the visual character of the project site. The project is located in an area that is
designated as medium density residential. The area to the east (Aries Court) is developed in
the same character as the proposed project (single family residential units). The project
would not result in substantial degradation of the existing visual character or quality of the
site or its surroundings. Landscaping and building exteriors would be changed to be
consistent with the surrounding land uses and would comply with the Specific Development
Designs designated as part of the proposed project. Therefore, a less than significant impact
would occur.
D. Less Than Significant Impact. As mentioned above, the project is located in an area that is
developed with medium density residential as well as commercial and light industrial uses.
The existing site includes lighting around the existing building and pole street lights along
South Fairview Street and Alton Avenue. The proposed project would include street lighting
within the residential development and lighting on and around the residential units. All
lighting would be hooded and appropriately angled away from sensitive land uses, and it
would comply with the designated development design standards outlined in the Specific
Development Plan. Furthermore, the lighting used for the proposed project would not
introduce significant amounts of additional lighting to the surrounding land uses compared to
the existing warehouse. Therefore, less-than-significant impacts would occur.
Alton Court
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
3-15
August 2007
J8S 00635.07
~ 75B-79
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
II. Agricultural Resources
A. No Impact. According to the Santa Ana General Plan and the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Project (FMMP), no Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance is located on the project site or in the vicinity of the proposed project. The FMMP
designates the project site as Urban and Built Up Land (California Department of
Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection, FMMP 2006). Therefore, no important
farmland would be converted as a result of the proposed project. No impact would occur.
B. No Impact. 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. The
California Department of Conservation indicates that there are no Williamson Act Contract or
Preservation lands on or near the project site (California Department of Conservation,
Division of Land Resource Protection, Williamson Act Program 2006). Therefore, no
Williamson Contract lands would be removed as part of the proposed project. The proposed
project site is zoned as Arterial Commercial (City of Santa Ana 2005). Therefore, the
proposed project would not conflict with existing agricultural zoning. No impact would occur.
C. No Impact. The proposed project would not disrupt or damage the operation or productivity
of any areas designated as farmland. As discussed above, no farmland is located within the
project site or within the surrounding areas that would be affected by any elements of the
proposed project. The project would not induce growth that could result in the premature
conversion of existing farmland in the area. No impacts would occur.
III. Air Quality
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin
(Basin). The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is required, pursuant
to the Federal Clean Air Act, to reduce emissions of criteria pollutants for which the Basin is
in nonattainment (i.e., 03, PM,o, and PM2.5). As such, the project would be subject to the
SCAQMD's Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The AQMP contains a comprehensive
list of pollution control strategies directed at reducing emissions and achieving ambient air
quality standards. These strategies are developed, in part, based on regional population,
housing, and employment projections prepared by the Southern California Association of
Governments (SCAG). SCAG is the regional planning agency for Los Angeles, Orange,
Ventura, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Imperial Counties, and it addresses regional issues
relating to transportation, economy, community development, and environment.'
A project is consistent with the AQMP if it is consistent with the population, housing, and
employment assumptions that were used in its development. The most recent AQMP
adopted by the SCAQMD incorporates SCAG's 2004 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)
socioeconomic forecast projections of regional population and employment growth. SCAG
locates the project site within the City of Santa Ana Subregion. The 2004 RTP projects that
population in this subregion will grow by about 1,517 households between the years 2005
and 2015. The proposed project's addition of 38 net new housing units would represent
three percent (3%) of the total housing units projected for the subregion (assuming one
housing unit per household). Such levels of housing unit/household growth are consistent
~ SCAG serves as the federally designated metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for the Southern California
region.
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-16
J&S 00635.07
75B-80
i~
i~
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
with the forecasts for the subregion as adopted by SCAG, and as such are consistent with
the AQMP.
B. Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. As discussed above, the
project site is located within the Basin. State and federal air quality standards are often
exceeded in many parts of the Basin. The proposed project would contribute to air pollutant
emissions during construction (short-term) and operations (long-term). A discussion of the
project's potential construction-period and operations-period air quality impacts are provided
below.
Regional Construction Impacts
The SCAQMD has established methodologies to quantify air emissions associated with
construction activities such as air pollutant emissions generated by operation of onsite
construction equipment; fugitive dust emissions related to site preparation activities; mobile
(tailpipe) emissions from construction worker vehicles and haul/delivery truck trips; and off
gassing emissions of reactive organic compounds (ROC), which occur during the application
of architectural coatings and asphalt paving. Emissions would vary from day to day,
depending on the level of activity, the specific type of construction activity occurring, and, for
fugitive dust, prevailing weather conditions.
With respect to the proposed project, construction activities are anticipated to start around
November 2007 and require approximately 16.5 months to complete. Construction would
occur in four phases. Phase 1 would require 6 weeks and would consist of the demolition of
existing onsite structures. Phase 2 would require 1 month and would consist of grading and
site work (24,917 cubic yards of cut and 31,555 cubic yards of fill). Phase 3 would require 3
months and would consist of roadway improvements and paving along West Alton Avenue.
Phase 4 would require 14 months and would consist of the construction and finishing of the
38 detached single-family housing units. A copy of the anticipated construction schedule is
provided in the air quality appendix to this IS/MND document (Appendix A).
A construction-period mass emissions inventory was compiled based on an estimate of
construction equipment, scheduling, and phasing assumptions provided by Manning Homes.
More specifically, the mass emissions analysis takes into account the following:
1. Combustion emissions from operating onsite construction equipment,
2. Mobile-source combustion emissions from worker commute and haul-truck travel,
and
3. Mobile-source and fugitive PM2.5 and PM,o emissions resulting from the 24,917 cubic
yards of cut, 31,555 cubic yards of fill, and 6,638 cubic yards of soil import on site.
Emissions for on-road mobile sources, off-road construction equipment, and off gassing were
calculated using the URBEMIS 2002 emissions inventory model; fugitive PM~o emissions
were compiled using the calculation formulas provided in the CEQA Air Quality Handbook
(appendix to Chapter 9); and PM2.5 emissions were calculated using the SCAQMD guidance
document. titled Methodology to Calculate Particulate Matter (PM) 2.5 and PM 2.5
Significance Thresholds (October 2006). A conservative estimate of the project's regional
mass emissions during construction is presented in Table 3-1. As shown therein, ROC, CO,
SOX, PM,o, and PM2_5 emissions would be less than significant, but NOX emissions would
exceed the SCAQMD regional significance threshold of 100 pounds per day. As such,
Alton Court
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
3-17
August 2007
J$S 00635.07
75B-81
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
mitigation is required. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1 would reduce impacts to
less than significant levels.
Table 3-1. Forecast of Regional Construction Emissions
Criteria Pollutant Emissions (pounds per day)
Construction Phase ROC NOx CO SOx PM,aa PMZ 6a
Demolition (1.5 months) 7 59 59 <1 6 2
Site Prep (1 month) 15 108 124 <1 15 6
Building Erection/Finishing (14 months) 63 90 118 <1 3 3
Roadway Improvements (3 months) 8 54 66 <1 2 2
Maximum Concurrent Regional Project 63 115 145 <1 15 6
Emissionsb
SCAQMD Regional Emissions Threshold (Ibs/day) 75 100 550 150 150 55
Exceed Threshold? No Yes No No No No
Fugitive PM,o and PM2.5 emissions estimates take into account compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403
requirements for fugitive dust suppression.
Maximum concurrent emissions for NOx and CO occur in a three month period during simultaneous
building construction of the homes and roadway paving; maximums for other criteria pollutants occur in
a one month period during the final architectural coatings and paving stages of the homes.
Source: Jones & Stokes 2007. URBEMIS 2002 outputs are provided in Air Quality Appendix.
Mitigation Measures
AQ-1. All onsite diesel construction equipment shall meet EPA Tier 2 emissions
standards.
Operational Impacts
The proposed project would generate fewer daily and peak hour vehicle trips than the
existing SAUSD warehouse that exists on the site (370 daily trips, 49 AM peak hour, and 52
PM peak hour trips compared to 364 daily trips, 29 AM peak hour, and 39 PM peak hour
trips). Additionally, potential air quality impacts from residential heating equipment would
likely be less than from mechanical equipment used at the warehouse and distribution center.
Therefore, it can be concluded that operational air quality impacts would be less than
significant.
C. Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The SCAQMD's approach
for assessing cumulative impacts is based on the AQMP forecasts of attainment of ambient
air quality standards in accordance with the requirements of the Federal and State Clean Air
Acts. As discussed earlier in Response No. III-A, the proposed project would be consistent
with the AQMP, which is intended to bring the Basin into attainment for all criteria pollutants.2
z CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3) states "A lead agency may determine that a project's incremental
contribution to a cumulative effect is not cumulatively considerable if the project will comply with the requirements
in a previously approved plan or mitigation program which provides specific requirements that will avoid or
substantially lessen the cumulative problem (e.g. water quality control plan, air quality plan, integrated waste
management plan) within the geographic area in which the project is located. Such plans or programs must be
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration g_~g
J&S 00635.07
75B-82
i~
i~
i~
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
In addition, the mass regional emissions calculated for the proposed project would be less
than the applicable SCAQMD daily significance thresholds (with the incorporation of
Mitigation Measure AQ-1 ), which are designed to assist the region in attaining the applicable
state and national ambient air quality standards. As such, cumulative impacts would be less
than significant with mitigation incorporated.
D. Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. As described in Response
No. III-B above, construction and operation of the proposed project would not result in any
substantial localized or regional air pollution impacts (with the incorporation of Mitigation
Measure AQ-1), and therefore would not expose any nearby sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations.
E. Less Than Significant Impact. According to the SCAQMD CEQA Air Qualify Handbook,
land uses associated with odor complaints typically include agricultural uses, wastewater
treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills,
dairies, and fiberglass molding. The proposed project does not include any uses identified by
the SCAQMD as being associated with odors and therefore would not produce objectionable
odors.
Potential sources that may emit odors during construction activities include asphalt paving
and the use of architectural coatings and solvents. SCAQMD Rules 1108 and 1113 limits the
amount of volatile organic compounds from cutback asphalt and architectural coatings and
solvents, respectively. Via mandatory compliance with SCAQMD Rules, no construction
activities or materials are proposed that would create a significant level of objectionable
odors. As such, potential impacts during short-term construction would be less than
significant.
Other CEQA Considerations
Climate Chanpe and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
AB 1493 and AB 32
While climate change has been a concern since at least 1988, as evidenced by the
establishment of the United Nations and World Meteorological Organization's
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the efforts devoted to greenhouse gas3
(GHG) emissions reduction and climate change research and policy have increased
dramatically in recent years. In 2002, with the passage of Assembly Bill 1493 (AB 1493),
California launched an innovative and proactive approach to dealing with GHG emissions
and climate change at the state level. AB 1493 requires the Air Resources Board (ARB) to
develop and implement regulations to reduce automobile and light truck GHG emissions;
these regulations will apply to automobiles and light trucks beginning with the 2009 model
year.
On June 1, 2005, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order S-3-05. The
goal of this Executive Order is to reduce California's GHG emissions to (1) 2000 levels by
i~
i~
specified in law or adopted by the public agency with jurisdiction over the affected resources through a public
review process to implement, interpret, or make specific the law enforced or administered by the public agency."
3 Greenhouse gases related to human activity include: Carbon dioxide, Methane, Nitrous oxide,
Tetrafluoromethane, Hexafluoroethane, Sulfur hexafluoride, HFC-23, HFC-134a, and HFC-152a
Alton Court
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration
3-19
August 2007
J&5 00635.07
~ 75B-83
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
2010, (2) 1990 levels by the 2020, and (3) 80% below the 1990 levels by the year 2050. In
2006, this goal was further reinforced with the passage of Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the
Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 sets the same overall GHG emissions
reduction goals while further mandating that ARB create a plan, which includes market
mechanisms, and implement rules to achieve "real, quantifiable, cost-effective reductions of
greenhouse gases." Executive Order S-20-06 further directs state agencies to begin
implementing AB 32, including the recommendations made by the state's Climate Action
Team.
Climate change and GHG reduction is also a concern at the federal level; however, at this
time, no legislation or regulations have been enacted specifically addressing GHG emissions
reductions and climate change. According to the IPCC report, Climate Change 2007: The
Physical Science Basis: Summary for Policymakers (February 2007), there is no doubt that
the climate system is warming. Global average air and ocean temperatures as well as global
average sea level are rising. Of the last 12 years, 11 years have ranked as among the
warmest on record since 1850. While some of the increase is explained by natural
occurrences, the 2007 report asserts that the increase in temperature is very likely (> 90%)
due to human activity, most notably the burning of fossil fuels.
For California, similar effects are described in the California Climate Change Center report,
Our Changing Climate: Assessing the Risks to California (July 2006). Based on projections
using state of the art climate modeling, the temperatures in California are expected to rise
between 3° F and 10.5° F (1.7° C and 5.8 ° C) by the end of the century dependent on how
much California is able to reduce its GHG emissions. The report states that these
temperature increases will negatively impact public health, water supply, agriculture, plant
and animal species, and the coastline.
Impacts
Automobiles have been identified as the greatest source of greenhouse gas emissions, and
the quantity of GHG emissions from automobiles is directly correlated with the amount of
vehicle miles traveled (VMT). The SCAQMD is in the process of releasing an updated
version of the URBEMIS 2002 emissions estimation/evaluation model that will calculate the
impacts associated with greenhouse gas emissions, especially carbon dioxide emissions
from mobile sources. Because automobiles are the largest contributor to COz emissions, it
can be deduced that if a project does not result in an increase of daily trips or VMT, that the
project would not result in an increase of GHG emissions. As discussed in Response XV-A.
under Transportation/Traffic, the proposed project would result in a net decrease of 6 daily
trips, 20 AM peak hour trips, and 13 PM peak hour trips. This net decrease in trips results in
a net decrease of VMT, and ultimately in a net decrease of GHG emissions. Consequently,
there would be an overall net beneficial impact to GHG emissions.
IV. Biological Resources
A. No Impact. The project site is located in a fully urbanized setting and is void of any native
• vegetation or wildlife habitat; therefore, it does not have the potential to accommodate
sensitive biological resources. No impacts would occur.
B. No Impact. The site is void of any riparian habitat or other natural communities; therefore, it
does not have the potential to accommodate sensitive biological resources. No impacts
would occur.
Alton Court August 200
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-20
gas oosss.o~
75B-84
i~
ii
i~
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
C. No Impact. The project would not result in impacts to wetland areas because no wetlands
are located on the project site. No impacts would occur.
D. No Impact. The project site does not contain any biological resources that are protected by
local policies. Therefore, the project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources. No impacts would occur.
V. Cultural Resources
A. No Impact. The project site does not have any structures listed on local, state, or federal
historic resource lists and have not been determined to be eligible for such lists (City of Santa
Ana 1998:A-54). The existing warehouse building is less than 50 years old and has no
historic significance. No impacts would occur.
B. Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. 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 archaeological resources exist on site (City of Santa Ana 1998:A-
53). However, there is the potential for unknown resources to be discovered during
construction and excavation at the site. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-1 below
would reduce impacts to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measures
CR-1. During construction activities involving grading or other site preparation activities that
involve in-ground excavation, the construction contractor will monitor activities to
ensure that potential archaeological resources are not damaged or destroyed.
Should grading or excavation activities uncover any materials that are suspected of
having any potential to be of archaeological significance, the contractor will halt
construction activities in the immediate area (within 100 feet of the find) and notify the
City. Such materials may include, but are not limited to, former building foundations,
historic dump/trash sites (i.e., outhouse privies), glass from a historic era, pottery and
ceramics, or other materials that are suspect of being associated with historic
occupation of the area. In this event, the City will retain a Qualified Archeologist to
make an immediate evaluation of significance and appropriate treatment of the
resource. To complete this assessment, the Qualified Archeologist will be afforded
the necessary time to recover, analyze, and curate the find. The Qualified
Archeologist will recommend the extent of archeological monitoring necessary to
ensure the protection of any other resources that may be in the area. Construction
activities will be allowed to continue on other parts of the building site while
evaluation and treatment of historical or unique archaeological resources takes
place.
