Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
75A - PH 520 S HARBOR
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: SEPTEMBR 2, 2008 TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 2008-02 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2008-23 TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A COMMERCIAL BUILDING AT 520 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARD - CAL- CITY CONSTRUCTION, INC., APPLICANT CITY MANAGER CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: APPROVED ^ As Recommended ^ As Amended ^ Ordinance on 15f Reading ^ Ordinance on 2nd Reading ^ Implementing Resolution ^ Set Public Hearing For^ CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Approve and adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2006-87. 2. Adopt an ordinance approving Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2008-02. 3. Adopt a resolution approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-23 as conditioned. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION On August 11, 2008, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve and adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2006-87, adopt an ordinance approving Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2008-02, and adopt a resolution approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-23 as conditioned by a vote of 7:0 to allow the construction of a two-story medical and commercial development with restaurant use at 520 South Harbor Boulevard in the North Harbor Specific Plan (SP2) zoning district. The Planning Commission made no changes to the staff report as proposed. The Commission made two recommendations to staff relating to landscaping and window material. The Commission recommended that staff work with the applicant to install larger canopy trees that will provide additional shade and serve as a buffer against the adjacent residential uses. Additionally, the Commission recommended that the applicant utilize an alternative material or color for the proposed vinyl windows located on the second story of the building. Staff will work with the applicant to address the recommendations. 75A-1 Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2008-02 Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-23 September 2, 2008 Page 2 FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. Ja M. Trevino Executive Director Planning & Building Agency PG:rb pg\reports\zoa08-02cup08-23 Harbor Medical Plaza.cc 75A-2 REQUEST FOR Planning Commission Action PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: AUGUST 11, 2008 TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING - FILED BY CAL-CITY CONSTRUCTION, INCORPORATED FOR ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 2008-02 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2008-23 TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A COMMERCIAL BUILDING AT 520 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARD Prepared by Pedro Guillen k~.u.. Executive irecto 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 1`~.vl.' Planning Manager 1. Approve and adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2006-87. 2. Adopt an ordinance approving Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2008-02. 3. Adopt a resolution approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-23 as conditioned. DISCUSSION Request of Applicant Cal-City Construction, Inc. is requesting approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2008-02 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-23 to allow the development of a medical and commercial building at 520 South Harbor Boulevard. Property Description The subject site is a 2.27 acre rectangular shaped lot located at the northwest corner of Harbor Boulevard and McFadden Avenue. The site is currently occupied by an existing auto sales business located on the eastern portion of the site and vacant agricultural land on the west portion (rear) of the site. The site is located within the North Harbor Specific Plan (SP2) zoning district and has a General Plan land use designation of General Commercial (GC). Surrounding land uses include EXHIBIT A 75A-3 Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2008-02 Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-23 August 11, 2008 Page 2 commercial and multiple-family residential to the north; commercial, single-family and multiple-family to the south; commercial uses to the east; as well as single and multiple-family residential to the west (Exhibits 1 and 2). Project Description The applicant is proposing to construct a 44,511 square foot two-story commercial building with 23,469 square feet located on the first floor and 21,042 square feet on the second floor. The building will include 8,882 square feet of retail space, 2,696 square feet for restaurant use, 28,968 square feet for medical use and 3,965 square feet of covered walkways on the first floor. The proposed building will also include a 35,917 square foot subterranean parking area (Exhibits 3 through 6). A total of 247 parking spaces will be provided, with 147 stalls on the surface and 100 spaces provided in the subterranean parking area. Per the Santa Ana Municipal Code, the project will require 174 spaces for the medical use, 44 spaces for the retail use and the restaurant use will require 27 spaces, totaling 245. As proposed, the project is over-parked by two spaces and meets the on-site parking requirements. The architectural design of the building reflects a Spanish style design with high quality materials and finishes (Exhibits 7 through 12). The exterior design elements proposed for the building include a fine sand finish, decorative hanging exterior lights and mission style clay roof tile. Additionally, decorative wood columns, wood rafters and wood lattice are proposed at the second floor elevations. As well, the applicant has provided an outdoor plaza area adjacent to the west portion of the building. In September 2007, this project was reviewed as a study session item by the Planning Commission. The Commission's comments pertained to the need for high quality signage, the provision of courtyard space and ensuring adequate parking for the site. The submitted project has incorporated the Commission's comments into the final design of the project. A sign program will be created that incorporates a high-quality and uniform design that will avoid the appearance of sign clutter on the building. Additionally, the sign program will be created to reduce visual impacts to the surrounding residences. The proposed courtyard space as well as the driveway entrance and front paseo walkway area will encompass elements of textured and colored decorative paving to soften the hardscape appearance 7 5A-4 Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2008-02 Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-23 August 11, 2008 Page 3 of the project. Teak wood furnishings will also be provided in the courtyard space. The landscape design incorporates trees, shrubs and ground cover in multiple colors and in a layered effect to create a high quality visual result. The proposed landscape design enhances the quality of the project by framing and softening the appearance of the building, providing shade and buffering it from the adjacent residences. Analysis of the Issues The applicant is proposing to develop an underutilized parcel of land within the North Harbor Specific Plan. The North Harbor Specific Plan encourages high quality development by focusing land uses into specific commercial activity areas. The Specific Plan is divided into seven land use activity areas to clearly reflect the intended character of the zone. The subject parcel has two land use designations within the Specific Plan, General Commercial and Single-Family Residence. The subject parcel is approximately 600 feet deep, with the front 300 feet having a designation of General Commercial and the rear 300 feet having a Single-Family Residence designation. The proposed commercial development is allowed on the front half of the site; however, it is not allowed in the rear portion as it is zoned for residential use. When taking into account that the site is one parcel and is not likely to be developed with two separate and different uses at the front and rear and residential would not be viable since it would be landlocked and have no street frontage, it is recommended that the land use designation for the rear of the site be changed to General Commercial (Exhibits 13 through 15) The change in the land use designation to general commercial will allow the ability to create a consistent and well integrated development project and enhance the character along Harbor Boulevard. As well, it will provide the opportunity for development that supports uses to the other focused project areas in the Harbor Specific Plan. Additionally, a conditional use permit to allow restaurant uses is required. Section 3.5.2 of the Specific Plan requires the approval of a conditional use permit for restaurants and eating establishments. The intent of the conditional use permit is to ensure that uses comply with the goals and objectives of the North Harbor Specific Plan. The proposed project includes 2,696 square feet of restaurant space on the first floor of the building. The restaurant use will be consistent with the Harbor Specific Plan and several policies of the General Plan. 75A-5 Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2008-02 Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-23 August 11, 2008 Page 4 Policy 2.2 of the Land Use Element encourages commercial land uses in adequate amounts to accommodate the City's needs for goods and services. The restaurant will provide an additional destination for neighboring businesses and residents seeking additional eating establishments. Policy 2.5 of the Land Use Element encourages projects that balance economic and fiscal benefits of commercial development with its impacts on the quality of life in the City. In addition, the proposed development complies with Policy 5.5 of the Land Use Element which encourages projects that are compatible with and supportive of surrounding land uses. The project has been designed to comply with the development standards of the North Harbor Specific Plan. Further, conditions of approval have been included to minimize potential impacts on the adjacent property owners. The development of this underutilized parcel will enhance the economic stability of the area and will improve Harbor Boulevard's urban design by re-enforcing and establishing a district character. Based upon the analysis of the project, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2008-02, Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-23 as conditioned and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2006-87 (Exhibits 16 through 18). CEQA Compliance In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2006-87 has been prepared for this project. The Mitigated Negative Declaration evaluated the proposed project's effect on several environmental topics. The key findings of the document determined that less than significant effects would be created when incorporating mitigation measures relating to aesthetics, air quality, noise, transportation and traffic. All other topics evaluated determined that the project would have no impact or less than a significant impact. To address possible light impacts on the neighboring residential uses, mitigation measures have been created requiring the installation of directional lighting to avoid spillover light. Possible air quality impacts will be addressed by requiring exposed surfaces on the site to be watered two times daily and requiring machine equipment to be located as far away from residence as possible. Additional mitigation measures have been added to limit noise impacts by limiting construction operation hours from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. daily. As well, mitigation 75A-6 Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2008-02 Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-23 August 11, 2008 Page 5 measured have been added to require mufflers on equipment and require stockpiles and fixed noises to be located away from residences. Additionally, except for emergency signals, no noise producing signals will be allowed. Finally, mitigation measures have been created requiring the preparation of a traffic management plan during construction to address possible traffic issues and provide information identifying detours, lane closures and warning signs. The mitigation measures placed on the project will ensure that all possible impacts identified will be reduced to less than a significant level. ~/ Pedro Guillen Associate Planner 'V Vince Fre so, P Principal P anner PG: jm pg\reports\zoa08-02cup08-23 Harbor Medical Plaza.pc 75A-7 J LJ ~ sTN sT - -- -- ---- , - FOURTH ST~~r ~~ ~ -- sTN sT R2 Al . I I 1'" 1 R1~ IPRD I I° R7 RZ I ~T II 1 SP-2 SP-2 SP-2 SP-2 SPd C2 R2 r -~ -j t = - _ it I- II__~I -- --, I R2 ~ Al R1 R2 I ~,3,e,-t ~ SD ~I -38 1 ~ I I ~ II r ~~ ~~ r __ ~I I~ IlAi mos R2 ~ I R2-PRD ~,~= __ --- ~I IR2-PRD - --~I 1 R2 ~ ~1=:Ir --- ll _I i _I ~ R2 - r-II- ` r R7 R1 I I~ '~i~l j I ~ ~~ ~~~~ ~ 11 ~ ~I k~ 1 1 R SP- Z ° RZ RZ ~~ T ~ ~ R2 R2 R2 R2 N ~ RZ / I I .._ ~i a.Pa ~+ -- _'~------- -- - Rl- PRD II II ii At ii R%ii PRD iso II II Al ~~ `t~-- ii --t~ 1 II-- 1 ,t II I (~ =, I Rz- PRD $ ~ ~I 1--~ I R I ~ I I - 1 I --- - -- J s 4 11 rl II II Ind SP-Z CZ ~ T C ~ I iss - __-- i.~~ -_-J~ i~tl 1 _ - / „ g PRD CZ I 1 -aro~ SP-2 SP-2 SP-2 SP-2 P- -- --- - - FIRST ST. I - -i - - - C5 C5 'CZa C2 1~ ~t IIC2j = v ~~' I - SP-2 ~ 11 ~w~ ~ sP-2 i i~ e i ,w. Mi n - SD-3Z R 2~ II II --11 I I I I I I I i I < No ~ R2 ~. _~ __~~ Ir g r r SD-49 I I I ~ ~` ~ ~ . Ri Ri RZ "~ C2 M1 o O ' II II II 11 ~ I II II II 11 I I 2 R2 l ~, L Lsu r ~~~ __ l ~~1f ~<r- ,I " I1~ --- 'I / R ~ ~ \ / r ~ II II I I I SP- m w ~, __---__' ~ RZ1 R3-PRD , SD 34 - o o 1 G / == ` t ~ R1 ~ - R2~IPRD I Imo- I- -_- II I i`_--_!V! I 1 ~ ro & PINE ST r - ~~~ . ~ I R2 ~~ j t r rr ° i R3 . f-II Ir-It I -- ~1 I IL-.- I Q R R2 ; R2 ~ x L-_~~r~~ < / - ~~ ~~ D r r R1 R2 I I I I I II ~ ~~ ~~ . I -- -- 1 ~1 I ~~ 2 SP-2 2 ~ ~~ r I Il I i ~~i r~r ii -------'I _ _ tl _ I _______,`__~~ __ ______ i 1 t; / ~~ r R3 R2 w i ---~--- t I ~ r- r- r- r- r- r- I I I I 1 1 IL I R2 R2 R2 ~ _ cuni Rts y _ ~ __ _I ~ _ I I I I I I I ~F- 11 ~- I I ~ 0 R2 R2 ° 1^-- I A1i: ` l II I~I 11 II II II 1 11_1 I_,1_,1_~I_~ - - s. ,a R2 Q ._- ==i--- I Ir Ir-Ir-Ir-lisp- ~ Ir ~ R2 ~ R2 Q = R1 ° PosEV ST. CAMILLE T i Ai O , 9 I~ _I~__ -- _ ~ --'~ - - I II 1 II II II II I II I II II II II II Z I-JI-JI-JI-JI-JI I l- ~ - 93 ~-~~ c~ 2I0' ~ At fQ $ . WATKHJS WAV RZ > AC ~ ~r1 ~//~i \` `~I 1'I }{ ~` I mSP-2 SP-Z a rA1 /~ STRt R2 R2 R t a I I\ )I II-=-- R2 ~ Rt y Ri , ~ A. s ~ ^ ` ` Ai ~ " I ~ ~ PROJECT SITE A7 5 Al ^~ Ri R2 i___'~---11 ° - - - MC FADDE - - -- -- al. w,m.. a.g ~3z 0 II I " ' i R1 ~ 0 I ~~ I NISTERIA PL. R1 R1 ~ SP-2 WI - ~ SP-2 ~ PL. NR1 I R1~ i i R1 R1 R1 I " . s'ss " R1 Rt R1 Ri A. ! 1 ~ R1 ° R1 SoR R1 IT y ~ R1 R1 R1 R1 ~ ROBERTS °R ~ R1 ~ R1 R1 ~ R1 R1 a R1 ' -- -- KENT u N ° ~ s R1 AV I I ~ R1 m R1 / R1 Y ~ - - - R1 N I L R1 LN. I 0 ~,~ Rt = R1 R1 Rt SP-2 ASP-2 R R1 RV T U Rt m ~ / A R1 Ri R1 Ri R T Rr~'S~ ~ Rt " Ri ~ ~~ R1 Ai / R1 i ~ ~i --I~ ---li --li - i ~ R1 Ri I is it is it I Rt I ~I '- _. I ====' - - a R1 LN. R1 ~ I I it ' =` R1 i ii ,I II ii I -II--~I~---II--'L--I ~ ~ E v. ~ R~ --------------- ~ ~~ ~ n ~ n R1 R1 E . Al GENERAL AGRICULTURAL C-SM SOUTH MAIN STREET COMMERCIAL DISTRICT PD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT -B PARKING MODIFICATION -F FLOOR AREA RATIO PRD PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT C1 COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL GC GOVERNMENT CENTER R1 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE C1-MD COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL-MUSEUM DISTRICT M1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL R2 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENCE C2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL M2 HEAW INDUSTRIAL R3 MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE C3 CENTRAL BUSINESS MO MILITARY OPERATIONS R4 SUBURBAN APARTMENT C3-A CENTRAL BUSINESS-ARTISTS' VILLAGE O OPEN SPACE RE RESIDENTIAL ESTATE C4 PLANNED SHOPPING CENTER -OZ OVERLAY ZONE SD SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT C5 ARTERIAL COMMERCIAL P PROFESSIONAL SP SPECIFIC PLAN CR COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL PCD PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ZOA 08-2/CUP 08-23 ~ MR. YOUNG KIM ~, 520 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARD - - =5DDFEET 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 ~HB~ 1 1--T-T-~ ~ I I I I MUILTI I FAMILIY R(~SI DEf~ T!A L I I (I MOB I LIE HOMIES) I I ~ I I ~ I I I I I I - - - I - ~- y - ~ - J o Q a W ~' W ~ MUL I FAMILY Q J O RES DENTAL U m W C C ~ J ~ ~ z ~ F- p COMMER IAL U ~ W O U > W j ~~ PROJECT SFTE M L T I F A M I L Y R E S I D E N T I A L ~ ~ J ~ g ti `~ z ~ 2 ~ fA W w w ~ ~ N _ o" Z ~~ ~ z Z w o . ~ ~ Z U ~ y MC FADDEN C O M M E R C I A L 0 m Q J J U ¢ ~ w g ~ o z U AVE. ZOA 08-2/CUP 08-23 MR. YOUNG KIM 520 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARD 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 EXHIBIT 2 75A-9 z c~ jfp• ~ pp(~ o ~§~ l`F~~~EIPP ~~$~13i~1~~i1 Z ~€~ ~C` ~~g~F ~y ~~~ s ~ o 6§ ~~ ~~~ e ~ ~ 3 +~~yjyy g 3 ~YY Y~ Yy n 3 GFKOG G~ e a p^ ~= i.a. CS F° ~RbY $~~&# ~ i $ w_ K ~ s y~ a d ~y y Y$YE q ,~, G G €~ a ~ Sy d3 _ ~ n 9 ~ € € 'Yn ~ G ~ ~ 8 d H C r N tCC c CtC r @ ~ 3 ~ 8&$ a ~aa d §~ ~ 3 '• § a ~ .. ..- .. .. .. .. ° ... y ~ x '~ " ~ ~ ~ - a c a 3 = a z q ~ ~ 4 3 '~ ~ ~4 C~ g8~ 8 ~ ~ ~' 9 ° Q ~~# B R d ~i~ ' ~8$~ j ~6$~~ p~ !i i e Q ~ z gg ~ aq a ~ = n s ~° a~A ~ _ - - O O yea w F 3 ~ 6 ~ ~~~ ~ ~ yR ~ ~ y~ '~ ~ y ~~~ $ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g€g a a ~3a '~ ~ ~ sa ds ~€g ° n n ~ m ~ v ° ° a W = Q ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ Z~ e a B ~~ a $ tiP e ~ Q e ~ ~ ~ k .. e Y ~ o a' ~ ~ a 33 ~ i E Q t •/J v~ ~ ~ ~e ~ € $ ~ $ O ~ ~ o ~~ yF ~~ ~a ~ i~ ~ M N ~ ~~~ ~° ~ ~ F ._, ~ W ~ ~ ~ `~ ~~~ ~ qqq -_ t"~ ~ q ~~ ~ d ° ~ ~ ~a ~~ ~ ~ =. i a - n a _ .. .~ ~ ~. ,. .... T :' s pe £ ~ ~ s ~ a ~ €g~a~~~~ ~ e A ~~ ~ ¢~ ~~ s~ 3 a ~ ~ ~ ~ a a t & ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ € d yga ~ ~ ~ ~ ~$y a G ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ g~ `~ pp¢ g~ tl~ L p ~ ~ q 3 ~~ CM1 E ~ ~ Y ~a ~ ~ ~ @~ ~ € £ G ~~ ~~' q Y C ~ 8¢ S q g k a E g~ € ~g^s ~ S e 3 g Ya ~ €Nq`Ag~ $~~Q~e ~ y d~ ~~ „~ a tl ~$ ~~ ~~e° Y @e c ~ ~ y any ~~~~~~ ~ €£ x ~ e~ ~y ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~ ~e ~ g @ * ~ n 8 Lu'- yd~ e~ ~~'~' ~~ ~& ~~~'Y ~ Y Y ~ @.. `: ~a E ~~`.~i ~ ~5 ~ ~~ as o a Y €sa @~ a$Y gg ~ ~ ~ ~ sg ~~~ ~ ~a~ ~ c` seR $,s e~"aaa4 ~e5~~ ~sge ~$:8~ a ~~ 36 €~ ~~ ~~ ~ Cg e~~~a~~~a ~3 E~ I ZOA08-2/CUP 08-23 W ~~~~~ x~~~~~ I~~~~~~g~~~~~~ ~ ~~ I ~ ~~ ~ g~ ~~S~~I~~~~~~~ ~~ I~ ~ EXHIBIT3 _~ t.°°°~ .° ,_ x. e° ~~_t.~o~ ~ ~ ~_ F ~~ ~. ~~~~a~ ~~~x~ F~ ~3 I LL _ n ° .. ° . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .. .r ° .. .~ ° ~ i 6 fF~~~~+Ff gg p p ~'g~~i+fgx~ d 0 6~~pg'6:~f~l~~t ~~~ x3 S -~ ~ 6~~~ ~ s Q ~ ~ Bra ~ n Yc"~ ~ $~~~E~~~e~ P~~ g ~~ t f~ 64 tl. ~ 4Y ~ e ^a @@ $ 5~~~ ~ ~~s~ ~ ~ ~- ~ € Ya ~ ~ ~~eHi~ ~ 9 Y ~~ a ~~~g ~ h~b XB ~Y~F ~'d~~ ~H~_ €' 8 a ~ ggo~g d F4 3 ~~ k a~ F ~ gg ~~ v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'e 6-~sd BOO ~ ~ o ~~a~~~~~~~~$$~~~ ~~ ~~~ I~ ~ $ ~ yy~ ~,~ ~p ~ ~ f ~~~hh~ ~3g d ~ a 3~ ~' E ~~~SL gy R ga ~d R ~~i1 y ~ 6 '( Qgg ~ p $R4 FLEE 66~tl 2 ~ 3~~C~~- r 9 ~ ~ 3 S 3~ ~ B ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~' 3 4~Y •5 ~ ~~a Y' i SR~g~ x. 5 x a QQw ~~~~ ~ K ~ ", + Q o ~ h H ~ W W N Y ~ m I ~ T-- '_ _ ~ I I _ .~ _ ~I ~--- +___ . ~_- i -- i _ - - R 'QA7 8 BUVN a.wi ,-,. to - ---_E------ ----- 5 p - --.