C. No Impact. The project site is located within an urbanized area and has been disturbed by
previous and existing development. No known paleontological resources are located within
the vicinity of the project area. Additionally, excavation and grading of the site would be
relatively shallow and is not anticipated to uncover any paleontological resources, should
they exist in the area. Therefore, no impacts would occur
Alton Court
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
3-21
August 2007
J&S 00635.07
75B-85
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
D. Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The project site is not known to
contain human remains interred inside or outside formal cemeteries. The proposed project
site is not located o.n a cemetery or burial ground, is currently developed, and has been
disturbed in the past. The proposed project would include grading and excavation.
Discovery of human remains is governed by state law, which requires stop of work and
reporting to authorities.
Although it is unlikely that human remains would be discovered at the project site, in the
event that human remains are discovered on the project site during construction activities,
Mitigation Measure CR-2 would reduce any unforeseen impacts related to the discovery of
human remains to below a level of significance.
Mitigation Measures
CR-2. In the event that human remains are found on the project site, all work will stop and
the County Coroner will be called to assess the remains and exhume them. In the
event that the County Coroner recognizes the remains as being of Native American
origin, the County Coroner is responsible for contacting the Native American
Heritage Commission within 24 hours. The Commission has various powers and
duties to provide for the ultimate disposition of any Native American remains, as does
the assigned Most Likely Descendant. Sections 5097.98 and 5097.99 of the Public
Resources Code also call for "protection to Native American human burials and
skeletal remains from vandalism and inadvertent destruction."
VI. Geology and Soils
A-1 No Impact. According to the most recent Alquist-Priolo Zoning Map, no known fault traces
are located in the City of Santa Ana (California Department of Conservation, California
Geologic Survey 2006). No impact would occur.
A-2 Less Than Significant Impact. Seismic hazard from ground shaking is typical for large
areas of southern California. The Newport-Inglewood (L.A. Basin) fault is closest to the site
and is located approximately 5.4 miles (8.7 km) away (Associated Soils Engineering 2006).
Other nearby active faults include the Newport-Inglewood (offshore) Fault and the Compton
Thrust Fault, located approximately 7.8 miles (12.5 km) and 8.3 miles (13.4 km) away,
respectively (Associated Soils Engineering 2006). Based on literature and analysis, the
Newport-Inglewood (L.A. Basin) Fault would probably generate the most severe site ground
motions (Associated Soils Engineering 2006). All of these faults are typical of southern
California, and it is reasonable to expect a strong ground motion seismic event during the
lifetime of any proposed project in the region. The probability and consequences of such
earthquakes are unknown, but they could result in minor structural damage and possible
injuries, ranging up to large-scale destruction and possible fatalities. The proposed project
includes the demolition and removal of an existing onsite warehouse and the construction of
38 single family residential units. All demolition and building would occur in accordance with
building and safety standards as specified by the City Building Division. All buildings would
be constructed in compliance with the latest earthquake-resistant design and relevant codes
available. All project components would be built in compliance with the most up-to-date
building codes, which would minimize potential impacts. Potential impacts would be less
than significant, and no mitigation measures would be necessary.
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3.22
J&S 00635.07
75B-86
1
II
~ 1 ~ Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
A-3 Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The site is within an area identified
as having a potential for soil liquefaction when subject to a seismic event (Associated Soils
Engineering 2006). The term liquefaction describes a phenomenon in which a saturated,
cohesion less soil loses strength and acquires a degree of mobility as a result of strong
ground shaking during an earthquake (Associated Soils Engineering 2006). The factors
known to influence liquefaction potential include soil type and depth, grain size, relative
density, groundwater level, degree of saturation, and both the intensity and duration of
ground shaking (Associated Soils Engineering 2006). Catastrophic failure of structures due
to soil liquefaction is not expected at the site, but the ground shaking associated with a large
magnitude earthquake would likely cause settlement and/or small scale lateral displacements
in local areas (Associated Soils Engineering 2006).
All demolition would occur in accordance with building and safety standards as specified by
the City Building Division. All site preparation (including grading) and construction of the
residential units would occur in accordance with building and safety standards as specified
by the City Building Division, which inherently provide for measures to reduce the potential
impacts of liquefaction to structures. In addition, the geotechnical study provides for certain
design measures during site preparation, excavation, grading, and construction, which would
also reduce any potential impacts related to liquefaction (Associated Soils Engineering 2006).
These design measures include, but are not limited to:
• Specific site preparation and grading techniques to reduce liquefaction impacts such
as over excavation.
• Additional testing for the degree of soil expansion on site during or after rough
grading operations.
• Specific foundation designs to reduce provide sound structural design on potentially
expansive soils.
• Conformance of foundation design and asphalt design to Greenbook requirements.
Therefore, the impacts to structures can be mitigated to less than significant with the
implementation of mitigation measure GEO-1.
Mitigation Measures
GEO-1. To mitigate the effects of liquefaction, the applicant will follow the safety and
building standards specified by the City Building Division as well as implement the
appropriate combination of design recommendations outlined in the Associated Soils
Engineering (2006) geotechnical report (Appendix B). The engineering plans will be
submitted to the City's Building Department for a plan check along with the geotechnical
report and will receive appropriate approvals and clearances prior to construction
occurring onsite.
A-4 No Impact. The project area is generally flat, and implementation of the proposed
project would not require slope cuts that could result in landslides. There is no indication that
recent landslides or unstable slope conditions exist on or adjacent to the project site that
would otherwise result in a landslide hazard to the proposed project (Associated Soils
Engineering 2006). According to the Seismic Hazards Zone Map, the site is not located
within an area identified as having a potential for earthquake-induced landslides (CGS 1998
in Associated Soils Engineering 2006). Therefore, no impacts associated with landslides
would occur.
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-23
J&S 00635.07
75B-87
Environmental Checklist
~~~~~~~ For CEQA Compliance
B. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project is currently developed and consists of
60% of impermeable surfaces (asphalt, concrete, and buildings) and approximately 40% of
hard-packed unpaved sun`aces. Furthermore, low topographic relief on site is not significant;
therefore, impacts associated with substantial erosion or loss of topsoil would be less than
significant during construction or post-construction of the proposed project.
C. No Impact. The project site has been previously developed and does not contain any unique
geological or physical feature. No impact would occur.
D. Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. According to City of Santa Ana
General Plan Land Use Element, the proposed project is not located in an area of
subsidence (City of Santa Ana 1998: A-40). The project area is generally flat, and there is no
indication that recent landslides or unstable slope conditions exist on or adjacent to the
project site that would otherwise result in a landslide hazard to the proposed project
(Associated Soils Engineering 2006). However, the project is located in an area of high to
very high liquefaction (City of Santa Ana 1998: A-40, Associated Soils Engineering 2006).
All demolition would occur in accordance with building and safety standards as specified by
the City Building Division. All site preparation (including grading) and construction of the
residential units would occur in accordance with building and safety standards as specified
by the City Building Division, which inherently provide for measures to reduce the potential
impacts of liquefaction to structures. In addition, the geotechnical study provides for certain
design measures during site preparation, excavation, grading, and construction, which would
also reduce any potential impacts related to liquefaction to less than significant (Associated
Soils Engineering, 2006). Therefore, the impacts to structures can be mitigated to less than
significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1 identified above.
E. No Impact. Sewer access is available throughout the project area. No septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems are included as part of the proposed project. The
project site would tie into existing 8-inch sewer line located along South Fairview Street. No
impacts would occur.
VII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
A. Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Implementation of the proposed
project may be associated with the disposal of hazardous substances as a result of the
demolition of the various structures. Development of the proposed project would require the
demolition of existing interior and exterior features on the site. The buildings on site were
constructed between 1961 and 1962, and no extensive renovations to the existing structure
have occurred since that time (TRC 2006). Asbestos-containing building materials have
been previously identified in the existing warehouse (TRC 2006). In addition, due to the
building's age, lead-based paint and/or lighting ballasts containing polychlorinated biphenyl
(PCB) may be present (TRC 2006). Mitigation Measure HM-1 would ensure that proper
disposal of any hazardous materials, if discovered, would be followed as directed by the City
of Santa Ana Building Division and Fire Department. Impacts are therefore considered less
than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-24
J&S 00635.07
75B-88
Environmental Checklist
~""'~ For CEQA Compliance
Mitigation Measures
HM-1 Prior to demolition of the existing warehouse on site, an asbestos-containing
materials, lead-based paint, and polychlorinated biphenyl survey will be
performed by a qualified environmental professional and conducted in
accordance with all federal, state, and local requirements, including those
established by National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAPS) guidelines and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA). A report will be furnished by said qualified environmental professional
and will outline the occurrence of hazardous materials on the project site.
If asbestos-containing materials are discovered during site investigations, all
potentially friable asbestos-containing materials will be removed in
accordance with federal, state, and local laws and the NESHAP guidelines
prior to building demolition or renovation that may disturb the materials. All
demolition activities will be undertaken in accordance with California
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) standards,
contained in Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Section
1529, to protect workers from exposure to asbestos. Materials containing
more than 1 % asbestos are also subject to SCAOMD regulations.
Demolition performed in conformance with these federal, state, and local
laws and regulations will avoid significant exposure of construction workers
and/or the public to asbestos-containing materials.
If lead-based paint is discovered during onsite investigations, all building
materials containing lead-based paint will be removed in accordance with
Cal/OSHA lead in construction standard, Title 8, CCR 1532.1, including
employee training, employee air monitoring, and dust control. Any debris or
soil containing lead-based paint or coatings will be disposed of at landfills
that meet acceptance criteria for the waste being disposed. Demolition
performed in conformance with these federal, state, and local laws and
regulations will avoid significant exposure of construction workers and/or the
public to lead-based paint.
• If polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) are discovered during onsite
investigations, all PCB-containing lighting ballasts will be removed and
disposed of in conformance with federal, state, and local laws and
regulations so as to avoid exposure of construction workers and/or the public
to PCB-containing materials.
B. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project is within 0.25 mile of an existing
school. The closest school to the project site is Thorpe Elementary, located to the east of the
proposed project at 2450 Alton Avenue. Additionally, Segerstrom High School is located
approximately 0.4 miles southeast of the project site on MacArthur Boulevard. The proposed
project would not regularly emit any hazardous waste or hazardous material, nor would it
regularly handle acutely hazardous materials, substances, or wastes. There may be some
emissions during construction, but these would be short-term and would be reduced through
mitigation (See Air Quality Section). Therefore, less-than-significant impacts would occur.
C. Less Than Significant Impact. A Phase I and Phase II Environmental Site Assessment was
conducted for the proposed site in January 2006 (Appendix C). Per review and
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-25
J&S 00635.07
75B-89
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
recommendation by the Orange County Health Care Agency, a Phase II Subsurface
Investigation was completed in February 2006, expanding the initial Phase I and II
investigations to further characterize any potential subsurface contamination from past land
use activities on site (Appendix C). The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment determined
that the proposed project site is not identified as a hazardous material site, nor is it on any
lists compiled by the City of Santa Ana Fire Department, the Santa Ana Regional Water
Quality Control Board (SARWQCB), or the California EPA Department of Toxic Substances
Control (TRC 2006). The proposed project site was listed by SCAQMD as being permitted
for certain emissions for a business that no longer exists on the property (TRC 2006). The
Phase II Environmental Site Assessment included soil gas, soil matrix, and groundwater
sampling, which revealed low concentrations of Perchloroethene (PCE) in soil vapor
samples, and low concentrations of Dichloroethene (DCE) in groundwater samples (TRC
2006: 24). Additionally, concentrations of arsenic, benzo(K) fluoranthene, and benzo(a)
pyrene were detected in the ballast samples collected from the railroad spur located in the
eastern portion of the subject property at concentrations that exceeded the corresponding
Preliminary Remediation Goal (PRG) for residential soils (TRC 2006: 24). However, the
Phase II report concluded these are not likely to present a potential increased human health
risk to future residents (TRC 2006: 24).
Based on these results, Orange County Health Care Agency requested additional subsurface
investigation to further characterize the nature of site contamination, including the lateral and
vertical extent of the contamination along the railroad spur (TRC 2006: 3). This additional
assessment was performed in the Phase II Subsurface Investigation. Twelve borings were
completed to a maximum depth of 13 feet below ground surface, and soil and groundwater
samples were collected at approved locations on site by the Orange County Health Care
Agency (TRC 2006: 4). Overall, the results of the samples collected do not suggest that a
significant release of hazardous wastes occurred on the subject property, and average
concentrations were well below the PRGs for all compounds (TRC 2006: 6). Additionally,
none of the samples collected and analyzed along the railroad spur were found to contain
detectable levels of contaminants (TRC 2006: 6). The Phase II Subsurface Investigation
concluded that no additional investigative actions were necessary or warranted for the site
and requested the Orange County Health Care Agency to issue a "no further action" status
for the proposed project site (TRC 2006: 7). Based on the information in the Phase I and
Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, the Phase II Subsurface Investigation, and
Mitigation Measure HM-2 incorporated below, impacts are considered less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
HM-2 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant will provide written
evidence from the Orange County Health Care Agency to the City that a status of
"no further action" for the proposed project site has been issued.
D. No Impact. The project is not located within an airport land use plan or within 2 miles of an
airport. The closest airport to the project site is John Wayne Airport approximately 3 miles
southeast of the project site. The proposed project includes constructing 38 two-story single-
family residential units. The proposed project would not result in hazardous obstructions to
operations at John Wayne Airport. No impacts would occur.
VIII. Hydrology and Water Quality
Alton Court August 2007
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration 3-26
J&S 00635.07
75B-90
i~
i~
i~
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
A. Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The City of Santa Ana is included
within four watersheds: San Diego Creek, Santa Ana River, Talbert, and Westminster. Each
of these watershed areas are under the jurisdiction of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality
Control Board and subject to the objectives, water quality standards, and best management
practice requirements established in the Santa Ana River Basin Plan and Orange County
Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP). The City of Santa Ana Storm Water Management
Program Ordinance (Municipal Code Ch. 18) governs all projects within the City to comply
with the Orange County DAMP and the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board
MS4 permit, which is the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination (NPDES) permit that
governs stormwater discharges into the public storm system (MDS Consulting 2007:1). The
City of Santa Ana does not contain any impaired water bodies, as defined by Section 303 of
the Clean Water Act. However, the City does contain several drainage facilities that convey
surface water runoff into bodies of water that are classified as impaired.
During construction, runoff from the project site would be managed by best management
practices (BMPs) and would be managed as directed in the City's stormwater protection
requirements. BMPs include, but are not limited to, treatments such as private storm filters
and catch basins, the minimization of directly connecting impervious areas, education of
property owners, activity restrictions in certain areas of the property, and regular street
sweeping. Therefore, the proposed project would result in aless-than-significant impact to
water quality standards and waste discharge requirements during construction of the project.
The existing site consists of approximately 40% pervious surface runoff from the project area,
which includes two landscaped areas located along the western boundary of the site and the
unpaved areas located along the eastern and southern boundaries (MDS Consulting 2007:6).
The proposed project would reduce the pervious area by half, to approximately 20% of the
site (MDS Consulting 2007:6).
The proposed project is classified as a Priority Project Category 1 per the Countywide
Orange County Storm Water Program (MDS Consulting 2007:1). Therefore, after
development of the proposed project, treatment control BMPs are required to remove
pollutants typically associated with urban runoff (MDS Consulting 2007:5). Pollutants
typically associated with urban runoff include nutrients, pesticides, sediment, trash and
debris, bacteria and viruses, and oil and grease.
~~
BMPs included in the Water Quality Management Plan, already prepared for the proposed
project, would limit impacts from project site runoff. These BMPs identified in the WQMP
include, but are not limited to:
• Onsite structural BMP treatments such as private storm filters and catch basins and
the minimization of directly connecting impervious areas.