- .___-- --.._ e d rw _ w • ~a n + u.~~w y ~i Lo • d 1 / V ~. ~ ~~ _ ~ j /~ ~ ; / ~: ~ y , i V ~ ~ / ~ s a _ ~ i j / } ~ ~ :~ ~i ~'3 ~ ~ i $ty5 o g X39 /- 7 {... ~~ ' 2 a I i ~~ W bIj -{ ' _ ~ _ 'j € Q~ gg ~F j ty t . , ~ ~~ 1 ~ 2 !1 / ~ Q~ ~' Q ~ ~ ~y ~ bY ~1Y ~ 1 ~~ 08'6 ~ . ' ~ a o°o,. ~ 4 ~ gg ~ ~3~ t~ ~ ~~ ~ t: i \ \ J~ i . t ~ I ~ ~ ~ j x ~. % ~ . .•~.. ~ ~ t . I i 7 ~~ , I J ~~ ~ . _ ~[, % i i i, i ~ ~~ ~ P, ~ ~t 'w~ o ~ i ~ ~ I ~ a l t _ ' ~`: ~ rta " ^ ~ Y z _ i ~f ~ ~ i ,r :~: ~ 4 i ~ ~ W ' I n : J ~ ~ ~. d i. ~ 4 S ? I t ' Y ' 'I b C ~ ' . x ty l: _, ,~. x ~ ,y~ ~" r. ~` >.u ~€ ~ b 1:: R ~ . T Y T ~ ~ ~I ~~ ~ l ~$ ~ f s~ ~ ~ ._ ................ a - ~ 8 ~ 9:YtNd7~(18.~dONd iX33tA'ttt~ i ¢a ~ ° ZOA 08-2/CUP 08-23 ~~ ~~~~ ~~..,'~ EXHIBIT 4 ~, ~ jP•~i~~plg o s;~ 1~4.1d~ h ~+#~~rl.~~g~ ~tr 45 B ~i '! ffi Q != ~~ ~~~ R ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~ o oooooao K• ~I LL C C LV E O O a s; e ° ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ @ ~~~ ~~ Eye ~ ~ g q~~ E ~~7y ~ E.$~ " @@ 7 $~ e~AE~E g ~ ~ e ~ ~~ ~~ a~ cy ~~S kg~ ~~ ~ x~~A g ~ ~~~~ ~~e'9 ~ ~ ~$ C r 000®®® ® o (~~ ^ ~ a ~: a~_°aa 3;3 ~~aix Q Q 7 n~ T ° z~ ~ ' F ~ g ~ Y : ~- ~ llI IIII Y - ~~ ~~ Y ~ _ ® ~ a 0 I I ~`~ ~ e , J- ~ ® ~ ' R Y ? _ ~ a~ r ~ ~ ~...._ 0 ~I s ' ~ ~ ® w k 4 Q - d K z-u ~- >.. ~ r L ~ ~ ,, k 4 r® ~o L -~ ~ ~ ~ y-- L k Y r ~ 0 _~ L` 4 Y * _ II § I~I ^~ ~ O O e - § e s II T `' I I k \ ~® ~ 1 O ~ § F ~ r - a_f~ ~ ° ~ ~ .» . -. ~ e O e e t - ~ '' " ~ i r.~z rn ~ e O .e: ~ e _ _ (~ g' O e ® G ~ Y o- s d K r !' ~ ~ u ~~ i'~~ ~ ~~~ 'M'N yO~11YN ~ y ~ ~ ~ S ~ 5 5 ~ w ~ ~x ~~s U U U O U U U U O ~ d 6 m o ~ d d ~ ~ ~ b ~; ~ Q -~ u W7Y °q t 6 ~ ~ J ~' o ® ~ ~ ~ ~ 4~8 ~ F F 0 pOp ppp y y ~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ - 2 t7i ~ U $ 5 Z OZ a ~ 02 ¢ 5 ~ N ~ ~;; 22 ~~J'j ~~ ~ ~ ~g ~~ 3~ ~~3 ~ g ~ y ~ ~Q ~ a 2 ~Z F Wu aLL y ~~ ~~ ~3 ~dm p Y 5 ~ ~ ®, ~ ® " ~ ~ ~ a 3 ~ b ~ S x 8 ~ S S ~ S ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~w ~ w~ 3 w ~ o~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ cS~U~U ~'~ sw a~ ~`„'1 ~w y00 Z~ ~n o~ ~~ ag< ~3 ~~ ~U' ~F ~~ 1. ~~ J •+... ~._ s.~ ~~ g 5~ ~ o Q= w ~~ ~ N ~Z w~ i~ ~ N Y ~ w~ $ ~~ 99yy a~ ~~ EXHI~'~~_ 1 °_ ay ~f~~~~p6~5gVVP 33 ~ ~~i ~E~9~ft~T dg ~ `~ ±~ ~~ 7 l~u~~~~~ a~ ~a s ~ ~1 e x ~ ~ gE ~ O ~ ~ ~ 4` s@ Z iY i 3 C a yy o~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~a~~~~~~~~~: wooaooaooooo000 E O 'Q J H 0 z O Q w N 0 z, a 8 b ZOA ~~UP~8-23 s e pf F €y~ 9B 2 Y 5 Y r» A p~, ~~~ro i r ~t4 i i 4 ~ '~ ~ ~' 1 .W ~X ' ; fx _~~ ~, e ,~i. ~~ ' . pp~~ }I~ F ~ ~ F ~ d ~~, +~ ~i C ~ t ~~ ~ ~t ~~ 4 ~ ~'~e ~ r~~ ~ 1 ~ , / 2K ~ t-51 yyy, ~Y~ P. ~. _ j ~~ TTT q ~ t .~.~ ~.ti} ' `~ s ~~? ' ~ . ~ ~a ~ ` - ~ ,~ ~ ^tF Sm 1.:: y { ;:i _ . . L ~~~ ~ .~a f7 ~Y11 iM = r r--~~ ~~~ .., ~ F' i. ,'~~` '®~~ ~~ ~. h ''~ `®~~ ~ ~; ~t-~~ I y / A ~A'S.. ~~ EX~~~B a,,. ~~4; ~~ a~,; ~~,~~ rv; f } l.+ ~l;_x t 'L N-'+'~. `.~",, Y ___ , ~. ~~~ mom, o ~•- '~.-a ~, ~,.. acs F. ®~ICC f~~~ iA~~ `~.~^_ ~~ ~' .{. ~~~~ -~~ _ y f4i ~_• ~ 1 ~~ ~-~~ y •+' 5~~4«T ~-T-~-~ I I I I I MUILTI FAMI LIY R~SI DEI~TIAL I I (I M O B !LIE H O M E S) I I I I I I I I I I ~ I - - - I- - ~ - ~ - ~ - J 300' - I o Q a W ~' LLJ ~ MUL 1 FAMILY I J RES DENTAL p ~ U p m W J J ~ Z ~' F~ p COMMER IAL U ~ W O U > W j ~~ ZOAISP2/SFR $P2/G(; ?o SP2/GC M L T I F A M I L Y R E S T D E N T I A L ~ -r ~ ¢ ~ Q ~ Q Q F~ ~L Z ~ Z ~ 0 N w W m O W ~ ~ _~ _ Q (~ ~ ~ J (n Z ~ Z ~ W ~ p U ~ ~ MC FADDEN C O M M E R C I A L ~ J Q U ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z U AVE. ,~ ZOA 08-2/CUP 08-23 ~, MR. YOUNG KIM ~ 520 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARD 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 EEO ,~, x ~,.w,. .~. ... cBNERAa . , _. ~ .~, .....,.,.... COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL TOWN x _- ~ ~ ~ HOMES' ~, t` u x n w ENTERTAINMEN S/NGLB FAMILY RHS. ,~ GENERAL ~ ~' COMMERCIAL ~' ,_ ~: " z. :n, 111 ~ i1*~. EXH~'~42'~ NORTH HARBOR SPECIFIC PLAN Figure 3.1 North Harbor Specific Plan Emphasis Zones 12 ~~ Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2008-02 Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-23 August 11, 2008 Page 1 of 2 Findings of Fact A. Will the proposed use provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood or community? The proposed restaurant use will add an additional service to the existing community by providing an additional location for existing residents and business to eat. This will provide patrons with the convenience of purchasing food, while waiting for medical appointments or shopping at the proposed retail uses. Policy 2.2 of the Land Use Element encourages commercial land uses in adequate amounts to accommodate the City's needs for goods and services. Additionally, the inclusion of conditions of approval will help to ensure that the applicant will operate the project in a manner that will not create additional problems for the neighboring residents and Police Department. In addition, the proposed development complies with Policy 5.5 of the Land Use Element that encourages projects that are compatible with and supportive of surrounding land uses. B. Will the proposed use under the circumstances of the particular case be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity? The proposed restaurant use will not be detrimental to persons residing or working in the area because of placement conditions of approval on the project. Policy 5.5 of the Land Use Element encourages projects that are compatible with and supportive of surrounding land uses. The restaurant use will be a supportive use and provide additional dining and eating opportunities for the neighboring area and will not create any negative impacts to the surrounding residences and commercial businesses. C. Will the proposed use adversely affect the present economic stability or future economic development of properties surrounding the area? The project will not negatively affect the economic stability of the surrounding area. Policy 2.5 of the Land Use Element encourages projects that balance economic and fiscal benefits of commercial development with its impacts on the quality of life 7316 Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2008-02 Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-23 August 11, 2008 Page 2 of 2 in the City. A restaurant will not affect the surrounding neighborhood or City. The addition of the restaurant space will create an additional service for the surrounding residential and commercial neighborhoods. The conditions of approval will help to mitigate any potential problems and will minimize the possibility of the restaurant affecting the economic stability for the area. D. Will the proposed use comply with the regulations and conditions specified in Chapter 41 for such use? The proposed project is a new development and will be in complete compliance will applicable regulations and standards specified in Chapter 41. In addition, conditions of approval will be placed on the conditional use permit to ensure compliance with City standards. The proposed project complies with the intent of the City's codes and the intent of the North Harbor Specific Plan goals and objectives. E. Will the proposed use adversely affect the General Plan or any specific plan of the City? The proposed use will not have adverse affects on the General Plan as it is permitted in the General Commercial land use designation. Policy 2.2 and 2.5 of the Land Use Element encourage commercial land uses in adequate amounts to accommodate the City's needs for goods and services and encourages projects that balance economic and fiscal benefits of commercial development with its impacts on the quality of life in the City. The proposed use will give the neighborhood an additional restaurant use to purchase food. Additionally, Policy 5.5 of the Land Use Element encourages projects that are compatible with and supportive of surrounding land uses. The proposed project is located within an existing commercial corridor and the addition of the restaurant use will not affect the General Plan of the City. 75A-24 AUGUST 11, 2008 PAGE 1 OF 5 Conditions for Approval Should Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-23 be approved, the project shall comply with all applicable sections of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, the California Administrative Code, the California Building Standards Code and all other applicable regulations. The applicant must comply in full with each and every condition listed below prior to exercising the rights conferred by this conditional use permit. The applicant must remain in compliance with all conditions listed below throughout the life of the conditional use permit. Failure to comply with each and every condition may result in the revocation of the conditional use permit. A. Planning Division 1. The project shall remain in compliance with Site Plan Review (DP No. 06-43). 2. Any amendment to this conditional use permit 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 conditional use permit must be amended. 3. Prior to final issuance of a building permit, a sign program shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval. 4. Construction areas shall receive appropriate routine maintenance to reduce unnecessary debris piles. 5. Construction areas shall have appropriate erosion and dust control programs in place. 6. Construction lighting shall be limited to safety and security and directed to minimize light and glare impacts to any adjacent sensitive receptors. 7. The proposed project will comply with the design standards outlined in the City of Santa Ana's North Harbor Specific Plan. AUGUST 11, 2008 PAGE 2 OF 5 8. For the proposed commercial building, subterranean parking, and surface parking lot, all lighting shall comply with all City zoning, building, and NHSP design guidelines and will utilize directional and/or shielded lighting in order to minimize spillover effects to adjacent vicinities. The applicant will provide the City, for their approval, a lighting plan with a photometric study that shows the point- by-point foot-candle layout to 20 feet outside the property line (NHSP 6.2.3). Additionally, all new projects shall provide an ornamental night lighting plan, prepared by an electrical engineer, and approved by the building, planning, and police departments (NHSP 6.2.3). 9. The applicant shall apply soil stabilizers to inactive areas; water exposed surfaces two times a day to reduce air quality impacts from construction related activities. 10. The applicant shall apply position equipment staging areas away from the sensitive receptors to reduce air quality impacts from construction related activities. 11. If human remains are unearthed during construction, work shall cease immediately and the County Coroner shall be contacted to make necessary findings as to the origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American decent, the NAHC shall be notified. The NAHC will identify the ancestry of the remains and determine which course of action should be taken in addressing the findings. 12. If the temporary structures are to be demolished, then as a condition of approval for the project, an asbestos containing materials survey will be performed by a qualified environmental professional before any demolition permit is issued. Said survey will adhere to federal, state, and local regulations and will be sent to the City for approval. If the survey finds ACMs in the temporary structures, then those materials containing ACMs will be removed and disposed of in accordance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations. 75A-26 AUGUST 11, 2008 PAGE 3 OF 5 13. If lead-based paint is discovered during on-site investigations, all building materials containing lead-based paint will be removed, transported, and disposed of at landfills that meet acceptance criteria for the waste being disposed. Demolition and removal shall be performed in conformance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations pertaining to lead based paint. 14. As part of the design for the proposed project, a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) will be prepared and implemented. The WQMP will include structural and nonstructural Best Management Practices (BMPs), which will avoid or minimize, to the greatest extent possible, the impacts associated with the daily operation of the project site. 15. The proposed project will require a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and will require the preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) incorporating BMPs to reduce Stormwater impacts during construction. 16. Construction activities shall comply with the applicable local jurisdiction's construction noise requirements. The City of Santa Ana Noise Ordinance prohibits construction activities between the hour of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Monday through Saturday, anytime on Sundays, and federal holidays. 17. All noise-producing project equipment and vehicles using internal combustion engines shall be equipped with mufflers and air-inlet silencers, where appropriate, in good operating condition that meet or exceed original factory specifications. Mobile or fixed "package" equipment (e.g., arc-welders, air compressors) shall be equipped with shrouds and noise control features that are readily available for that type of equipment. 18. All mobile or fixed noise producing equipment used on the project, which is regulated for noise output by a local, state, or federal agency, shall comply with such regulation while in the course of project activity. 19. All material stockpiles and mobile equipment staging, parking, and maintenance areas shall be located as far as practicable from noise sensitive receptors. 75A-27 AUGUST 11, 2008 PAGE 4 OF 5 20. The applicant shall locate fixed noise generating equipment as far from noise sensitive land uses as practical to avoid unnecessary annoyance from construction noise. 21. The hours of construction, including noisy maintenance activities, shall be restricted to the periods and days permitted by the City of Santa Ana Noise Ordinance. 22. The loudest construction activities, such as concrete breaking and jack hammering, shall be limited to the middle of the day when the sensitivity to such noises will be at its lowest. 23. Noise producing signals, including horns, whistles, alarms, and bells shall be used for safety warning purposes only. 24. No project related public address or music systems shall be audible at any adjacent receptor. 25. If complaints arise, the contractor shall initiate a construction noise-monitoring plan to ensure the construction noise levels at the nearest noise sensitive land uses are within the limits of the noise ordinance. 26. Use of temporary noise barriers shall be considered where project activities and equipment is unavoidably close to noise sensitive receptors. 27. The use of on-site trailers and containers as temporary barriers between any fixed construction noise source and nearby sensitive receptors shall be used to avoid unnecessary annoyance from construction noise. 28. The proposed project will implement a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) to be prepared, in consultation with the City of Santa Ana, prior to construction. The TMP shall consist of prior notices, adequate sign-postings, detours, and temporary driveways, if required. Adequate access shall be maintained at all times to and from existing driveways serving adjacent land uses. Proper detours and warning signs shall be established to ensure public safety. The TMP shall be devised so that construction will not interfere with any emergency response or evacuation plans. The TMP shall specify construction routes so that construction workers and vehicles will travel non-residential street, as practical. 75A-28 AUGUST 11, 2008 PAGE 5 OF 5 B. Police Department 1. Subterranean parking to be equipped with a rolling overhead grille equipped with an Emergency Knox Access System. 2. Parking garage design: Each door within the structure leading into a stairwell, lobby, and storage area must be outfitted with a 100 square inch rated window. Convex mirrors minimum of 12 -inch in diameter must be provided at each stairwell landing and at each corner along a walkway. The area underneath the last flight of each stair must be fully enclosed at its base. Elevator lobbies must be glass encased (glass entry doors) to provide the user with maximum visibility. Elevations of the glass-encased lobby are to be submitted for review and approval prior to installation. Elevator lobbies must open directly into the parking garage. Elevators are to be equipped with a minimum 12-inch shatterproof convex mirrors or are to have mirrored backing. 3. One State licensed uniformed security guard will be required of the exterior of the property seven days a week, twenty-four hours a day. 4. Underground parking garage elevator lobby to be glass encased to provide maximum visibility. 75A-29 MAYOR Miguel A. Pulido MAYOR PRO TEM Claudia C. Alvarez COUNCIL MEMBERS P. David Benavides Carlos Bustamante Michele Martinez Vincent F. Sarmiento Sal Tinajero CITY OF SANTA ANA PLANNING 8 BUILDING AGENCY 20 Civic Center Plaza (M-20) P.O. BOX 1988 • Santa Ana, California 92702 (714) 667-2700 • Fax (714) 973-1461 www.santa-ana.org CITY MANAGER David N. Ream CITY ATTORNEY Joseph W. Fletcher CLERK OF THE COUNCIL Patricia E. Healy NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION This is to inform the general public that the City of Santa Ana proposes to adopt a Negative Declaration for the following project: Project Title: Harbor Medical and Retail Center Project Project Description: The proposed project consists of the following: The proposed project involves the construction of a 45,744 square foot, two- story commercial building with retail and medical offices and a surface and subterranean level parking garage to accommodate 247 parking spaces on-site. Additionally, the project requests to amend the zoning ordinance to allow ancillary parking area in the Single-Family Residential District and a Conditional Use Permit to allow eating establishments within the North-Harbor Specific Plan area. Project Location: 520 South Harbor Boulevard, Santa Ana, California. Project Number: Conditional Use Permit 2008-23 and Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2008-02. Public Review Period: July 11, 2008 to July 30, 2008 Hearing Date: August 11, 2008 Hearing Location: City of Santa Ana Council Chambers 22 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92702 The Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study as well as all referenced documents will be available for public review at the City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency located at 20 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, California. Please submit any comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration to the City on or before July 30, 2008. Please direct your comments to: Environmental Coordinator, City of Santa Ana, P.O. Box 1988, M-20, Santa Ana, CA, 92702. If you have any questions or would like any additional information, please contact Pedro Guillen at (714) 667- 2729. EX~~~~ 0 Harbor Medical and Retail Center Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Prepared for: City of Santa Ana, Planning and Building Agency 20 Civic Center Plaza, Ross Annex M-20 Santa Ana, CA 92702 Contact: Pedro Guillen, Associate Planner (714)667-2729 Prepared by: URS Corporation 2020 East First Street, Suite 400 Santa Ana, CA 92706 Contact: Court Morgan (714) 835-6886 July 2008 75A-31 tvSA r:JR h"iguzl ,~ Pulido - FA~'f RJR ?RCS TcF.9 ~laud+a J .%tvare~ ,tiGJNCIL h'~7'~S P {:avid 9eravxies ..ar'r.~ 9ustamante 1 Mid F~'~•~e~ `.'recent F Sarmienlc Sal 'iratzrc K „~ ~' ~ ~~ 3avid h.. Ream Clr r' :,T' ORFdE;, Joe~ph ~. J Belcher CLERK OF THE CGUNCfL ^~aMea E Hraiy CITY OF SANTA ANA PLAtJNfNG & BIHLDtNG AGENCY '' vi~~ic. Center P a`a (M-2l}f FU E©xy'91?S •$8nt@:~na. Ca+;fomia ~~?QC Gi f_ih?