• Nonstructural BMPs such as HOA management of BMPs operation through
appropriate Codes, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs), education of property
owners, activity restrictions in certain areas of the property, and regular street
sweeping.
Impacts are therefore considered less than significant with Mitigation Measure WQ-1,
identified below, incorporated.
Alton Court
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
3-27
August 2007
J&S 00635.07
~ 75B-91
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Mitigation Measures
WQ-1 During final design of the proposed project, the applicant will incorporate and
adhere to all structural and nonstructural treatment and control BMPs identified
to control water quality and waste water runoff identified in the Water Quality
Management Plan (Appendix D) (MDS Consulting 2007).
B. No Impact. The proposed project site is currently developed and is not considered a source
for groundwater recharge. The proposed project would decrease the pervious area on site
from 40% to 20%. Therefore, less than significant impacts would occur.
C. Less Than Significant Impact. The existing site is generally impermeable to stormwater
due to the impermeable surfaces on site. Currently, stormwater runoff, as sheet flows, is
conveyed southerly to MacArthur Boulevard and then easterly to a 10-foot by 14-foot
trapezoidal section of the earthen Greenville-Banning Channel (OCFCD Facility Number
D03) (MDS Consulting 2007:7). It is finally discharged into Reach 1 of the Santa Ana River
near the river mouth at the Pacific Ocean (MDS Consulting 2007: 7). Site drainage after
development would be altered. stormwater runoff would be conveyed as sheet flows
northerly to Alton Avenue. However, the City has determined and approved that discharge of
the proposed project's stormwater into the existing 72-inch storm drain in Alton Avenue is
acceptable (MDS Consulting 2007; Chin pers. comm.). The City determined that the
change in drainage would be acceptable and can be easily accommodated by the 72-inch
storm drain located in Alton Avenue. The stormwater would be treated prior to discharge to
the Alton Avenue storm drain through incorporation of onsite BMPs. Additionally, no streams
or rivers pass through the proposed project site. Less-than-significant impacts would occur.
D. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not increase flooding potential
or result in any substantial change in the drainage patterns on or adjacent to the project site.
Because of the urban character of the area and the use of the project site as a warehouse,
substantial amounts of stormwater are not readily absorbed into the soil. The proposed
project would alter the existing drainage pattern of the project site; however, the City has
determined the 72-inch storm drain located in Alton Avenue can accommodate the runoff
generated by the project and has approved the discharge of runoff into the Alton Avenue
storm drain (MDS Consulting 2007; Chin pers. comm.). Therefore, storm runoff generated by
the proposed project would be conveyed as sheet flow to the project's proposed area drains
and catch basins (MDS Consulting 2007). It would then be conveyed north to the Alton
Avenue storm drain, and then west to the Greenville-Banning Channel (MDS Consulting
2007). The channel would convey it to the Pacific Ocean as in existing conditions. A less-
than-significant impact would occur (MDS Consulting 2007). The 72-inch storm drain in Alton
Avenue has the capacity to accept the storm runoff from the site. Additionally, the
stormwater would meet water quality standards through the incorporation of onsite BMPs
prior to discharge to the Alton Avenue storm drain.
E. Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located within the 100-year floodplain
associated with the Prado Dam inundation zone (City of Santa Ana 1998: A-41). Prado Dam
is a flood control and water conservation project constructed and operated by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District. The Los Angeles District has begun construction
to increase the capacity of the reservoir behind Prado Dam. Modifications to the dam are
divided into three phases:
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-28
J&S 00635.07
75B-92
i~
i~
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
1. Raise the height of the dam by 30 feet, build a new intake tower, and construct
improvements to the dam's outlet works (Mar 2003 -Sept 2003);
2. Construct dikes in the basin to protect property (Sept 2004 -Sept 2007); and
3. Raise the height of the adjacent spillway by 20 feet (Jul 2006 -Jan 2008) (U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers 2004).
The proposed project includes the construction of 38 single-family residential units on 6
acres. Therefore, the proposed project would place housing within a 100-year floodplain.
However, in the event of a dam failure, based on the distance to Prado Dam, the projected
depth of potential floodwaters (less than 1 foot), and the emergency warnings that would be
issued in the event of dam failure, the project would not expose people or structures to a
significant risk. Impacts would be less than significant.
F. Less Than Significant Impact. The project would involve the construction of 38 single-
family residential units on 6 acres. As stated above, although the proposed project is located
within the 100-year floodplain, improvements to Prado Dam would limit impacts to the project
site. Therefore, existing structures on the project site would not impede or redirect flood
flows. Impacts would be less than significant.
G. Less Than Significant Impact. As stated previously under Section VIII-E, the proposed
project is within the 100-year floodplain; however, improvements to Prado Dam would limit
impacts to the project site. Impacts would be less than significant.
IX. Land Use and Planning
A. No Impact. The proposed project involves the construction of 38 single-family residential
units and redesignation of the project site to comply with zoning, land use, and the new
Specific Development Design standards. The amended zoning and land use designations for
the project site would generally be compatible with the adjacent residential and commercial
uses. The construction of 38 single-family residential units and the revised zoning and land
use designations associated with the proposed project would not divide the existing
community. No impacts would occur.
u
B. Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is zoned as Arterial Commercial (C5).
Residential units are incompatible with this zoning; therefore, the City is proposing a zone
amendment to a Specific Development No. 81 designation, which will allow the proposed
project. After the zone amendment and Specific Development Plan, the zoning would be
compatible with the proposed project for residential units, and less-than-significant impacts
would occur.
C. No Impact. 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
Alton Court
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
3-29
August 2007
J&S OD635.07
~ 75B-93
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
A. No Impact. There are no areas designated in the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of
1975 (SMARA) or existent oil fields within the City of Santa Ana (City of Santa Ana 1998:A-
44); therefore, no impacts would occur.
XI. Noise
Mestre Greve Associates (2007) prepared an acoustics analysis for the proposed project
(Appendix E). The analysis contained within this section incorporates the results of the noise
study and relies primarily upon the study by Mestre Greve Associates, unless otherwise
noted.
Sound is technically described in terms of the loudness (amplitude) of the sound and
frequency (pitch) of the sound. The standard unit of measurement of the loudness of sound
is the decibel (dB). Decibels are based on the logarithmic scale. Therefore, in terms of
human response to noise, a sound of 10 dB higher than any other is judged to be twice as
loud; and 20 dB higher four times as loud. Every day sounds normally range from 30 dB
(very quiet) to 100 d6 (very loud).
Since the human ear is not equally sensitive to sound at all frequencies, a special frequency-
dependant rating scale is devised to relate noise to human sensitivity. The A-weighted
decibel scale (dBA) discriminates against frequencies in a manner approximating the
sensitivity of the human ear. Community noise levels are measured in terms of dBA. For
example, 40 dBA is very quiet, such as bird calls, and 100 dBA is very loud, such as a jet fly
over at 1,000 feet.
There are a number of noise scales that have been developed to measure community noise,
which account for the parameters of noise that have been shown to contribute to the effects
of noise on people, the variety of noises found in the environment, the variations of noise
levels that a person experiences moving through the environment, and the variations of noise
associated with the time of day. Two of the predominant noise scales are the Equivalent
Noise Level (LEQ) and the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL).
LEQ is the energy average noise level during the time period of the sample. It is typically
measured for one hour and is the energy sum of all the events and background noise that
occurred within that one hour.
CNEL represents atime-weighted 24-hour average noise level based on the dBA. Time
weighted means that noise that occurs during certain sensitive time periods are penalized for
occurring at these times. The evening time period (7 p.m. to 10 p.m.) and the nighttime
period (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.) are penalized should noise making activities occur at these times.
This is because they seem louder during these quieter times of the day because there are
few other competing noises. Many communities use the CNEL as their standard in
California.
Ldn is similar to CNEL, except that evening noises are not penalized, while nighttime noises
are penalized. It is a measure of overall noise experienced during an entire day. L(%) is the
method of describing noise that accounts for the variance in noise levels through a given
measurement period. L(%) is a way of expressing the noise level exceeded for a percentage
of time in a given measurement period. For example, since 5 minutes is 25% of 20 minutes,
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-30
J&S 00635.07
75B-94
i~
i~
Environmental Checklist
i~
i~
i~
u
i~
i~
i~
i~
i~
7
""'~ For CEQA Compliance
L(25) is the noise level that is equal to or exceeded for 5 minutes in a 20 minute period. The
L(°/o) is used for many city noise ordinance standards.
A. Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The City Noise Element uses
outdoor and indoor noise limits for residential land uses impacted by transportation noise
sources based on CNEL (Mestre Greve Associates 2007:4). The City Noise Element states
that for residential land use, the exterior noise exposure level will not exceed 65 CNEL, and
the interior noise exposure level will not exceed 45 CNEL (Mestre Greve Associates 2007:4).
Additionally, the City Noise Ordinance is designed to control unnecessary, excessive, and
annoying sounds from stationary (nontransportation) noise sources (Mestre Greve
Associates 2007:4). Section 18-311 of the City's noise ordinance states that the entire city is
designated as "Noise Zone 1." The noise ordinance criteria in Table 3-2 is used to determine
impacts and appropriate mitigation.
Table 3-2. City of Santa Ana Exterior Noise Ordinance Criteria
Noise Level Not To Be Exceeded
Maximum Time of Daytime 7 a.m. Nighttime 10 p.m.
Exposure Noise Metric to 10 p.m. to 7 a.m.
30 Minutes/Hour L50 55 dBA 50 dBA
15 Minutes/Hour L25 60 dBA 55 dBA
5 Minutes/Hour L8.3 65 dBA 60 dBA
1 Minute/Hour L1.7 70 dBA 65 dBA
Any Period of Time Lmax 75 dBA 70 dBA
Two aspects of the project would be subject to the noise ordinance; (1) construction and (2)
the proposed residential use adjacent to the commercial center to the south.
Potential noise impacts are commonly divided into two categories; short-term and long term.
Short-term impacts are usually associated with noise generated by onsite construction
activities, which affect offsite surrounding land uses. Long-term impacts are further divided
into noise generated by the proposed project, which impact offsite surrounding land uses
(i.e.: car alarms or cars driving around the residential area), and noise generated by offsite
land uses, which impact onsite land uses (i.e. traffic on South Fairview Street or Alton
Avenue).
Short-Term Noise
Construction noise represents ashort-term impact on ambient noise levels. Noise generated
by construction equipment, including trucks, • graders, bulldozers, concrete mixers, and
portable generators, can reach high levels. The nearest homes to the proposed project site
are located directly east. Heavy equipment could be operating as close as 20 feet to these
residential areas for prolonged periods of time. The exact fleet and number of equipment
pieces to be used on the construction site is not known; therefore, average noise levels for
construction based on worst-case peak levels are the best estimates to use for assessing
Alton Court
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
3-31
August 2007
J&S 00635.07
~ 75B-95
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
short term impacts (Mestre Greve Associates 2007:11). The worse-case unmitigated peak
construction noise levels are estimated to be between 65.7 to 90.7 dBA, with the average
noise levels typically 5 to 15 dB lower than these peak levels (Mestre Greve Associates
2007:11). Even with the lowered average noise levels, the short-term construction noise
impacts would be significantly loud and would represent a significant impact. The most
effective method of controlling construction noise is through limiting construction hours and
using appropriate construction equipment. Therefore, with the incorporation of mitigation
measures N-1 to N-10 identified below, the short-term noise impacts would be reduced to
less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
N-1. Noise generating construction activities near residential land uses will not take
place between 8 p.m. and 7 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or anytime
on Sunday or a Federal holiday.
N-2. All noise-producing project equipment and vehicles using internal combustion
engines will be equipped with mufflers and air-inlet silencers, where appropriate,
in good operating condition that meet or exceed original factory specification.
Temporary, higher-grade exhaust silencers are recommended where available.
N-3. Mobile or fixed "package" equipment (e.g., arc-welders, air compressors) will be
equipped with shrouds and noise control features that are readily available for
that type of equipment. Factory-supplied sound enclosures will be specified and
utilized where available for stationary equipment such as generators, engines
etc.
N-4. All equipment will be operated in the quietest manner practicable.
Pneumatically-powered tools will be fitted with noise-suppressors.
N-5. To the extent feasible, the noisiest operations will be scheduled to occur together
in the construction program to avoid prolonged periods of annoyance.
N-6. Material stockpiles and mobile equipment staging, parking, and maintenance
areas will be located as far as practicable from noise-sensitive receptors.
N-7. Any public address system operated on the project site during construction will
be designed and adjusted for minimum sound levels and minimum "spillover" of
sound onto adjacent properties.
N-8. No music or electronically reinforced speech will be audible at anoise-sensitive
property.
N-9. The use of noise-producing signals, including horns, whistles, alarms, and bells
will be for safety warning purposes only. All mandated audible warning devices
will be set to produce the lowest legally permissible sound level (i.e., audible
above the surrounding noise level within the obstructed work area).
N-10. The onsite construction supervisor will have the responsibility and authority to
receive and resolve noise complaints. A clear appeal process to the project
owner will be established prior to construction commencement that will allow for
Alton Court August 2007
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration 3-32
J&S 00635.D7
75B-96
1
~ ~ Environmental Checklist
' For CEQA Compliance
resolution of noise problems that cannot be immediately solved by the site
supervisor.
Long-Term Noise
Potential long-term offsite noise would primarily be generated by onsite traffic from future
residents living in the proposed project or from visitors to the proposed project. The Trip
Generation Manual defines the existing warehouse as a Light Industrial use. Light industrial
uses usually employ fewer than 500 persons, with an emphasis on activities other than
manufacturing, and they typically have minimal office space (Institute of Transportation
Engineers 2003:89). The existing warehouse currently generates 370 daily trips to the site,
including 49 AM peak hour and 52 PM peak hour trips. The proposed project would generate
364 daily trips to the site, including 29 AM peak hour and 39 PM peak hour trips. This would
result in a net decrease of 6 daily trips, 20 AM peak hour, and 13 PM peak hour trips to the
site. Since the proposed project is not anticipated to generate a significant amount of traffic,
and in fact decreases the amount of traffic, the project would not generate significant noise
impacts on surrounding land uses (Mestre Greve Associates 2007:11).
Potential long-term onsite impacts related to traffic noise from Alton Avenue and South
Fairview Street were analyzed using traffic volumes and the FHWA Highway Traffic Noise
Model. The modeling results are shown in Table 3-3, and the results do not take into account
any barriers or topography that may reduce noise levels.
Table 3-3. Existing Roadway Traffic Noise Levels
Distance (Feet) to CNEL Contour from Centerline
of Roadway
Roadway Link 70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL
Fairview Street 85 183 394
West of Alton
Avenue
Alton Avenue North 33 71 152
of Fairview Street
The worst-case onsite noise levels, which are due to traffic noise from South Fairview Street
and Alton Avenue, were calculated to be 70.8 CNEL at the property line along South Fairview
Street and 65.0 CNEL at the property line along Alton Avenue. These levels equal or exceed
65 CNEL required by the City's noise element and noise ordinance; therefore, the long-term,
onsite noise levels generated by the two streets are considered a significant impact to the
first floor of the residential units. However, the proposed project includes the construction of
a wall around the property at a height of more than 7 feet to reduce street level noise.
Additionally, Mitigation Measure N-11 below would ensure the noise barrier is constructed out
of the proper acoustical-resistance material. Therefore, the significant impact at the street
level of the residential units due to traffic noise on Alton Avenue and South Fairview Street is
reduced to less than significant.