-~71]i] Fax t714j y?3-l~0' ~n~a~vr.s<nnta-ana ory MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Pursuan# to the Procedures of the City of Santa Ana for lmplementaUon of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Environmental Evaluator has completed an Initial Study for the project described i3elow: Project Nwnber. Conditional Use Pem~it 2008-23 Zoning (ordinance Amendment 2008-02 Applicant: City of Santa Ana Project Location /Address: 520 South Harbor Boulevard. Santa Ana, California Project Title I Description: The proposed project invoh~res the construction of a A5,74~ square foot, two-story commercial buildFng with retail and medFCal offMCes and a surface and subterranean level parking garage to accommodate 2d7 parking spaces on-site. Additionally, the project requests to amend the zoning ordinance to allow ancillary parking area in the Single-Family Residential Dis#nct and a Conditional Use Permit to allo~~,~ eating establishments within the Narth-Hartaor Specific Plan area. And does hereby find: That although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the en•w~ironment. there will not be a significant effect in this case because of revisions to the project and mitigation measures placed on the project. and agreed to by the applicant, reduce each impact to bebw a level of signifi Signature: Date: ` ~ s iota Planner Thrs determFnatiai is not final until adopted by the decision-making body or administrative official, and a Notice of Determination is filed. t ~ 75A-32 t TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW .....................................................5 OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................5 AUTHORTTY ............................................................................................................ ..5 SCOPE OF THE IS/1VIND ........................................................................................... ..6 IMPACT TERMINOLOGY ........................................................................................... ..6 IS/MND ORGANIZATION ........................................................................................ ..7 CHAPTER 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..................................................................... ..8 PROJECT OVERVIEW ............................................................................................... ..8 PROJECT LOCATION ................................................................................................ ..8 EXISTING CONDITIONS AND SURROUNDING LAND USES ......................................... 11 PROJECT'S RELATIONSHIP TO GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING ................................... 16 CHAPTER 3 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ....................................................... 18 AESTHETICS ............................................................................................................ 34 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES ................................................................................... 36 AIR QUALITY .......................................................................................................... 37 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ........................................................................................ 41 CULTURAL RESOURCES .......................................................................................... 42 GEOLOGY AND SOII..S .............................................................................................. 43 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ................................................................ 46 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ....................................................................... 48 LAND USE AND PLANNING ...................................................................................... 52 MINERAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................. 52 NOISE ...................................................................................................................... $2 POPULATION AND HOUSING .................................................................................... 60 PUBLIC SERVICES .................................................................................................... 61 RECREATION ........................................................................................................... 62 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC ............................................................................. 62 UTII.TTIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS .......................................................................... 66 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE .............................................................. 68 CHAPTER 4 MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN AND REPORT ......................70 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................70 PROJECT OVERVIEW ...............................................................................................70 MONITORING AND REPORTING PROCEDURES ..........................................................71 MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ...............................................71 CHAPTER 5 REFERENCES .........................................................................................80 PRINTED REFERENCES ............................................................................................BO WEB STTES ..............................................................................................................81 CHAPTER 6 LIST OF PREPARERS ...........................................................................82 i Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A 3 3 July 2008 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1 -REGIONAL LOCATION MAP .................................................................................9 FIGURE 2 - VICINITY MAP ....................................................................................................1~ FIGURE 3 -SURROUNDING LAND USES ..............................................................................12 FIGURE 4 -PROPOSED SITE PLAN ........................................................................................13 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1 -DAILY CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE ............................ 38 TABLE 2 -DAILY CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE .......................... 39 TABLE 3 -DAILY OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS -REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE ........................... 39 TABLE 4 -DAILY OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS -LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE .......................... 4~ TABLE S -AMBIENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVEL GUIDELINES ................................................ 53 TABLE 6 -AMBIENT NOISE ORDINANCE LEVEL GUIDELINES .............................................. 54 TABLE 7 -LONG TERM NOISE MEASUREMENT SUMMARY .................................................. 54 TABLE S -SHORT TERM NOISE MEASUREMENT DATA ........................................................ SS TABLE 9 -COMMON PARKING FACILITY NOISE LEVEL ....................................................... 58 TABLE 10 -SUMMARY OF PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION OPERATION EXISTING CONDTTIONS ................................................................................................................ 63 TABLE 11 -LEVELS OF SERVICE DESCRIPTIONS FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS ............. 63 TABLE 12 -SUMMARY OF PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION OPERATION OPENING YEAR CONDITIONS WITHOUT PROJECT ................................................................................. 64 TABLE 13 -SUMMARY OF PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION OPERATION OPENING YEAR wlrH PROJECT ............................................................................................................. 64 TABLE 14 -PARKING REQUIREMENTS .................................................................................66 TABLE 1 S -MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN ......................................................................72 LIST OF PHOTOS PHOTO 1 -ONE OF TWO MOBILE HOME-TYPE STRUCTURES ON THE MCFADDEN AUTO SALES STTE ...........................:............................................................................ 11 PHOTO 2 -VIEW LOOKING NORTH ALONG HARBOR BOULEVARD WITH MCFADDEN AUTO SALES SITE ON LEFT ......................................................................................... 14 PHOTO 3 -VIEW LOOKING SOUTH ALONG HARBOR BOULEVARD, MCFADDEN AUTO SALES SITE ON RIGHT ................................................................................................. 1 S PHOTO 4 -VIEW FROM MCFADDEN AUTO SALES SITE TOWARDS ROW CROPS LOOKING SOUTHWEST ................................................................................................ 15 PHOTO S -VIEW OF ROW CROPS AND MULTIFAMILY HOUSING LOOKING WEST ................ 