Furthermore, units along both South Fairview Street and Alton Avenue may not meet the
outdoor to indoor noise standards of the City based on the noise measurements of Alton
Alton Court August 2007
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration 3-33
J&S 00635.07
~ 75B-97
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Avenue and South Fairview Street. Units along South Fairview Street could be exposed to
worst-case traffic noise levels of approximately 70.8 CNEL, and as a result, these units would
require maximum outdoor to indoor noise reduction requirements of 25.8 dBA to comply with
the 45 CNEL requirement (Mestre Greve Associates 2007:15). Units along Alton Avenue
could be exposed to worst case traffic noise levels of approximately 65.0 CNEL (Mestre
Greve Associates 2007:15). As a result, these units along Alton Avenue would require
maximum outdoor to indoor noise reduction requirements of 20.0 dBA to comply with the 45
CNEL noise standard (Mestre Greve Associates 2007:15). Impacts are potentially significant
but can be mitigated with the incorporation of the mitigation measures below.
Other potential long-term, onsite noise can be generated by the commercial center to the
south of the proposed project site. This commercial center includes a Ralph's grocery store
with loading docks along the rear, adjacent to the project site. The primary source of noise
associated with the Ralph's loading docks is truck deliveries and loading dock operations
(Mestre Greve Associates 2007:7,8). The City has established a delivery curfew for the
loading dock; deliveries must occur between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Monday through
Friday (Mestre Greve Associates 2007:13). Therefore, deliveries would not occur on the
weekends or in the late evening. Noise measurements at the loading docks were conducted
during the day in June 2007 at the project site (Mestre Greve Associates 2007:7,8). The
noise measurements were taken 35 feet from the property line (Mestre Greve Associates
2007:7,8). The maximum noise level was 74.8 dBA (Mestre Greve Associates 2007:7,8).
This maximum noise level does not exceed the daytime noise ordinance levels (shown in
Table 3-2). Therefore, the loading dock would not significantly affect the proposed project
site.
Other potential long-term, onsite noise can be generated by the Southern Pacific Railroad
freight train track to the north of the project site, across from Alton Avenue. The noise
generated by a train is the result of two components: the engine or locomotive, and the
railroad cars. Noise levels generated by the freight trains were modeled using field data.
Data was gathered in June 2007 from two local freight trains passing (Mestre Greve
Associates 2007: 8,9). The worst-case proposed exterior living area would be approximately
130 feet from the railroad tracks. At this location, if shielding is not present, the worst-case
noise level associated with train operations is projected to be 54.0 CNEL (Mestre Greve
Associates 2007:9). The noise levels due to trains would be well below the City's 65 CNEL
standard; therefore, railroad noise is not a significant long-term onsite impact (Mestre Greve
Associates 2007:13).
The long-term, onsite significant impact caused by traffic on South Fairview Street and Alton
Avenue to the street level and second story of the residential units can be reduced to less
than significant for the proposed residential units with the implementation of Mitigation
Measures N-11 through N-16.
Mitigation Measures
N-11. The noise barriers along Alton Avenue and Fairview Avenue must have a surface
density of at least 3.5 pounds per square foot and have no openings or gaps.
The wall may be constructed of stud and stucco, 3/8-inch plate glass, 5/8-inch
plexiglass, any masonry material, or a combination of these materials.
N-12. The noise barriers along Alton Avenue will be no less than 5 feet tall.
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-34
J8S 00635.07
75B-98
i~
i~
i~
J
r
r
i
n
n
L
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
N-13. The noise barriers at the intersection of Alton Avenue and South Fairview
Avenue will be no less than 6.8 feet tall.
N-14. The noise barriers along South Fairview Street will be no less than 6.8 feet tall.
N-15. Prior to final plan check approval of the residential structures, detailed
engineering calculations will be completed for building attenuation requirements
greater than 20 dBA. In order to meet the 45 CNEL interior standard, building
upgrades will be required for units along Fairview Street and Alton Avenue. After
draft final building plans have been prepared but prior to final building plan
approval, an acoustical analysis of the proposed residences will be prepared by
a qualified acoustical analyst to ensure that the building assemblies would
provide the required exterior-to-interior noise attenuation (i.e., a minimum of 26
dBA for rooms facing Fairview Street and 20 dBA for rooms facing Alton
Avenue). Final architectural plans will demonstrate that the structural integrity
will reduce interior noise levels 45 CNEL at these future residences. These
reductions will be verified during plan check as part of the Building Department
review of the project plans.
N-16. All units along South Fairview Street and Alton Avenue will be provided with
adequate mechanical ventilation to allow windows to remain closed so that
homes will not experience greater indoor noise.
B. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project includes the construction of 38 single-
family residential units. Construction would not involve any pile driving or specific activities
designed to generate groundborne vibrations. General construction may produce some
groundborne vibration; however, Mitigation Measures N-1 through N-10 (identified above) are
recommended to minimize noise generated during the construction phase of the project.
C. Less Than Significant Impact. Potential long-term offsite noise would primarily be
generated by onsite traffic. Since the proposed project is not anticipated to generate a
significant amount of traffic, the project would not generate significant noise impacts on
surrounding land uses (Mestre Greve Associates 2007:11).
D. Less Than Significant Impact. Short-term noise impacts are impacts typically associated
with site preparation, excavation, grading, and construction of structures. Local sensitive
land uses include the residential units that are located on the east side of the proposed
project.
The municipal code recognizes that some forms of noise are required for urban development
and maintenance that are difficult to control. Section 18-314(c) exempts noise sources
associated with construction, repair, remodeling, or grading of any real property, provided
said activities do not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays,
including Saturday, or any time on Sunday or a federal holiday. Compliance with the code is
requisite and as such, is not considered as mitigation under CEQA. Furthermore, Mitigation
Measures N-1 through N-10 would reduce the short-term, temporary construction impacts to
less-than-significant levels.
E. Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located approximately 3 miles northwest
of John Wayne International Airport. The project is located to the west of the established
flight path and is beyond the airport's 60 dBA CNEL noise contour (Airport Land Use
Alton Court
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
3-35
August 2007
J&S 00635.07
~ 75B-99
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Commission 2002). Implementation of the proposed project would not expose the site
occupants to excessive aircraft noise levels and no mitigation measures would be necessary.
There would be a less than significant impact.
XII. Population and Housing
A. Less Than Significant Impacts. The proposed project includes the construction of 38
single-family residential units, a zoning amendment to accommodate the zone change for the
residential land use, a tract map to allow the sale of the units and a widening of Alton Avenue
to the final planned design. The proposed project increases the total housing units available
(73,002) in the City of Santa Ana by less than 1.0% (approximately 0.05%) (U.S. Census
Bureau 2000: Matrices H3, H4, H5, H6, H7, and H16). A 1% increase in housing is negligible
to the overall growth of the City; it would not be considered substantially growth inducing.
The widening of Alton Avenue is included in the General Plan as planned design for this
roadway. The restripping and increased shoulder width of the road would be considered
growth accommodating, because it is planned for in the General Plan, rather than growth
inducing. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
B. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project includes the construction of 38 single-
family residential units, a zoning amendment to accommodate the zone change for the
residential land use, a tract map to allow the sale of the units and a widening of Alton Avenue
to the final planned width. The proposed project would be adding to the existing housing
stock in the City and not displacing housing necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere. Therefore, there would be a less than significant impact.
C. Less Than Significant Impact. As stated in Section XII-B above, the proposed project
would not displace housing and therefore substantial numbers of people, but rather would
provide housing. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant.
XIII. Public Services
Fire Protection:
Less Than Significant Impact. Implementation of the project could potentially contribute
additional demand for fire protection and emergency medical services, including possible
additional wear on fire equipment and increased use of medical supplies. However, the
existing warehouse operations located on the project site currently contribute to fire and
emergency demands, and the proposed project is not likely to result in many more additional
demands than the existing use on fire and emergency services. The City of Santa Ana Fire
Department would provide fire protective services to the propose project site. The project
site would be served by the nearest fire station, Station 7, which is located at 2317 South
Greenville Street at the intersection of Greenville and Warner, approximately 1 mile to the
north of the project site (Dix pers. comm.). Under the City's Mutual Aid Agreement for fire
protection services, the neighboring cities of Fountain Valley, Garden Grove, Tustin, Irvine,
and Costa Mesa would provide backup service as needed (Orange County Fire Authority
2007). Emergency vehicle access for the project would be provided to the project site via the
Alton Avenue driveway. Prior to final site plan approval, the applicant would submit plans to
the department for review of compliance with applicable water pressure and fire equipment
regulations. Impacts would be less than significant.
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-36
J&S 00635.07
75B-100
i~
i~
i~
r
i~
i~
i~
n
i~
i~
u
i~
i~
i~
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Police Protection
Less Than Significant Impact. The Santa Ana Police Department would provide police
protection services for the proposed project. The West End Sub-Station, located at 3750 W.
McFadden Avenue, (City of Santa Ana Police Department 2007) is the closest police station
to the project site. Although the proposed project may increase the population at the project
site by increasing the permanency of housing provided on site, it is not expected to place a
significant added burden on the Santa Ana Police Department. Additionally, the department
is currently patrolling the project site and surrounding areas. Emergency vehicle access for
the project would be provided to the project site via Alton Avenue. Prior to final site plan
approval, the applicant would submit plans to the department for review of compliance with
applicable safety regulations. The project would not require new or additional police facilities.
Impacts would be less than significant.
Schools
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. School services in the City are
provided by the Santa Ana Unified School District. The demand for new schools is generally
associated with population increases or impacts on existing schools. The proposed project
would increase the number of children housed at the project site, and therefore would
increase the number of students attending schools. Based on the average family size in the
City of Santa Ana-two parents and 2.72 children-the project is anticipated to generate 103
total children. Census 2000 data indicates there are 127,603 children under the age of 19
living in Santa Ana (U.S. Census Bureau 2000: Matrix P14). Using this information, 86,671
children are considered school age (between the ages of 6 and 19) (U.S. Census Bureau
2000: Matrix P14); this is approximately 68% of the population of children in Santa Ana (U.S.
Census Bureau 2000: Matrix P14). Of the 103 total children assumed to live at the proposed
project site, approximately 70 would attend either elementary, middle, or high school (U.S.
Census Bureau 2000: Matrix P14). The project applicant would be required to pay
development school impact fees to offset the increase in school population that would result
from the proposed project. Impacts would be less than significant after payment of school
impact fees.
PS-1. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant will pay school mitigation fees
based on project student generation rates in compliance with SB 50 and Section
17071.10 of the Education Code. Compliance with the provisions of SB 50 is
deemed to be full and complete mitigation of impacts of a development project
on school facilities.
Parks
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The demand for parks is generally
associated with the increase of housing or population in an area. The proposed project
would increase the population that uses parks, which may increase demand on existing
parks. The project applicant would be required to meet park requirements through the
payment of a parkland acquisition and development fee. The impacts would be less than
significant after payment of park impact.
PS-2. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant will pay a parkland acquisition
and development fee or participation in off-tract park construction to minimize
impacts on existing parks.
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-37
J&S 00635.07
75B-101
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Other Public Facilities
No Impact. The project would not require any other new or altered service facilities. No
impacts would occur.
XIV. Recreation
A. Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. An increase in the use of parks is
generally associated with the increase of housing or population in an area. The increase in
housing provided by the proposed project would increase the population that uses parks,
which may increase demand on existing parks. The increase in population caused by the
proposed project would accelerate the deterioration of existing recreational facilities.
Although onsite recreation facilities would reduce impacts to existing City recreational
facilities, the project applicant would be subject to an acquisition and development fee paid to
the City Parks and Recreation Department. The impacts would be less than significant after
payment of park impact fees or construction of an off tract park (see Mitigation Measure PS-
2).
B. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would replace the existing tilt-up
concrete warehouse with 38 single-family residential units. Associated land use
improvements with those units include landscaping and open recreational areas. It is not
anticipated that the installation of the onsite landscaping and recreational areas would result
in an adverse physical effect on the environment. Impacts associated with these
improvements have been addressed in the respective sections of this Initial Study. Impacts
would be less than significant.
XV. Transportation/Traffic
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The project would result in a change in traffic on the local
roadway network in the vicinity of the project site. The Trip Generation Manual defines the
existing warehouse as a "Light Industrial" use. Light industrial uses usually employ fewer
than 500 persons, with an emphasis on activities other than manufacturing, and typically
have minimal office space (Institute of Transportation Engineers 2003:89). The existing
warehouse currently generates 370 daily trips to the site, including 49 AM peak hour and 52
PM peak hour trips. The proposed project would generate 364 daily trips to the site,
including 29 AM peak hour and 39 PM peak hour trips. This would result in a net decrease of
6 daily trips, 20 AM peak hour, and 13 PM peak hour trips to the site. Therefore,
implementation of the proposed project would not significantly impact local intersections or
roadway segments.
B. No Impact. The Orange County Congestion Management Plan (CMP) states that "a traffic
impact analysis (TIA) will be required for CMP purpose for all proposed developments
generating 2,400 or more daily trips" and that "for developments which will directly access a
CMP Highway System link, the threshold for requiring a TIA should be reduced to 1,600 or
more trips per day" (OCTA 2005:61). The proposed project would access Alton Avenue,
which is not a CMP facility. Furthermore, the proposed project would not produce more than
2,400 daily trips. Therefore, no threshold would be violated and no impact would occur.
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-38
J&S 00635.07
75B-102
i~
~ -~-
- - Environmental Checklist
' For CEQA Compliance
' C. No Impact. The proposed project would not affect air traffic patterns. The project is not
located in the vicinity of an airport or private airstrip, nor would it include any structures that
would extend into the air and affect aircraft circulation. No impacts would occur.
' D. Less Than Significant Impact. As stated in Section XV-A, a significant adverse impact
would not occur at local intersections or roadway segments as a result of the proposed
project. Impacts are considered less than significant.
' E. Less Than Significant Impact. The project would not result in inadequate emergency
access. Additionally, the project would not affect existing emergency access routes. All
appropriate fire and emergency access conditions would be incorporated into the design of
' the project. Prior to final site plan approval, the applicant would submit plans to the
department for review of compliance with applicable fire equipment regulations. Impacts
would be less than significant.
' F. No Impact. For this type of single-family detached residential land use, the City requires 152
parking spaces (MDS Consulting 2007). A single driveway would provide access to the site
via Alton Avenue through a gated entrance. The proposed project would include 76 covered
parking spaces as garages and 54 covered parking spaces as driveways, for a total of 130
' off-street parking spaces (MDS Consulting 2007). Additionally, 23 on-street, uncovered
parking spaces would be designated along the private drive as part of the proposed project
(MDS Consulting 2007). Therefore the proposed project would have a total of 153 parking
' spaces (MDS Consulting 2007). This exceeds the amount of parking required by the City by
one parking space. There would be no impact as a result of inadequate parking capacity.
G. Less Than Significant Impact. The project would not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or
' programs supporting alternative transportation. There is a Class I Bike Lane along Alton
Avenue and no designated bike lane along South Fairview Street per City of Santa Ana
Bikeway Master Plan (City of Santa Ana 2003). The project site is served by the Orange
County Transit Authority (OCTA) bus route #47 and #145 along South Fairview Street (OCTA
' 2006). There are bus stops at the southeast corner and northwest corner of the Alton
Avenue and South Fairview Street intersection (OCTA 2002). Additionally, the project is
within walking distance of a number of retail needs. No significant impacts would occur.
' XVI. Utilities and Service Systems
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located within the service area of the
' Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The project would not exceed
the wastewater treatment requirements of the RWQCB for storm runoff because it would be
required to comply with the RWQCB's objectives, water quality standards, and best
management practice requirements established in the Santa Ana River Basin Plan and
' Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan. The City of Santa Ana Storm Water
Management Program Ordinance (Municipal Code Ch. 18) governs all projects within the City
to comply with the Orange County DAMP and the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control
Board MS4 permit, which is the NPDES permit that governs stormwater discharges into the
public storm system (MDS Consulting 2007:1).
In addition, the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) regulates wastewater treatment for
' the City of Santa Ana. The proposed project would not cause any violation of those standards
set forth by the OCSD. The existing land use currently generates wastewater from the daily
use of the SAUSD facility and has existing sewer ties into Fairview Street. The proposed
' Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-39
J&S 00635.07
75B-103
Environmental Checklist
~~~~~~~ For CEQA Compliance
project would also tie into Fairview Street and would not substantially increase wastewater
compared to the existing warehouse use. Therefore, wastewater treatment requirements
would not be exceeded, and impacts would be less than significant.
B. No Impact. No new or expanded water or wastewater treatment facilities would be required
to accommodate the proposed project. The proposed project would connect to the existing
sewer system at Fairview Street. OCSD, which manages and oversees all wastewater in
Orange County, is expected to be able to accommodate the waste water generated by the
proposed project. No impacts would occur.
C. Less Than Significant Impact. The existing site is mostly impermeable to stormwater due
to the impermeable surfaces on site. Currently, stormwater runoff, as sheet flows, is
conveyed southerly to MacArthur Boulevard and then easterly to a 10-foot by 14-foot
trapezoidal section of the earthen Greenville-Banning Channel (OCFCD Facility Number
D03) (MDS Consulting 2007:7). It is finally discharged into Reach 1 of the Santa Ana River
near the river mouth at the Pacific Ocean (MDS Consulting, 2007:7). Site drainage after
development would be altered. stormwater runoff would be conveyed as sheet flows
northerly to Alton Avenue. However, the City has determined and approved that discharge of
the proposed project's stormwater into the existing 72-inch storm drain in Alton Avenue is
acceptable (MDS Consulting, 2007) and (Chin pers. comm.). Less than significant impacts
would occur.
D. Less Than Significant Impact. Existing water supplies serving the site are sufficient to
meet the needs of the proposed project. The City of Santa Ana is required to evaluate the
appropriate level of water reliability sufficient to meet the needs of its various categories of
customers (e.g., residential, industrial, etc.) within during normal, dry, and continuously dry
years. The California Water Management Planning Act of 1983 requires the City to evaluate
the water supply and demand within its service area in the Urban Water Management Plan
every five years in the years ending in zero and five (City of Santa Ana 2005:1-1 ). The City
receives 36% of its water through water imported by the Metropolitan Water District of
Southern California and 64% of its water from groundwater managed by the Orange County
Water District (City of Santa Ana 2005:2-2). The Urban Water Management Plan uses
historical normal year, wet year, dry year, and then multiple dry and wet years, as well as
water usage over time in the service area, to establish a baseline (City of Santa Ana
2005:4-15). It then evaluates present and future conditions of water reliability in the City (City
of Santa Ana 2005:4-15). The City used 44,920 acre feet of water in 2005 (City of Santa Ana
2005:4-19). This use includes all types of categories of customers, including large industrial
users, municipal uses such as irrigating parks, offices, and residential consumers using water
for drinking and landscaping purposes. Using the 2005 projected City population of 350,625,
this is approximately 0.13 acre feet per resident in 2005, or approximately 42,360 gallons per
resident in 2005 (City of Santa Ana 2005:1-4). The Urban Water Management Plan identifies
that the City's demands for water can be met in average, single dry, and multiple dry years
through the year 2030 based on current and project water supplies and the demands
forecast for normal, a single dry year, and multiple dry year scenarios (City of Santa Ana
2005:4-19). Based on this information and the City's evaluation and planning for reliability of
water supplies, no new or expanded entitlements would be required to serve the project site.
Therefore, less than significant impacts would occur.
E. Less Than Significant Impact. See XVI-B.
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-40
JB.S 00635.07
75B-104
i~
u
i~
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
F. Less Than Significant Impact. The project would generate solid waste as a result of the
proposed residences. A preliminary review of landfills currently serving the project area
shows significant remaining capacity. Santa Ana disposed of a total of 419,794 tons in the
year 2004, at a rate of 2 pounds/resident/day and 12.1 pounds/employee/day (CIWMB 1995).
A study of the area landfills and their remaining capacity is presented in the following table.
Table 3-4. Remaining Capacity of Existing Landfills Serving the Project Area
Remaining Municipal Waste
Closure Capacity (million Contributed by Santa Ana
Landfill Year cubic yards) in Year 2000 (tons)
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 Alpha 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
Recycling Center
Remaining Capacity in System 267.7
Residential municipal solid waste would be generated by the proposed project; however, the
existing land use is already generating municipal solid waste, which must be disposed of in a
landfill. The existing land use supports 70 employees and therefore generates, on average,
847 pounds of solid municipal waste a day (Lopez pers. comm.). The average household
size in. Santa Ana is 4.55 (Census 2000). Assuming each person in a residential unit
' produces 2 pounds of municipal solid waste a day, one single family residential unit within the
proposed project would produce 9.1 pounds of solid municipal waste per day; the proposed
project as a whole would produce, on average, 345.8 pounds of solid municipal waste per
day. Therefore, the proposed project is likely to create less municipal solid waste than the
existing land use. Construction waste generated by the proposed project would result in a
temporary increase in the total construction and demolition waste. As part of demolition of
the existing warehouse, some of the concrete materials would be crushed and reused on site
' for the proposed project. Sufficient capacity remains to accommodate waste generated by
the project. Less than significant impacts would occur.
G. No Impact. The solid waste created by the demolition of the structures would be removed
per local, state, and federal guidelines. No significant impact is anticipated.
' Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-41
J&S 00635.07
75B-105
Environmental Checklist
~•"'•~ For CEQA Compliance
XVII. Mandatory Findings of Significance
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The project area is highly urban in character and does not
contain biological resources that would be affected by the implementation of the project.
Additionally, no cultural resources, either historical or prehistorical, are expected to be
affected by the construction or operation of the project. No significant impacts would occur.
B. Less Than Significant Impact. The project would not result in impacts that are cumulatively
considerable. The City of Santa Ana identified eight individual projects within the general
vicinity of the proposed project. The projects are listed below:
Hutton Center/MacArthur Place South, which includes three projects: Skyline
at Macarthur Place, located at 9 and 15 East Hutton Center Drive; the Montage
at Macarthur Place, located at 1 East Hutton Center and 101 East Sandpointe;
and, Skyline Phase II, located at 10 East Hutton Center Drive Avenue. Skyline at
Macarthur Place involves the construction of two 25-story residential towers
containing 350 condominium units atop amulti-level parking deck. The units will
range in size from 1,000 to 2,400 square feet. Construction is anticipated to take
between 18 and 24 months. Montage at Macarthur Place includes the
construction of 276 for-sale condominiums on this site, located at the southeast
corner of Main Street and MacArthur Boulevard. Finally, Skyline Phase II
includes the construction of a 25-story, 150-unit high-rise condominium project
on this parcel.
^ St. Gertrude Retail, located at 1400 West St. Gertrude Avenue at the southwest
corner of Bristol Street and St. Gertrude Avenue. This development includes a
new two story 8,000 square foot multi-tenant retail building proposed for the
vacant site.
^ Riverview West Marketplace Expansion, located at 3770 West McFadden
Avenue, which includes two new buildings at an existing commercial center: a
4,000 square-foot bank building along McFadden Avenue, and a 1,750 square-
footdrive-through Starbucks on Harbor Boulevard. The Starbucks building has
been completed and the bank is currently under construction.
^ Edinger Avenue Retail, located at 2627 West Edinger Avenue, which includes a
9,000 square foot retail center on a site.
^ Werdin Commercial Center, located at 3200 South Bristol Street. This
project consists of a new 7,100 square foot retail commercial shopping center.
^ John Laing Townhomes, located at 2823 West Edinger Avenue. This project
includes the development of 44 townhomes along 2800-3000 West Edinger
Avenue.
• Implementation of the proposed project has the potential to temporarily increase dust
levels in the project area. The proposed project, in conjunction with those listed above,
would have the potential to contribute to a cumulative impact to air quality in the project
area. The mitigation measure identified in Section III-B would reduce the air quality
impacts associated with the proposed project to a level of less than significant. Air
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-42
J&S 00635.07
75B-106
i~
i~
L
r
i~
i~
i~
i~
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
quality thresholds account for other activity occurring within the region, and the regional
thresholds are used to determine whether individual projects would result in significant
impacts when combined with other activities assumed to occur within the region. Thus,
when individual project impacts fall below regional air quality thresholds, they are
assumed to also be less than cumulatively considerable.
Implementation of the proposed project has the potential to result in the disturbance of
undiscovered cultural resources. In conjunction with the projects listed above, the
proposed project would have the potential to contribute to a cumulative impact to cultural
resources. The mitigation measures identified in Section V-B, and V-D would reduce the
significance of impacts to cultural resources associated with disturbance of an
undiscovered cultural resource. Other projects in the vicinity of the proposed project
would be required to implement similar measures. As such, cumulative impacts
associated with the proposed project would not be cumulatively considerable.
Implementation of the proposed project may result in the disposal of asbestos-containing
building materials, lead based paint, and PCB-containing lighting ballasts. In conjunction
with the projects listed above, the proposed project would have the potential to contribute
to a cumulative impact to hazards and hazardous materials. The mitigation measure
identified in Section VII-A would reduce the significance of impacts associated with
disposal of hazardous materials to aless-than-significant level. Hazardous waste that
may be found at other project sites would be disposed of according to local, state, and
federal requirements. Implementation of the mitigation measure provided as part of the
proposed project and implementation of other safety measures in the cumulative
scenario would reduce cumulative impacts associated with the proposed project to less
than cumulatively considerable levels.
Implementation of the proposed project has the potential to generate stormwater runoff.
In conjunction with the projects listed above, the proposed project has the potential to
contribute to a cumulative impact to hydrology and water quality. The mitigation measure
identified in Section VIII-A would reduce the significance of impacts to hydrology and
water quality to a less than significant level. Other projects in the vicinity of the proposed
project would be required to institute WQMPs and implement BMPs. Implementation of
WQMPs and BMPs in a cumulative scenario would reduce cumulative impacts
associated with the proposed project to less than cumulatively considerable levels.
• Implementation of the proposed project has the potential to expose people to excessive
noise. Implementation of mitigation measures identified in Section XI-A and XI-B would
reduce impacts from noise exposure to aless-than-significant level. Projects in the
vicinity of the proposed project would be required to institute similar measures if they
were found to expose people to excessive noise. Implementation of mitigation measures
' would reduce cumulative impacts associated with the proposed project to a less than
cumulatively considerable levels.
Although the proposed project would result in less-than-significant environmental impacts,
the impacts from the cumulative developments would not be significant when combined with
other cumulative projects. Thus, because there are no significant cumulative impacts,
impacts associated with the proposed project would not be cumulatively considerable.
Alton Court
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration
3-43
August 2007
J8S 00635.07
75B-107
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
C. Less Than Significant Impact. Implementation of the proposed project is not expected to
have environmental impacts that may cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly. There would be no significant impact.
Alton Court August 2007
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration 3-44
J8S 00635.07
75B-108
Chapter 4
Mitigation Monitoring Plan and Report
Introduction
The California Public Resources Code, Section 21081..6, requires that a lead or
responsible agency adopt a mitigation monitoring plan (MMP) when approving
or carrying out a project when a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND)
identifies measures to reduce potential adverse environmental impacts to less-
than-significant levels. As lead agency for the proposed project, the City is
responsible for adoption and implementation. of the MMP.
An IS/MND has been prepared for the project that addresses the potential
environmental impacts, and, where appropriate, recommends measures to
mitigate these impacts. As such, an. MMP is required to ensure that adopted
mitigation measures are successfully implemented. This document plan lists
each mitigation measure, describes the methods for implementation and
verification, and identifies the responsible party or parties.
Project Overview
The project proponent proposes to develop 38 single-family detached residential
units and related improvements on the project site. The project inchides the
construction of private drives, common landscaped areas. a common recreational
area with a pool. and spa, and other residential development improvements.
The proposed physical improvements related to the project include:
^ Development of 38 single-family detached residential units (4.3 acres)
^ Realignment and/or closure of existing driveways and new on-site parking.
^ Landscaping improvements and open space (0.2 acres).
^ Common. recreational. area (0.1.4 acres).
^ lmprovements to Alton Avenue and South Fairview Street (1.39 acres)
Additional details regarding the project description are contained in Chapter 2,
"Project Description."
i~
i~
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 4-1
J&S 00635.07
75B-109
City of Santa Ana
Chapter 4. Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Monitoring and Reporting Procedures
The l~tMP for the proposed project will be in place through all phases of the
project, including design, construction, and operation. The City will be
responsible for administering the MMP and ensuring that all parties comply with
its provisions. The City may delegate monitoring activities to staff, consultants,
or contractors. The City will also ensure that monitoring is documented tlu•ough
periodic reports and that deficiencies are promptly corrected. The designated.
environmental monitor will track and document compliance with mitigation
measures, note any problems that may result, and take appropriate action to
rectify problems.
Mitigation Monitoring Plan Implementation
Table 4-1 lists, by resource area, each mitigation measure inchtded in the draft
IS,'MND. Certain inspections and reports may require preparation by qualified
individuals and these are specified as needed. The timing and method of
verification for each measure is also specified.
Alton Court
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 4_2
August 2007
J85 00635.07
75B-110
H
~W
w
rl
O
~I
Q
O
~I
~~
V
ICI
L
+
r~
~ V
O
~
' ~
Q~ U
c_c
C ~ ~=.,
~ 4N '> U:
~ ~ O ~
a
~'~ ~
~
'~ ~ ~
`-'
.~ C
.C ~ p
LL ~ C ~
w ~ ~ U
~
~ ~- N +`-~
o -o ~
c~~
O O ~
O
~
C U C ~_+
~ C C
n O
'O
Q ...
O
C N N
O ~ ~ ~
~
Q
y- L
N
'" ~ C
` c
oY ~
~ ~ °
O o
w O .«.
U N
tf~
~ y C
OU
~
C ~ >
Q io
c
.
~ a
n- C .U
O
N ~ O ~
aQ ~
C C O
~ ~ rnU
C Q
(0 •~
~
O ~- O
C/) L.L.. .C
~ O O
.,-
O
~,
" ~
Q
~ ~
~. ~ o
I~
N 0
N
rf
"
U 'p O
~ c .~ t~
~ O
~n
Ql - (0 w'
~ ~ N O
d N
w
C
N _
~ ' d0'
' ~
~ " 07
N O
y~ O N O
.~ ~ 3 E C ~
(n O ~ O
- C4 ~
~ 7 U
~
~ ~
' U C6
'O .C C O
•C U
O
~ C +-~ "O
L
f0 N O
s
~ O O
tLp O O
O ~-
o O °-'c O ~
t
N N ~ O
~
O
M -o p ca ~ Y
c~ o a ~
o m ~ ~
c
O ~
O Q-~ ~ ~
> a
U
O O O U cn .. ..
m
O
~ °- w ~~ ~
~ ~ v ~ O
Z O
Z
Q- O N ~ m W W
~
L v :D o `a"
~~ n. G ~ Z
QO z
O
~ ca o ~ -O . o ca = ~ _
p~v~ 0.. C N ~
C CO.
O Nd
V~
~ .A
Z O h
Y p' J
~W O J
W
C
~Z D
~
~ ~ a-
s ~ =
'~
¢o r
a_ a, .-, ~
z ~
z
t= ~s~
~;_, ~
UO
cn ~
CO
~
~ U ~ ~ .,r ~~° ~~ ~
~
z~ ~ za a
~ ~
o F.:
UU~~ U~~ ~ C7V QU
W W O a.
W N
0
a Q
V Q
~~ ~
a~
--
~'co ~
w0
ao
aa.5 a-v~(~ JC3 Qc~
C
co
n.
C
`o
C
O
t0
7
~'
d
H
d
V
ftS
::i
d
U ~,
O L
O ~
U a
A
~ ~ ~ "" U
U
^. ~
i
O ~ Cv ~ cs ~ ~ c
s Q
~, r'.
~ O Q~ C/I ^A
w ~.. f
J V~ aA GA
". ~
4-~ C
.'