16 LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A -LIST OF TECHNICAL STUDIES BOUND SEPARATELY ...........................83 ii Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center 75A-34 1 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 1 ACMs AQMP Asbestos Containing Materials Air Quality Management Plan Basin South Coast Air Basm BMPs Best Management Practices ' Cal OSHA California Occupational Safety and Health Administration CCR California Code of Regulations CEQA California Environmental Quality Act City City of Santa Ana CMP Congestion Management Plan CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level ' CO Carbon Monoxide CUP Conditional Use Permit dBA A-weighted sound level (decibels) FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FIIZM Flood Insurance Rate Map FMMP Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Project GC General Commercial ICU Intersection Capacity Utilization ' IS Initial Study LOS Level of Service mgd million gallons per day MMP Mitigation Monitoring Plan MND Mitigated Negative Declaration MWD Metropolitan Water District ' MRZs Mineral Resource Zones NESHAPS National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollution NHSP North Harbor Specific Plan NPDES National Pollution Discharge Elimination System 03 Ozone OCTA Orange County Transit Authority OCSD Orange County Sanitation District OCWD Orange County Water District ' OSHA PMIO Occupational Safety and Health Administration Particulate matter 10 microns in diameter or less PM2,5 Particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter or less ' PCBs RCPG Polychlorinated Biphenyls Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide RWQCB Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board t SCAG SCAB Southern California Association of Governments S h C Ai B i out oast r as n 1 iii Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A-3 5 J LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS (CONY) SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District SMARA Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 SR-57 State Route 57, Orange Freeway SR-55 State Route 55, Newport Freeway SR-22 State Route 22, Garden Grove Freeway STC Sound Transmission Class SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan TIA Traffic Impact Study WQMP Water Quality Management Plan iv Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declazation Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A 3 6 July 2008 I~ 1 i~ Introduction and Overview Overview Chapter 1 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 development of the Harbor Medical and Retail Center. The proposed project consists of the development and construction of a 45,744 square foot, two-story commercial building, with a mix of retail (8,880 square feet), restaurant (2,724 square feet), and medical office uses (28,775 square feet). Additionally, the project includes 147 surface and 100 subterranean parking spaces to accommodate 247 vehicles (245 spaces are required by the Zoning Code) on a site that currently incorporates a car sales lot and a field with row crops. A zoning ordinance amendment is required in order to allow for an ancillary parking area in the Single-Family Residential District and a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is required to allow eating establishments within the North-Harbor Specific Plan area. The project site is located at 520 South Harbor Boulevard on the western-side of South Harbor Boulevard between West Camille Street to the north and West McFadden Avenue to the south. As part of the City 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 the 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 a 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, references will be made to either the statute, the State CEQA Guidelines, or appropriate case law. This IS/MND, as required by CEQA, contains 1) a project description; 2) a description of I the environmental setting, potential environmental impacts, mitigation measures for any significant effect, and consistency with plans and policies; and 3) names of preparers. 5 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 ' Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A 3 7 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 and Traffic ' • Utilities and Service Systems ' 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. I • An impact is considered LESS TITAN SIGNIFICANT if the analysis concludes that it would cause no substantial adverse change to the environment and requires no mitigation. r ~ s Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A 3 8 1 t • An impact is considered LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATION 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 Hazbor Medical and Retail Center project, no impacts were determined to be potentially significant. IS/MND Organization The contents and format of this report are designed to meet the requirements of CEQA. This IS/MND consists of the proposed finding that the project, as mitigated, does not have a significant impact on the environment. • 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", identifies 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 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. July 2008 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ' Hazbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A 3 9 Chapter 2 Project Description ' Project Overview The proposed Harbor Medical and Retail Center project consists of the development and construction of a 45,744 square foot, two-story commercial building, with a mix of retail (8,880 square feet), restaurant (2,724 square feet), and medical-office uses (28,775 square feet). Additionally, the project includes 147 surface and 100 subterranean parking spaces to accommodate 247 vehicles (245 spaces are required by the City Zoning Code) on a site ' that currently incorporates a used car sales lot and a field with row crops. A zoning ordinance amendment is required in order to allow for an ancillary parking area in the Single-Family Residential District, and a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is required to ' allow eating establishments within the North Harbor Specific Plan area. The project site is located at 520 South Harbor Boulevard on the western-side of South Harbor Boulevard between West Camille Street to the north and West McFadden Avenue to the south. Project Location The proposed project is approximately 65 feet above mean sea level and situated on nearly level land with a topographic gradient sloping to the southwest. The proposed project is located to Orange County, in the eastern section of the City of Santa Ana. The project site, specifically located at 520 South Harbor Boulevard, is situated on South Harbor Boulevard between West Camille Street and McFadden Avenue. The proposed project site is approximately 2.28-acres of land with Assessor Parcel Number of 188-071- ' O5. Figure 1 shows the regional location of the proposed project, whereas Figure 2 shows the local vicinity of the proposed project. ~I ' 8 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 ' Harbor Medical and Retail Center 75A 40 ~I ~ 75A-41 Existing Conditions and Surrounding Land Uses The proposed project site is approximately 2.28-acres of land with the eastern portion ' currently paved with asphalt and developed as a used car sales lot, occupied by McFadden Auto Sales. The western portion of the proposed project site is currently an ' agricultural field planted with row crops of strawberries and vegetables. The existing used car sales lot, with access along South Harbor Boulevard, includes two mobile home- type structures used as offices for the used car lot business and numerous vehicles lined for sale. Figure 3 shows the surrounding land use in the immediate vicinity of the proposed project site and Figure 4 shows the proposed site plan. n ~, j s 11 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center ~ 75A-43 Photo 1 -One of Two Mobile Home-Type Structures on the McFadden Auto Sales site. n ~: t 1 ~ 75A-44 - Z woZ ~ _ Q ~~a W a ~ W a c~ N C9 ~ I jpp LL ---------h---------------------~--- (A ~w ---------~------------------------ ~ o>~ ZF-U - W a~ d o0 • t ' a ~ ~Q ^~^ ` , - a m o 1 Q ~ N ~~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~~ O iN NN Q QN M N ~ • z ~ i. ~~ ~ ~ ~• do ~ M M N M A MN 1 M 1 -- i d'! 1 I" 1 1 N ~+, ~ d'1 ~K M i" ~ _ I ~~ w 1 r 1 w ~ .' M M « :••~ M t _ ~ \,u \\ 4\ ` .- ; ~` ~ } 1 ' •• •. ~ P. j'. t ~ 1 ~:: V ~ 1: t F' 1 ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ . r ~ _ ti ~ r ~ ~ - ~- - - i ~ i :;~ n ~:~ O r~~^~tr+erwr~w ~ '~ d N O 75A-45 The surrounding land uses are comprised of commercially zoned parcels to the North, East, and South; and low-medium density residential parcels to the Northwest and West. The commercial uses include auto repair shops, a glass facility, a locksmith business, and auto dealerships. The Balihi Mobile Home Lodge is located to the northwest at 432 South Harbor Boulevard. Multi-family residences are located to west. Single-family residences and various retail stores are located to the south of the project site. 14 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center 75A-46 Photo 2 -View Looking North along Harbor Boulevard with McFadden Auto Sales Site on Left. ' 15 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Harbor Medical and Retail Center ~ 75A-47 July 2008 Photo 3 -View Looking South along Harbor Boulevard, McFadden Auto Sales Site on Right. Photo 4 -View from McFadden Auto Sales Site Towards Row Crops Looking Southwest. ~~ 1 Proposed Project The project proponent proposes to construct a commercial building with retail, restaurant, and medical offices and a surface and subterranean level parking garage at 520 South Harbor Boulevard in the City of Santa Ana. The proposed project includes the following key elements: • Construction of a 45,744 square foot, two story building to accommodate retail, restaurant, and medical offices (refer to Figure 4, Proposed Site Plan); • Surface parking lot and subterranean level parking garage to accommodate 247 parking spaces; • Zoning ordinance amendment to allow ancillary parking area in a Single Family Residential district; and a • Conditional Use Permit to allow eating establishments within the North Harbor Specific Plan area. Project's Relationship to General Plan and Zoning General Plan The proposed project site is designated as General Commercial (GC) in the City's General Plan and GC in the North Harbor Specific Plan (NHSP). A conditional use permit is required to allow restaurants in the North Harbor Specific Plan, while a zoning 1 16 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 I Harbor Medical and Retail Center 75A-48 Photo 5 -View of Row Crops and Multifamily Housing Looking West ordinance amendment is required to allow ancillary parking area in the Single-Family Residential District. Zoning The project site is designated as SP-2. An SP-2 designation specifies that the site is 1 governed by the North Harbor Specific Plan. Accordingly, the proposed project would require a zoning ordinance amendment and a conditional use permit. 