~ am
~
Ua,f~ ~ ~
Uwq
i. C
~ C ~ ~ O
~ ~ ~Lr ~ p •O
= :JJ C O
~ O
~ C ~ ,
,
~ `° ~ ~ `
° C
~ ~
~
n
CA ~ ~
:.A G
~+
O . „
6~
4: ~ ~ v O ~~ s0. O
,
~ ~ ti ~ w ~ O p ~
Q. c~ O ~
~ O ~ CUfi > cY3
,
~ U ~ ~ c~ ,~~' y ~
o ~ °
. ~. ~ 3,Y ~
'
cat v :n > cc ~ ~ ~ ~
N aT :.~
~
U
~ ~
y cn cS
C O N ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ ;J J3 ~
~ O ~ v: ~ ~ y p .'O,
'~
~
~ E..y ~ ~
U i.. ~ ~ ~ ~ U
~' ^ 1C ~ ~ s.a ..C p
'-'
W ~ O
v ~
p 0
y ,~ ~
b0
N
' ~
'
O ~ ~ ~
~
•,
p ,+
¢~
a ,^~ CC3 U
Q~~°~~~~
,
~ ~
~° ~' d ~ ~
~ d d U U
75B-111
~ o
J ~p
0
5 ~J7
n w
M
v
c
0
.~
m
N
0
m
z
d
m
a
c
0
.~
0
0
.~
_~
v
n
L
v
c
Q
C
0
T
U
v
C
is
::'
O
U rn
x
O s
.
o cv
~
v y
~"
t~
•
~ ~
Q
.~
r~
~ ~'
.., d ~
•~
o ~
'~"' y
~ ~ ~
~ d
O
~ .. tli
.
' O Q c3
~ G
~'
a ~, ~ :~
Y
U a fr
s. ~
0 c
a
'
~ ~,~ own
~ o
~ ~ ~
~ ~ •~ ~
~ ~
~ ~ -d
F~ ~ Q ~ ~.
~, ~
0 o Y b ~ a~ ~, a~ ~, • ~ • ~, . ~ „ o .~ a~ o 0 0 ~ ~
a .~
Y
~ 4~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~
~' ~
~ 3 0 ~ ~
•
`U' ~~
3
~ ,
o 'C ~ .
cs Y
~
~ ~ ~
~ ,
' a~ ~
.~ O ~.... rn Q~ ~
~. ~, O ~
cn v o v ~- Q, cn
~
O v ,~ O v, y ~ ~ ccs Y C
~' d TS ~ ~ ~.~ O
co z. ~ ~ ~ ' ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ' j U ~ O ~ v
V Q j "C) S'..' rf,a ~
C, c3 ~ ~ ~ G
~ M
p `~ .~-~
O
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~-o~ o ~ ~
O (~
~ O v ~ G .r p , ' Y ~',~ 3
c~., ~ ,~ ~ ~-' ~ o'er
O y ~ o
~ ~' ~ ~
~ ~ oz
~,
~ ~ ~
'C O ~ +~ ~' '
ti ~ ~ ~ ~ O 'C ~ O
O =
0 cA
c
3 O
~ >, sU• ~ ~ U ~ ~
,t. 'C3 O N
~ '~ ~
~
~ a
i
~ ~ ~
y ,
~,
YC
f
' N ~
~'" O '
.
.
~
U N
O
~ c3
N
U .
O N
~ c
•
~ ~ N +
' y
~
cC .'" ~ ~."
v ' ~ ~ ~ ~
.~
d
;~ ~ 3 ~ W ~ O C
a~ ~ ~
a ~ ~ v ~ ~
U ~ >
~ a~ ~ o ~ ~ q ~ O ~
~ o U ~ ~
, ~s
,
~ ~ . ~ ~s . ~ ~ ~
a~ . .
~~
O
ti
o
o
N io
o°
m
~ ~
m ro
Q
v
c
0
U
a~
m
d
Z
w
_m
.C T
7 ~
U~
c ~
o ;.,
Q C
75B-112
N
a
O7
C
O
.C
O
C
O
.m
_m
v
n
ca
t
U
u
C
so
r y
4~.f,
O L
O
'`+ y
u ~"
t,:.
L y
G> ~.+
~/ ^
CC
.,..i
r.+
.~
d ~
~ ~
~L
~ O
C
G. C
~ O
w `~ ~
a>~•~
~ ~ $
a~
G~ ~ o
H ~ ~
O
CC
W
O
•%+
bA
Ui
~ O ~ c~C ~
v~ 3 ~ ~ an bn
w~~ ~~.
va¢ vat
0
0
.~
o,
o
~; ~ ~
bq ~ ~ > o
an
.
~ '
~ a o
,
Q -o n, ~ ~., -°'u-
~ ~ .~ ,? ~ .~ ~ •~ ~ ~ ~ ~ bra bn y ~ -v ~ ° ~ ~ :n ~ c ~ -o ~
y ~ 'd O ~= O Fes, ..,°~., X > ~ ,~ ,~ 'd ' ~ .~ '' ~ ~ .~ v `~ ' ~ • ~ . ~ ~
~ 'b
O j ~' s`i', O ~ c~3 ~ Q: ~ N as O ~ bG ~ b1) „3 u cC by ~'' O
O 4-~
U ° U U ° Z ~ ° ~ Z '~.' -~ ~ H cc ~ Q ~ °~' ~ °~' ~ ~° °~' cis o ~ d ~, ~ :~
c~ c~
"C .~
.° O ~ '
m
.
m
c
m
~ O
' `o Z
y
U
1
75B-113
r' o
O ~
o ~,
N co
0
7 N
~ ~
7
Q
v
0
ca
aUi
D
o~
z
_o,
C ~'
~~
o w
U~
c ~
o ,,
Q ~
m
0
.~
0
c
0
m
v
n
U
Q
C
(0
O
T
U
V
G
e~
'~
O
U
o ~
O CS
~
C~ a
u
tp
.~ ~.+
:es
A
'~
'~
~~
~..a
a~ ~
;a .~
Vi ~+ U
' y
~
C
.
~
~ O Q
O
C
~ ~ .~
~
r
~
~ O
(~
~ ~
~. o
c
~ ~ ~ 3
o ~
~'
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ 0 3 U
3
' Q
y ~
~ ~, ~
¢- v ~ .~ •~ .~ ~ ~ o •~. _ u x ° ~ o " d ~ own ~
O '? "~ ~ ~ N :'U ~ T ~. ~ ~ ~ `n N v cd N > b ~ cS U
U ~ b!J ~ U N O •~'
oo
~ ~ va •~ ~ r ~ 3 ~ ~v x ~ ~ • s o ° ~ ~ ~ U
~
~
Y '/] ~i W U i-. ~ ~y O N ~~+ Sri CI~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ w 'N
?-1'/J
~ ~ O
~ O ~ ° r~+ Z
'
C/~ U ^C3 ~ ~ y.y
3
°
~ Q v, ~ a1 ~ Lia ~ ~ ~ U Tl ° 4-~
'Cy Ll
~ 0 ~ V O
~ 3 Z 'b ~
tom. N ~,
~ c3 Q
f3
• ~ 4-a
s
O
6
..i
v rn y ,
4-. t .--~ .
~
. .
+- .
c
0
.~
m
z
r
cm
G
T
f0
75B-114
a
m
`o
.~
0
0
a~
v
n
t
U
a
c6
0
U
v
C
ens
::
O
U
o i
O
~ a
~
i
6> y
~+
A
ee
..„
~.
.~
c
a~ ~ ~
~
~
;n ...
[ c ~
~ ~b ~'
~
a
~ d
~
.
Vl O Q ~ ~ ~
:
ti
a ~ ~~ r-1
O°
•~i
1
/l ti
~ •
rMM~
^^
F+~4 W
O
~I
+~ O ~
~~ ~ ~-F-I
O
v
~ J
~
-, _
~
°
CG
~~ ~
a .~
N ~ .D ca P"' .b~A .._. 'C ~ U ^~ :~ ~ O ,O /y^~ ~j e~ e~ 'C7 4-' O c~ ~ °
o ~ ~3 d '~ o -~ ~° o .~ a~ ,fl a ~3 ~ ~' ~ .o ~° ~ o
. a~ R, .:G 'C3 5 ~ ^'
°J bA ~ ^° Ri 'C~ ~ c~-S ~ ~
^, "G ~ • ~ O -O ~ ~ v:
ro 'C3 ~ as
o
C ~ ..n y ~ ..d
U ~ ~ o ,~ ~ U cs
o o
~ ~ o ..~
~
CU .ti ~ ~
O
' .y
~
O U
O ~ ~ n O a +"' v,
Or w U .
~ ~ ,n
~
U _ U
'
: ~
• O
~
sue
K O
' ~-. ai
~
='
'
~ U
~ v
cn ' y ~, ~ ~ ,~~
~ ~ p cS
cG N y~j : :> ._ '- CD
U ^ O
O N
~
I~
0
(°_
0
~~ ~
im m
~IQ
0
.~
U
N
0
m
m
a~
Z
m
~ T
~ ~
J ~
c ~
o w,
QS
75B-115
m
a
m
c
0
.~
0
c
0
.~
_~
g
v
a~
n
U
a
m
m
0
a
U
v
teS
::
O
U
o ue
s
.
o :C
E
u C"
Cam,
•
~ ~
A
~
.
eas
'w:
'
~
.~ C ~
..~ ~ ~
~ ~ ,~ ~
~ ca Q ~ ~ ~
~ ~ d ~ ~ an
~ d
y
c :
CL C O
v~ ~ v~ ~w ao v~ on on ~
v~ =~ an
a o.~ ~ ~ ~b ~~~~ ~~
~
Ua,Q Ua,cs~ Uam Uac1~
i, p o 0 0
0 c
`'" ~ ~
~ ee s,
o
• ~
~ ~ 0
~ O •~,
0
' ~
0
' ~.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ b
r ~
dl .
~
~ ~ U O
C
bfJ ~ s"' v
O, ~ Q U O
~ ~ ~ U O
GU
~
H F~ ~ Q b L:
~ Q . ~ c03 c~
Q 'd C1 , cC
Q 'J O
. , .
~ 3 ~ c.
a cn
°
°
° a
o -
~, ~ ~ ~,
~, - ~
c
, ~
~ d
~ o ~
Y ~ •
~ ~ ~ ~ _ y ~
. ~ ,~
, y
~
O 'O ~ ~ ~
.....1 r~
~ ~ U ~ ~-1 ~
' .
'
1
U O
ri. ~ ,,. ~ O O ~
v~
~ ~~ ~
,,, a , ~
5 , ~' .p ~
^
N
~
~
1
~ .~ a~ ~, ~ ~ . ~ a ~ o ~ ~. 3 o a~ ~ ~ ~ 3 :n
~ b 3 ~
~ ~ ~
n
Z ~ d ~ 3 ' ~ o o ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~..'' G 3
~
~ .
..
0
O ~
^o i
o' ~ ~ N M
z
j~' p ~-, z
r`~
0
.~
aUi
0
Z
w
~,
75B-116
a
m
c
0
c
0
c
0
m
m
V
n
U
m
Q
m
c
m
0
T
U
U
C
CAS
O
U ~
:., ~'
O
O ~
CC
G
C,:.
•
~ ~
:C
Q
CC
~C
~ bA ~ T C T ~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ T C
,~ [ d ~ ~ ~ d ~ d ~ ¢ ~ d ~ d
~ i, U
. Y b CA ~ b N
CA cs Z3 ~
CA c3 ^O 'v
bA
+•~ y ^G O ~ b y
Cf1 ~' 'L3
+~
+
O. O
O ^ cv ~ ca Q G
~ cct Q ^
~ cC ~ G
~ cC Q G
~ cC Q ~ ai ¢ ~
~ c3
Cr C V] dA bA V: CA Gq V] GA r,A C/: bA bA :/~ bA ~ C/~ bA "A ~ "
Uaq Uaq Uaq Ua.q Ua;g Ua.q U~
t, ~
~ .., cw d o bn ~ O bn a an ~ o ~ d o cp ~ o ~ c
.y ~ ~.I
i,
Y ~i 0
• ~ O "
• NI ~ ~i C ~ G ~ ~i ~ •~--~
• ~ Q
•
Y
M
~ ~ O ~
~
~ ce
~
ce ~
~
L ~
~
L ~
~
~ am
~
~ CS
~
i
+ i
+ i
-. i
. 5
.
. 5
. t
-i L
. I
. S
.
G
6~ %A ~ O ~~ ~ O ~~ ~ O ~~ y O ~ ~ '
J ~ ice-, O ..A ~
~~ G G G G G
H Q v, «S RS
Q Q v; cC Q /? CCS ~ U CC Q v? cs Q ;n
G ~ .~ ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ o ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ •U
~o ~ '~ ° o ~ °' ~ o ~ ~ ° ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ 3 ~
c r ~ v ~ ~ ~ ~ G v ~ ~ ~ • T~
~ ~ j GJ G. 'C7
~
~ G G ~ RS ~ ~' U • ~ i C •`+ bA ~ ~ ~ ~ C': •`~.
A
~•' ~
'
CC U ~ ~
O ._, G O G
~ b co O G c3
U O ~ O
,., ,_, '^.~ ~
yy ~
.y ?
•in c3
G r
" 4.
N i.
y ~ tr, ~ ~ v ~ ~
~
~ G ~
.~, rn s.. ~ bA cs f1, "
~ ai G~ O
L:. ~ s., CJ ' ~ ~ ~ 'L7 v
s.., a~ G y c3 ^c3 y O
~ `~ ~
o ~ o
• m ~ ~ ~ ~ c~ ~
. • o -c ,.~ ~ *~ ~ ~
a~ . ~ o ~
o ~ ~ ~. ~; ~ ~ v r o bA o .~ ~ .fl ~ ~ ~ o
~
~ ~ ~ •O ~ ~ ~
~ U
• ~
~ ~ ~ •
~ N ` ~ N CS Y ~
~". v
vim C V
.: ~
., e~ ,•"
''~ c'3 :'U '
F.
y . ~ O U
y bA .~ ~
~ .~ ,
.
r+ ~ .~~~., y cGi, ~ i
O ~
~ .--. G O G O O,, CA .,~ ~ Y N ~ G ~ N > G O '^ .G `> ''" ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~
~
~
~n
~o
r~
x
o~ O
~,
z z z z z z z z
0
~ m
o~ w
Q
rn
v
c
0
.~
m
U
N
0
d
Z
co
o~
~ T
~ ~
U~
~~
O. ;..,
a`s
75B-117
m
~o
.~
0
C
O
m
V
N
a
L
U
a`
m
c
(n
0
V
C!J
0
U ~
O C!3
++
Rt
u
w
~:
A
...
...,
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ T ~ T ~ T
o ~ a~ d ~ ~ Q ~ ~ Q ~ ~ d ~ ~ d ~ ~ Q
GZr C'.
~ O Q C1J V] ~ bq
C ~
4 V] Gq bA
c
~ C C/~ bA Cp
L." G
w
" C/~ Cq bA
C ~ V] bq "D
~ C
~ a , ,..,
, .
, 4-. 4..
t~ Ua,W Un.q Uaq Uwe Ua W
s. ~' 0 0 0 0 0
0 c
~ +
~
O
O
+
~
_ O G O O
~~~ J ~ fl, ~ ~. ~ G. ~ !1 ~ a.
~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ V ~ ~
U
~f'. Q ~ C ~
r'~ '
; a2
; cG
c3 ^. C' V
~
cG ~ ~ ~
ca y ~
a> o cu ~ 'c ~
~ ~
~
E
M~1. cC ~•-~ b f., ai ~ 'LS ~. c3 .Q b Cl. aS Q 'L3 ~. Ri Q 'tJ A.
~ ~' ~ bn bA O
~ -C .~ ~ N
s..