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: • North Harbor Specific Plan Amendment • Conditional Use Permit • Site plan review • Design Review Committee • Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) 17 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration A Q ' Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A-4 J July 2008 520 South Harbor Boulevard Harbor Medical and Retail Center Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ZOA 08-02 /CUP 08-23 MND July 31, 2008 ERRATA The following revisions have been made for the Harbor Medical and Retail Center Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, dated July 2008, as a result of a comment letter received from the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) on July 31, 2008 (one day after closing of the 20-day public review period). The revisions affect the below-referenced section of the Initial Study only and do not affect the substance of the analysis included in that document. Furthermore, the below-described revisions do not result in any additional mitigation measures beyond those already included in the Draft Initial Study circulated for public review. Revised text as included in this Errata is denoted by bold text below, whereas deletions are identified by s~l~ text. Page 67, CEQA Checklist Question E. (Utilities and Service Systems): E. Result in a 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? No Impact. Sewage from the City of Santa Ana is diverted to OCSD's Reclamation Plant Number 1 in Fountain Valley. The plant's primary treatment capacity (including standby) is currently equipped to handle bA 204 million gallons per day (mgd) ~~~~*'~ ~~~r„°a °.,...,,, (OCSD 2008). Furthermore, the secondary treatment capacity is equipped to handle 110 mgd at Plant Number 1 (OCSD 2008). The reclamation plant has enough capacity to handle the increase in project related wastewater, therefore, no further study is required and no mitigation measures are necessary. 75A-50 Chapter 3 Environmental Checklist 1. Project Title: Harbor Medical and Retail Center 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, CA 92702 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Pedro Guillen, Associate Planner (714) 667-2729 4. Project Location: The proposed project is located in the City of Santa Ana, Orange County, state of California. Specifically, the proposed project is located at 520 South Harbor Boulevard and situated on South Harbor Boulevard between West Camille Street and McFadden Avenue (refer to Figure 1, Regional Location Map and Figure 2, Project Vicinity Map). 18 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declazation ~ 5A 51 July 2008 Hazbor Medical and Retail Center ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: ' The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ^ Aesthetics ^ Agriculture Resources ^ Air Quality 0 Biological Resources ^ Cultural Resources ^ Geology /Soils Hazards & Hazardous Hydrology /Water ^ Materials ^ Quality ^ Land Use /Planning ^ Mineral Resources ^ Noise ^ Population /Housing ^ Public Services ^ Recreation ^ Transportation/Traffic ^ Utilities /Service ^ Mandatory Findings of Significance 1 Systems DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: ^ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. >> I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ^ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ^ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ^ I find that 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 ' or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. ~~ «~ ~~~ __~_ ._~~~.___ ~~~_ _~-_ m_~_M___~ P~dxo G~zille~_ A~~r.~ia.~ P n!.ex Prtn.tedNa~ ~~ .~..~.. ~~ e 19 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center ' 75A-52 1 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: ' 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 1 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than 1 significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: 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 (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses", may be cross-referenced). 1 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: I a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated", describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 20 ' Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center 75A-53 1 1 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. ~) 1 n 1 Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance 21 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ~ 5A 54 Harbor Medical and Retail Center July 2008 1 1 1 it u Less Than Issues: Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant with Significant Impact Mitigation Impact pact Incorporation I. AESTHETICS: Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on ^ >> ^ ^ a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic ^ ^ ^ ~> resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic 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? II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique ^ ^ ^ >> Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for ^ ^ ^ ~> agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing ^ ^ ^ ~> environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non- agricultural use? 22 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 75A 55 Harbor Medical and Retail Center July 2008 1 i~ Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria estab lished by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct ^ ^ ~> ^. implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or ^ >> ^ ^ contribute substantially to an existing or projected 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 emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to ^ >> ^ ^ substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting ^ >> ^ ^ a substantial number of people? IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, ^ ^ ^ ~> 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 Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on ^ ^ p >> any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? 23 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declazation July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center 75A-56 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant with Significant pact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation c) Have a substantial adverse effect on ^ ^ ^ ~> federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the ^ ^ ^ >> movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ^ ^ ^ >> ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an ^ ^ ^ >> adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in ^ ^ ^ >> the significance of a historical resource as defined in 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change ^ ^ ^ >> in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to ' 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a ^ ^ ^ >> unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, ^ >> ^ ^ including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? 24 Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration c July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center 75A-57 1 t Less Than Potentially Significant Significant with Impact Mitigation Incorporation Less Than No Significant Impact Impact 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: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, ^ ^ ~> as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ^ ^ ~> iii) Seismic-related ground failure, ^ ^ ~> including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? ^ ^ ^ b) Result in substantial soil erosion or ^ >> ^ the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit 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? d) Be located on expansive soil, as ^ ^ >> defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately ^ ^ ^ supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS B: Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the ^ >> ^ public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? 25 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration c Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5/`1~ C July 2008 ~]~ ^ ~> b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? 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 result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant with Significant pact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation ^ ~> ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ >> ^ ^ ^ >> ^ o ^ >> ^ ^ ^ >> ^ ~> 0 ^ ^ ^ ^ >> 26 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declazation July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center 75A-59 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant with Significant pact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project: a) Violate any 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 (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing ^ ^ ~> ^ drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing ^ ^ ^ >> drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a 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? e) Create or contribute runoff water ^ >> ^ ^ which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade ^ >> ^ ^ water quality? g) Place housing within a 100-year ^ ^ >> ^ flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? 