3 C
' ~ ~
~ 'G ~ ~ A "
l O ~ . ~ ~ cs ~ GD
.-a
~
3
~'
Y
O . ~ 0
~ ~ ~ y p ~ ~
~ ~ y a
~. N ~
~ ~
~
a~ U r-. U
.~''-~ ~
_ ~ ~ ~ v~
_ Q Q .. ~ N Y
~-I _
•
`~ ~ ~O o O ~ r-+ ~ b4 v~ I O N 'n v c3 a+ ~ ~Oy ~, ~
S~, C> ^.y~
~' ~ y Q, ~ 4-. :~ ~ ~? y o ~n ~ cis ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ °~ ~ ~ ~ `" -°'o
o a, ~ ~ o ~ ~ 3 ; o ~ ~ ~ ~
'o ~, ~ ~, '' a ~'a o' '.J' ~,
~ s~; ~ o ~ ~
- ,. ~ 4, c~ p ~ ~ ~
a
~ ~
h ~ ~
F~ ,~
H Q ~3 ~ ~
F w ~ ~ ~ GO
-
c
s ~ w v ~.. •., ,
w o ,~ v .o cn a. ~, ~ as
o
p N
~ M ~t
~ vi
z z z z z
C
O
rn
z
m
>.
75B-118
ca
4.
m
_O
C
O
C
O
o~
n
s
U
1
1
~,
m
Q
m
c
0
_~
1 ~
U
u
C
ea
0
U
~ ~
O L
O CIY
u ~
~"
C~
•
~
R
A
.
[
'~
~
[ V
Q ~. V
Q G
~ C ~
~
' ccf 'J ^„UA
~
' ~ ~ CA
O .i ~
.
"' ~ c~ Q
., ~ ccs
~ C Q 4, G ~ ~..,
~ Y ~.~
J
MM
J QI W MM
U Q W
w ~ .-.
~
a~
~.. _
~ ~
.a a~
~ ~ ~ ;~ o. ~
O ~
~ ~
Gz., ~.
a~ ~ "'
~ cs
:,,n > p 'L7 vi
~ ..O
Q v" c. ~ a o p,
.ty ~ ~ n, o -a
N O Q~~~
~ u b ,-: ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ +~
O N~~~ U ~" .^ ~ y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
O O O .~ O
_ ~ _ u ~ ~
~ Q
o ~ 3 ~ o ~ o ~ ~ c ~ ~~
o n ~ o
~ ~ r
n ~ ~ v .~
.r
~
~n o .
} ~
y ~
~
. .
L' -' a~ ' ~ • ~ a~ ~ ~ c . g o ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ c o O •„ ~,
~ ~ ~ ~ _ ti o ~ x • ~ 3 • tit ~ .~ y
y °~ '~ .~ ° ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
`~ . ~ ~
~ 3 4:..i ~ -b ~ co ~ w .~ ~= ~ z ~ y ~> .~ o '~:. -o v W
"' >
~ on ~ °~' c, ~ ~ ~. ° ~ °o ~ ~ ~ H on ~ ~' 3 ~ ~ ~ 3
s
i,
~ ~
~ N O •~ Ri
o O ~.
y y ~-• 4--~ ~ G vs -d Q
S ~ ~ ~
><
~ ~ O
U O
.~ ~ O ~ ~ .d ~ ~. w. ~ O ~ U bfJ a
rn J O ~ U ~, ~ U O ~
rn 4. ~ .~ .~ c~ t~. N Ll, q 'O N Li, .'~-. . ~ ~ > Q~ ~ Q~ Q cC '3 ~ ~
^,. ~ 4y s~-~ v b
,
i
t
v
~
O
~
:~ _
~
;~ ~ a
n ~
o
o
N c`yo
°o
N
7 N
O~ ~
Q
i
0
.~
a
D)
Z
v
m
m
_~
~~
~~
o
v cn
~~
o ;-,
Q C
~ 75B-119
a
c
0
.~
0
c
a
.~
v
N
a
m
r
U
m
m
C
0
T
U
61
U
G
CC
O
U ~
O "k
s
.~
O CC
u ~''
•~
:et
A
s
..,
.
~
~ nn
~ ~ ~
¢ U
Q ^ y ~ Q~
O y
O ~
~ ~ ti
~~!-i
~
a ^b
~
y ~ ~~
~a~
o°
~
~ ~ U
'+"' C
~ Rs
~
Cr3 y .
.
L bA
.
zl ~ O
~ n~ o -d Y
•
O ~
~
~
O ~ ;~
O v
'~ ~s
v
~
O ~
~ .~
~
a. ~
~
y
LI Y
~ ~~•i
.~ ~
u,
o
~
~ y ~ y
O -d ~ 4y
~
GA as
~ ~.~
v~
J ~
1
~ N
O
Y .
~ 3-.
~ ~
~ "
^
J]
U ~ ~
~ O
"" y C
'
~~ .
~ ~
~ o ~ -cs ' k
-- o
o ~ ,~ v
~ o
~ H
N
~ ~
G.
i
0
i m
0
.~
m
U
d
m
z
m
_~
T
(0
75B-120
Chapter 5
References
Printed References
Airport Land Use Commission. 2002. Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John
Wayne Airport. John Wayne Airport Impact Zones: Appendix D.
Associated Soils Engineering. 2006. Report of Geotechnical Exploration Report
Proposed Residential Development Southeast Corner of Fairview Street and
Alton Avenue, Santa Ana, California. January 31, 2006.
California Department of Conservation, California Geologic Survey. 2006.
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones. Last updated: January 29, 2007.
Available: <http://www.consrv.ca.gov/CGS/rghm/ap/index.htm>. Accessed:
June 28, 2007.
California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection,
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. 2006. Important Farmland in
California, 2004.
California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection,
Williamson Act Program. 2006. Agricultural Preserves 2004. Last updated:
December 21, 2006. Available:
<http://www.consrv.ca.gov/DLRP/lca/index.htm>. Accessed: June 27, 2007.
City of Santa Ana Police Department. 2007. SAPD Locations and Business
Hours. Available: <http://www.ci.Santa-ana.ca.us/pd/generalinfo.asp>.
Accessed: July 2, 2007.
City of Santa Ana. 1998. General Plan. Land Use Element. Adopted February
2, 1998.
City of Santa Ana. 2003. Bikeways Master Plan.
City of Santa Ana. 2005a. Urban Water Management Plan. November 7, 2005.
City of Santa Ana. 2005b. Zoning District Map.
CIWMB. 1995. Jurisdiction Profile Overview -Waste Stream Profile.
Jurisdiction Profile for the City of Santa Ana. Last updated: 2007.
Available: <http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov>. Accessed: March 23, 2007
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 5-1
75B-121
J&S 00635.07
City of Santa Ana Chapter 5. References
Institute of Transportation Engineers. 2003. Trip Generation Manual. 7`t'
Edition, Vol 2 of 3.
MDS Consulting. 2007. Parking Plan. Apri124, 2007.
MDS, Consulting. 2007. Tract No. 17071 Alton Avenue Storm Drain
Hydrology & Hydraulics Study. January 11, 2007.
MDS, Consulting. 2007. Tract No. 17071 Water Quality Management Plan.
April 18, 2007.
Mestre Greve Associates. 2007. Noise Assessment for Alton Court City of
Santa Ana. June 19, 2007.
OCTA. 2002. City of Santa Ana Bus Stops. September 2002.
OCTA. 2005. Orange County Congestion Management Plan.
OCTA. 2006. Bus System Map.
Orange County Fire Authority. 2007. Orange County, CA Fire Stations.
Available: <http://ocfa.know-where.com/ocfa/>. Accessed: July 2, 2007.
SCAQMD (South Coast Air Quality Management District). 1985. Rule 1108
Cutback Asphalt. Adopted May 4, 1979. Amended February 1, 1985.
SCAQMD. 1993. CEQA Air Quality Handbook.
SCAQMD. 2003. Air Quality Management Plan. August 1, 2003.
SCAQMD. 2005. Rule 403 Fugitive Dust. Adopted May 7, 1976. Amended
June 3, 2005.
SCAQMD. 2006. Rule 1113 Architectural Coatings. Adopted September 2,
1977. Amended June 9, 2006.
TRC. 2006. Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessment Report for the
Property at 3321 South Fairview Street Santa Ana, California. January 4,
2006.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District. 2004.
U.S. Census Bureau. 2000. Census 2000 Summary File 1, Matrices H3, H4, H5,
H6, H7, and H 16.
U.S. Census Bureau. 2000. Census 2000 Summary File 1, Matrix P14.
U.S. Census Bureau. 2000. Census 2000 Summary File 1, Matrix QT-P10:
Households and Families 100 Percent Data.
Alton Court August 2007
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 5.2
JRS 00635.07
75B-122
City of Santa Ana Chapter 5. References
Waste Management of Orange County. 2007. Keeping Orange County Clean.
Available: <http:/1www.wmorangecounty.com/glossary.asp>. Accessed:
July 12, 2007.
Personal Communication
Chin, Harry. City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency. January 16,
2007~mai1 to Nguyen, Dylan. MDS Consulting.
Dix, Susan. Dispatcher 383. City of Santa Ana Fire Department. July 13, 2007-
phone conversation.
Lopez, Maria. Facilities Planner. Santa Ana Unified School District. July 16 and
18, 2007-phone conversation and voicemail.
Alton Court August 2007
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration 5-3
J&S 00635.07
75B-123
75B-124
Chapter 6
List of Preparers
City of Santa Ana
Senior Planner
Jones & Stokes
Project Director
Project Coordinator
Air Quality
Graphics
Editing and Production
Vince Fregoso
Chad Beckstrom, AICP
Nicole Breznock
Victor Ortiz
Soraya Mustain
Mindy Higginson
Alton Court
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 6-1
August 2007
J&S 00635.07
75B-125
75B-126
ORDINANCE NO. NS-~CXX
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA ANA ADOPTING SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT NO. 81
(SD-81) AND REZONING THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT
3321 SOUTH FAIRVIEW STREET FROM ARTERIAL
COMMERCIAL (C5) TO SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT NO. 81
(SD-80) (AA NO.2007-02)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana does hereby find, determine
and declare as follows:
A. Applicant is requesting approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2007-37;
Amendment Application No. 2007-02 rezoning the property from Arterial
Commercial (C5) to Specific Development No. 81; Tentative Tract Map No.
2007-04 (County Map No. 17071) as conditioned to subdivide a lot into 9
parcels (six buildable lots and three open space parcels); and adopt a
resolution approving Site Plan Review No. 2007-02 as conditioned for the
property located at 3321 South Fairview Street.
B. On September 10, 2007, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed
public hearing and voted 5:0 (Gartner and Leo absent) to recommend that
the City Council:
1. Approve and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation
Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2007-37.
2. Adopt an ordinance approving Amendment Application No. 2007-02
and Specific Development No. 81.
3. Adopt a resolution approving Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04
(County Map No. 17071) as conditioned.
4. Adopt a resolution approving Site Plan Review No. 2007-02 as
conditioned.
C. The Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program,
Environmental Review No. 2007-37; Amendment Application No. 2007-02
and Specific Development No. 81; Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04
(County Map No. 17071); and Site Plan Review No. 2007-02 came before
75B-127
the City Council of the City of Santa Ana for a public hearing October 1,
2007, and at that time considered all testimony, written and oral.
D. Amendment Application No. 2007-02 has been filed with the City of Santa
Ana to adopt Specific Development No. 81 (SD-81) and to rezone the
property located at 3321 South Fairview Street from Arterial Commercial
(C5) to Specific Development No. 81 (SD-81 ). (AA No. 2007-02)
E. SD-81 would allow no more than nine (9) one-family dwellings, having four
or fewer bedrooms per one-family dwelling; a temporary real estate office;
accessory building and structures (over fifteen feet in height requires a
Conditional Use Permit); child care facilities providing care to not more than
fourteen children; and garages for four or more vehicles (with a Conditional
Use Permit).
F. Amendment Application No. 2007-02 is consistent with the General Plan,
including but not limited to its goals and policies:
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.
G. The City Council has weighed and balanced the general plan's policies and
has determined that based upon this balancing that the project at 3321
South Fairview Street is consistent with the purpose of the general plan.
H. The City Council also adopts as findings all facts presented in the Requests
for Council Action dated October 1, 2007 accompanying this matter. For
these reasons, and each of them, Amendment Application No. 2007-02 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.
The resolution approving and adopting the amended Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for Environmental Review
No. 2007-37 which came before the City Council on October 1, 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 3321 South Fairview Street is hereby
reclassified from Arterial Commercial (C5) to Specific Development No. 81 (SD-81).
(AA No. 2007-02) Amended Sectional District Map number 27-5-10 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.
75B-128
Section 3. Specific Development No. 81 (SD-81) 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 any one 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
AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers
75B-129
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
75B-130
Lily of NLINE LOT.VTR 9561
Fo un la in Valley
22-510 22-5-10
~'0 l
~~
VEND DNA. M1
Mi
/NINE LOT]t TN. 1561
I
Mi I
~ ~Z S 10i ~ z~5-1°
t
E I
o
M1 M1
M1
26-s-16
M1 - ~ M1 N _
C4
,_____
~ ,_
1,61
~ M1 13
R2-PRD
WARNER Av. M1 1
I`_ ~ ,` I
-~
_
_ ~ '
'~ uc-,.--sw~
AY. M1 ~
~
Mi RAl AV.
R1 0
~
G M1 R4 R
J M1 M1 ADAM sr R1
1./~
W MAN V AV
R1
M1
mz`
~' I
~i NI
SEGERSTROM AV.
y I
~ i-_ ~~
'
W
o i
~ i~
.-~1~
I
M1 it I LI R4
u
M1 LI
„2b
M1
M1
M1
~ Al
w W
D
~ e p ¢
J
~ ~° .~ _
a
"
m M1 eo6r
P Z
MO RE NI p W
= 9a6-~
R2-PR
c
~
~
~
so M1
C Mi
'~" ~
, ~ ii~ii C'3
Mi
~ ~Iw~~ R2-PRD
265-10 P
N ,~
7 F\N\j.\ C u
SD-81 I
I il
I~ ouRl AVI
6 Mi \``
~ `
II
R2-PRD 26-5-10
33-5-10 34-610 VO ~ 3 ~3]e.
I NORTH tINE LOr SECTION 31-SID ~«3)3'5e 35-5-10
I
1 34-5-10
II
/~
/~
SCAL1= IN FEET
SECTIONAL DISTRICT MAP 27-5-10
~ ~ , ADOPTED BY THE SANTA ANA CITY COUNCIL, AUGUST 17, 1959 BY ORDINANCE NS-394 ° 1000
60- MINIMUM FRONTAGE
-ROOD MINIMUM LOT AREA
Al GENERAL AGRICULTURAL C-SM SOUTH MAIN STREET COMM ERCIAL DISTRICT PD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
-B PARKING MODIFICATION -F FLOOR AREA RATIO PRD PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THIS MAP IS THE OFFICIrLL SecnoNAL
C7 COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL GC GOVERNMENT CENTER Ri SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT MAP OFTHE CfTV OF SANTAANA.
C1-MD COMMUNITV COMMERCIAL-MUSEUM DISTRICT M7 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL R2 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENCE As AUTHORIZED ev crrv coueclL
RESOLVTION N0. )4163, DATED 11-18-)6, I
C2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL M2 HEAVY INDUSTRIAL R3 MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE HEREBY ATTEST THAT THIS MAP ISATRVE
C3
CENTRAL BUSINESS
MO
MILITARY OPERATIONS
R4
SUBURBAN APARTMENT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SECTIONAL DISTRICT
MAP N0.21310.
C3-A CENTRAL BUSINESS-ARTISTS' VILLAGE O OPEN SPACE RE RESIDENTIAL ESTATE sign
C4 PLANNED SHOPPING CENTER -OZ OVERLAY ZONE SD SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT JAYTREVINO
CS
ARTERIAL COMMERCIAL
P
PROFESSIONAL
SP
SPECIFIC PLAN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
PwININC6BUIIDND ADENCv
CR COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL PCD PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT cenrtKale Date
RES. / A A. / AN%. NO.
ORD. /RES. N0.
ADOPTED DATE
PES. /A.A / ANX. NO.
ORD. /RES. N0.
ADOPTED DATE
RES./A.A./ANX. NO. 5233 5459 5692 ....... 5942 5913 6006 6008 AA]02 A.A. ]48 A.A. ]56 A.A. ]59 A.A. )60 AA. )64 A.A. 1066 AA. 993 A.A. O]-2
ORD.I RES. NO. NSJ29 NS]13 NS512 NS619 NS-105] NS1056 NS1138 NS-1140 NS-1315 NS1339 NS-1349 NS1361 NS-1362 NS-1366 NS2216 NS-2306 Pentling
ADOPTED DATE 2-160 10.360 4331 9-1631 1130.10 1130-]0 93]2 95-]2 &16-]6 12-20-]fi &)-P 5~4T/ 624-]) 524-'!] 2-2-91 fi-]-99
. • , ~ ~ , •
PREPARED BY THE PLANNING DIVISION - CITY OF SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA
J
J
75B-131
SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. 81
Alton Court
SECTION 1 -Applicability of Ordinance
The specific development zoning district No. 81 (SD-81), as authorized by
Chapter 41, Division 26, Section 41-593 et seq., of the Santa Ana Municipal
Code, is 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 Santa Ana Municipal Code shall
apply unless expressly waived or superseded by this ordinance.
SECTION 2 -Purpose
The Specific Development Plan No. 81 for Alton Court consists of standards and
regulations established for the purpose of protecting the health, safety, and general
welfare of the people of the City of Santa Ana by promoting and enhancing the value
of property and encouraging the orderly development of the property.
SECTION 3 -Uses Permitted in Specific Development No. 81
The following uses are permitted in the SD-81 district:
(a) No more than nine (9) one-family dwellings, having four (4) or fewer
bedrooms per one-family dwelling.
(b) One (1) temporary real estate office devoted to the sale of real estate in the
tract in which it is located, which use shall be for a period of time not to
exceed one (1) year.
(c) Accessory building and structures, except as otherwise provided in Section
4(b).
(d) Child care facilities providing care to not more than fourteen (14) children,
provided that if the number of children exceeds eight (8), a land use
certificate must be first obtained pursuant to Division 4 of Article V of Chapter
41.
SECTION 4 -Uses Subiect to a Conditional Use Permit in Specific Development
No. 81
(a) Garages for four (4) or more vehicles.
(b) Accessory structures more than fifteen (15) feet in height or more than one
story.
Exhibit B
75B-132
SECTION 5 -Minimum Lot Area in Specific Development No. 81
Lots shall have an area of at least 17,999 square feet.
SECTION 6 -Minimum Street Frontage in Specific Development No. 81
Lots shall have street frontage of at least 100 feet.
SECTION 7 -Building Height in Specific Development No. 81
No primary structure shall exceed twenty-eight (28) feet nor two (2) stories in height,
as measured from the lowest adjacent grade of the structure to the top of the
structure.
SECTION 8 -Lot Coverage in Specific Development No. 81
No more than forty (40) percent of the lot shall be covered by structures.
SECTION 9 -Front Yards in Specific Development No. 81
There shall be a front yard of not less than ten (10) feet from the street. Porches
may encroach into the front yard a maximum of six (6) feet.
SECTION 10 -Side Yards in Specific Development No. 81
Each side yard shall be not less than five (5) feet for each one-family dwelling
structure. Cornices, eaves, chimneys, and similar architectural features may extend
into the required side yard a distance not to exceed eighteen (18) inches.
SECTION 11 -Rear Yards in Specific Development No. 81
There shall be a rear yard of not less than thirteen (13) feet for each one-family
dwelling structure. Such rear yard may be reduced to not less than five (5) feet for
open patio covers.
SECTION 12 -Development Standards in Specific Development No. 81
Lots in the SD No. 81 district shall comply with the following standards:
(a) Front and street oriented side yards shall be landscaped with the exception of
approved driveways and sidewalks.
(b) Accessory structures shall not exceed thirty-five (35) percent of the required
rear yard area and shall not exceed fifty (50) percent of the main structure
square footage.
75B-133
(c) The building separation between one-family dwelling structures shall be at
least 10 feet. Cornices, eaves, chimneys, and similar architectural features
may extend into the required side yard a distance not to exceed eighteen (18)
inches.
(d) The building separation between primary and accessory structures shall be at
least five feet.
SECTION 13 -Parking Requirements in Specific Development No. 81
(a) The minimum parking requirements for one (1) one-family dwelling is four
(4) parking spaces. At least two of these spaces shall be in an enclosed
garage.
(b) Each parking stall in a two-car garage shall not be less than ten (10) feet
wide and twenty (20) feet long.
(c) All other uses shall be parked pursuant to Santa Ana Municipal Code
Chapter 41, Article XV.
SECTION 14 -Open Space Standard for Specific Development No. 81
A private open space shall be provided for any project. The lot shall be a minimum
of 7,100 square feet in size and contain the following amenities:
(a) Decorative shade structure
(b) Two gas barbeques
(c) A minimum of six benches
(d) Two picnic tables
(e) Pedestrian access gate on the west perimeter wall
SECTION 15 -Landscape Standards for Specific Development No. 81
In the SD No. 81 district, all yards shall be landscaped. All landscaping shall be
installed pursuant to a landscaping plan approved by the Planning Manager. Each
residential unit shall meet the following minimum requirements:
(a) Front Yard:
(1) Three (3) twenty four inch (24) box canopy trees per one-family dwelling
which is immediately adjacent to the front yard.
75B-134
(2) All trees shall be double-staked.
(3) Six five-gallon size shrubs and ten (10) one-gallon size herbaceous
perennials/shrubs as a foundation planting.
(4) Turf or acceptable dry climate ground cover:
Turf shall be drought tolerant variety and planted as sod or
hydroseed.
ii. Ground cover shall be well-rooted cuttings from flats and
planted at appropriate spacing for that particular plant material.
(b) Side Yard:
(1) Corner lots shall require three (3) thirty-six (36) inch box trees. plus
six five-gallon size shrubs and groundcover as a foundation planting.
Root barriers shall be required on all trees planted along the street
oriented yards.
(c) Motor court Landscaping:
(1) One (1) twenty-four inch (24) box canopy tree for each one-family
dwelling fronting a motor court,
(d) Project Entry Landscaping:
(1) A minimum of twenty-two (22) thirty-six inch (36) box Queen Palm trees
shall be planted within the project entry. Shrubs, vines and groundcover
shall also be planted pursuant to the City's Residential Landscape
Standards.
(2) Interlocking pavers shall be installed as the paving surface for the entry.
(e) Project Perimeter Walls:
(1) Flowering vines shall be provided and secured to a decorative
masonry wall. In addition, all exterior walls shall be covered in
vines to deter graffiti (Modified by the Planning Commission on
September 10, 2007).
(2) The vines shall be five-gallon size and be planted at a maximum 20-
foot interval. They shall be secured to the walls with eye hooks and
wire.
75B-135
(f) Irrigation Systems:
(1) A pop-up sprinkler type irrigation system shall be provided for all yards
for each residential unit.
(2) The use of "xeriphytic" or dry climate type plant materials is
encouraged. Irrigation systems may require special fittings to properly
water dry climate plantings.
(g) Screening:
(1) All meters shall be appropriately screened from public view with trellis
work and vines or a hedge type shrub or they shall be incorporated
into the residential structure.
(2) Any enclosed structure for utilities must not encroach into any required
setback.
(h) Maintenance:
(1) All plant material shall be maintained per Section 41-609 of the Santa
Ana Municipal Code.
SECTION 16 -Definitions for Specific Development No. 81
Motor court - An open area, unobstructed from the ground which is bounded on three
sides by exterior walls of one or more buildings and is used for driveway and parking
purposes.
75B-136
KO-9/26/07
RESOLUTION NO. 2007-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA ANA APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION
MONITORING PROGRAM (ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW NO.
2007-37); APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 2007-
04 AS CONDITIONED (COUNTY MAP NO. 2007-04), AND
SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 2007-02 AS CONDITIONED FOR
THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3321 SOUTH FAIRVIEW
STREET
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 Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2007-37;
Amendment Application No. 2007-02 rezoning the property from Arterial
Commercial (C5) to Specific Development No. 81; Tentative Tract Map
No. 2007-04 (County Map No. 17071) as conditioned to subdivide a lot
into 9 parcels (six buildable lots and three open space parcels); and adopt
a resolution approving Site Plan Review No. 2007-02 as conditioned for
the property located at 3321 South Fairview Street.
B. On September 10, 2007, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed
public hearing and voted 5:0 (Gartner and Leo absent) to recommend that
the City Council:
1. Approve and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation
Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2007-37.
2. Adopt an ordinance approving Amendment Application No. 2007-02
and Specific Development No. 81.
3. Adopt a resolution approving Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04
(County Map No. 17071) as conditioned.
4. Adopt a resolution approving Site Plan Review No. 2007-02 as
conditioned.
Resolution No. 2007-
Page 1 of 8
75B-137
C. The Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program,
Environmental Review No. 2007-37; Amendment Application No. 2007-02
and Specific Development No. 81; Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04
(County Map No. 17071); and Site Plan Review No. 2007-02 came before
the City Council of the City of Santa Ana for a public hearing October 1,
2007, and at that time considered all testimony, written and oral.
D. Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04 (County Map No. 17071) to subdivide
the existing lot into six buildable parcels and three open space parcels to
allow a total of 38 condominium lots. The City Council of the City of Santa
Ana determines that the following findings have been established:
1. The proposed project, as conditioned, and its design and
improvements are consistent with the Medium Density Residential
designation on the General Plan and are otherwise consistent with
all other elements of the General Plan.
Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04 (County Map No. 17071) is
consistent with the land use designation and density
prescribed in the General Plan and will have no adverse
affect on the surrounding land uses in the area.
2. The proposed project, as conditioned, conforms to all applicable
requirements of the zoning and subdivision codes as well as other
applicable City ordinances.
Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04 (County Map No. 17071) is
in keeping with the provisions of the site plan review (DP No.
06-77) and Chapters 34 and 41 of the Santa Ana Municipal
Code, all of which pertain to the subdivision of land and
development standards for the site.
3. The project site is physically suitable for the type and density of the
proposed project.
Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04 (County Map No. 17071) is
proposed for asix-acre parcel of land within an area that is
proposed to be rezoned to Specific Development No. 81
(SD-81). The site has been determined to be capable of
supporting the type and density of the proposed project.
4. The design and improvements of the proposed project will not
cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and
avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
No fish or wildlife will be affected by the approval of this map
or by the design and improvements of the project.
Resolution No. 2007-
Page 2 of 8
75B-138
Environmental Review No. 2007-37 has been prepared for
this project and has identified mitigation measures aimed at
reducing any environmental impact associated with this
project.
5. The design or improvements of the proposed project will not cause
serious public health problems.
The design and improvements associated with this project
have been prepared to comply with minimum City standards.
The street system, although to be private and maintained by
a homeowners association, has been designed to public
street standards and will accommodate emergency vehicles.
All other improvements have been designed to mitigate any
serious problem resulting from this project.
6. The design or improvements of the proposed project will not conflict
with the easements acquired by the public at large for access
through or use of property within the proposed project.
Approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04 (County Map
No. 17071) will not create conflicts with any easements
necessary for public access through the subject property, as
no such easements currently exist. Public access will be
allowed to the site through the entrance and with homeowner
authorization.
E. Section 41-593.5(c) of the Santa Ana Municipal Code requires a review by
the Planning Commission of all plans within a specific development plan
area to ensure the project is in conformity with the Specific Plan.
1. Site Plan Review No. 2007-02 came before the City Council of the
City of Santa Ana on October 1, 2007.
2. After reviewing the plans for the proposed project, the City Council
determines the project is in compliance with all applicable
development standards outlined within the Specific Development
Plan (SD-81 ).
Section 2. The City Council has reviewed and considered the information
contained in the initial study and the mitigated negative declaration and mitigation
monitoring program 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
Resolution No. 2007-
Page 3 of 8
75B-139
no evidence from which it can be fairly argued that the Project will have a significant
adverse effect on the environment. The City Council hereby certifies and approves the
mitigated negative declaration and mitigation monitoring program and directs that the
Notice of Determination be prepared and filed with the County Clerk of the County of
Orange in the manner required by law.
Section 3. The City Council after conducting the public hearing hereby approves:
A. Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04 as conditioned in Exhibit "A" attached
hereto and incorporated herein.
B. Site Plan Review No. 2007-02 as conditioned in Exhibit "B" attached hereto
and incorporated herein.
These decisions are based upon the evidence submitted at the above said hearing,
which includes but is not limited to: the Request for Council Action dated October 1,
2007 and exhibits attached thereto; and the public testimony written and oral, all of
which are incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 4. This decision rendered by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana
is final and is subject to judicial review pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure
section 1094.6. The Clerk of the Council shall give direct notice to the applicant of the
Council's decision and these findings.
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
Resolution No. 2007-
Page 4 of 8
75B-140
AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers
CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, PATRICIA E. HEALY, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the
attached Resolution No. 2007-XXX 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. 2007-
Page 5 of 8
75B-141
Conditions for Approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04
Tentative Tract Map No. 2007-04 (County Map No. 17071) 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 rid or to
exercising the rights conferred by this tentative tract map.
The applicant must remain in compliance with all conditions listed below throughout the life
of the tentative tract map. Failure to comply with each and every condition may result in
the revocation of the tentative tract map.
A. Planning Division
The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) for this project must
be reviewed and approved prior to approval of the final tract map.
2. The CC&R's must include language that requires all required landscaping
must be installed within a specified time period. In addition, the CC&R's
shall include a provision banning front yard and side yard fences and front
porch railings except as shown in the plans or elevations submitted by the
applicant in conjunction with the approval of the tentative tract map .
3. A fencing plan showing the location of all project fencing and the materials to
be used must be submitted to the Planning Division prior to submittal into
building plan check.
4. The perimeter fencing for the project cannot exceed eight feet in height, as
measured from the height of the street sidewalk.
5. All real estate signage must be removed from the site within one year from
the date of installation. An extension of time may be granted as determined
by the Planning Manager.
6. The final map must be approved and recorded prior to issuance of building
permits.
7. Development within the area of the map is subject to development and
permit fees in effect at the time of permit issuance.
8. Development within the area of the map is subject to design and
development standards in effect at the time of permit issuance.
Resolution No. 2007- Exhlblt A
Page 6 of 8
75B-142
9. The project must be in compliance with the provisions of Site Plan Review
(DP No. 06-77).
10. Two copies of the recorded final map and CC&R's shall be submitted each
to the Planning Division, Fire Department, Building Division, and Public
Works Agency within 10 days of recordation.
11. The final map and all improvements required to be made or installed by the
subdivider must be in accordance with the design standards and
specifications of the Santa Ana Municipal Code and the requirements of the
State Subdivision Map Act.
Resolution No. 2007-
Page 7 of 8
75B-143
Conditions for Approval for Site Plan Review No. 2007-02
Site Plan Review No. 2007-02 is approved subject to compliance, to the reasonable
satisfaction of the Planning Manager, with all applicable sections of the Santa Ana
Municipal Code, the California Administrative Code, the Uniform Fire Code, the Uniform
Building Code and all other applicable regulations.
The applicant must comply in full with each and every condition listed below rip or to
exercising the rights conferred by this site plan approval.
The applicant must remain in compliance with all conditions listed below throughout the
life of the site plan approval. Failure to comply with each and every condition may result
in a building permit not being issued.
A. Planning_ Division
1. All proposed site improvements must conform with the Site Plan Review
approval of DP No. 06-77.
2. Any amendment to this site plan must be submitted to the Planning Division
and Police Department for review. At that time, staff will determine if
administrative relief is available or the Planning Commission must amend
the site plan approval.
Exhibit B
Resolution No. 2007-
Page 8 of 8
75B-144