27 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5/'"'~-6 0 July 2008 Potentially Significant Impact h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard ^ area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a ^ significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or ^ mudflow? Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation ^ IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project: a) Physically divide an established ^ community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use ^ plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat ^ conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? X. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a ^ known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) 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? Less Than No Significant pact Impact 7 ^ '~ ~> ^ ^ ~> ^ ~> ^ ^ ^ ^ ~> >> >> ~> 28 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center 75A-61 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant with Significant pact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation XI. NOISE: Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation ^ ~> ^ ^ of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation ^ ~> ^ ^ of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ^ ~> 0 ^ 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 the 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? f) For a project within the vicinity of a ^ ^ ^ >> private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth ^ ^ ^ '> in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? 29 _ Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ~+ July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center 75A-V t Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant with Significant pact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation 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: 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 ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? ^ ^ ~> ^ Police protection? ^ ^ >> ^ Schools? ^ ^ ^ >> Parks? ^ ^ ^ >> Other public facilities? ^ ^ ^ ~> XIV. RECREATION: a) Would the project increase the use of ^ ^ ^ ~> existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational ^ ^ ^ ~> facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project: 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 ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? 30 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ' Harbor Medical and Retail Center 75A-V 3 July 2008 Less Than Potentially Significant Significant with Impact Mitigation Incorporation 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 ^ 0 patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to ^ ^ a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency ^ ~> access? f) Result in inadequate parking ^ ^ capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, ^ ^ or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: 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? 31 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ~+ Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A- V 4 Less Than No Significant pact Impact ^ ^ ^ ~~ 7 ^ ~> 0 ^ ^ ~> ^ ~> ^ ^ ^ ~~ ^ ^ July 2008 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation d) Have sufficient water supplies ^ ^ ^ ~> available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a 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) Be served by a landfill with sufficient ^ ^ ~> ^ permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local ^ ^ >> ^ statutes and regulations related to solid waste? 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? 32 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A-6 5 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, the 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? Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation ^ ~> ^ ^ ^ ~> ^ ^ 33 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A-6 6 Aesthetics A. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. The proposed project site is located within a commercial corridor area along Harbor Boulevard ' in the City of Santa Ana. The project site is zoned General Commercial in the North Harbor Specific Plan (NHSP), as well as, in the City of Santa Ana's General Plan. 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. These scenic corridors provide existing scenic views and vistas that are accessible to the public. Harbor Boulevard is not designated as a scenic corridor, but rather, as an inter-city corridor, which "Ensure that development within scenic corridors take place at a scale and is designed so that ' aesthetic features are consistent with the function of scenic corridors as part of the Framework Plan" (City of Santa Ana 1982:27). Construction-related visual nuisances, such as construction equipment, materials, and construction-related ' vehicles, will be minimized by implementing standard construction practices, and would be removed upon completion of the project. Furthermore, construction of the proposed project will occur in a developed area and in consideration of the relatively short duration of construction activities, potential impacts would be less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-1. Mitigation Measures AES-1 The following standard construction practices will be implemented to minimize potential aesthetic impacts: 1 -Construction areas shall receive appropriate routine maintenance to reduce unnecessary debris piles; -Construction areas shall have appropriate erosion and dust control ro ra i l p g ms n p ace; - Construction lighting shall be limited to safety and security and ' directed to minimize light and glare impacts to any adjacent sensitive receptors. B. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? No Impact. The proposed project is located in the General Commercial District ' of the North Harbor Specific Plan, which is not located on astate-designated highway as defined by the California Scenic Highway Mapping System. The closest designated scenic highway, the Riverside Freeway (SR-91), which is designated a scenic highway from the intersection with the Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) to the Weir Canyon exit, is approximately seven miles north of the project site. Therefore, the project site is not visible from the SR-91 and will not ' have an impact on a designated scenic highway. As the project site is currently operating as a used car sales lot with two temporary structures and an agricultural 34 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A-6 7 1 field, it does not contain any scenic resources such as trees, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings. Impacts are not anticipated in this regard. ' C. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? ' Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. The site currently has two mobile home-type structures associated with the used car sales lot, which will be replaced with a 45,744 square foot, 2-story commercial building over one level of subterranean parking. Construction of the proposed project may create temporary, short-term impacts to adjacent uses. However, these impacts are short-term, and would cease upon project completion and would be mitigated ' through implementation of standard construction practices mentioned in AES-1, above. ' Furthermore, the project site is designated as General Commercial in the City's General Plan, as well as, in the NHSP. The project site will be developed in accordance with the guidelines provided in the North Harbor Specific Plan, which ' attempts to improve the land use mix and visual quality of the North Harbor Corridor. Landscaping and the design characteristics of the building would comply with the Design Standards of the NHSP. The proposed project will bring the visual character of the project site into closer alignment with the NHSP design goals. Potential impacts would be less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2. Mitigation Measures AES-2 The proposed project will comply with the design standards ' outlined in the City of Santa Ana's North Harbor Specific Plan. D. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. The proposed project site is located on relatively flat land with no significant hills, trees, or rock 1 outcroppings. The site is approximately 65 feet above mean sea level with a topographic gradient sloping to the southwest. The site is disturbed and developed with a used car sales lot and an agricultural field. The site is further surrounded by commercial and residential land uses. Existing light sources adjacent to the proposed project site consist of building and street lighting generated by nearby commercial and residential developments. Additional light sources include nighttime vehicular traffic along South Harbor Boulevard. The proposed project includes a 147-vehicle surface parking lot, and a 100- ' vehicle subterranean level-parking garage to accommodate a total of 247 vehicles on site. New surface parking lot and subterranean parking lot lighting may be installed within the project site. This new lighting may affect residents of the ' adjacent Balihi Mobile Home Lodge, multi-family residences, and single-family residences. However, the proposed project is surrounded by an existing 6-foot high masonry block perimeter wall and impacts associated with on-site lighting are not anticipated to adversely impact adjacent residences with the incorporation 35 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A 6 8 of directional lighting techniques and adherence with standard City requirements relative to parking lot lighting. The proposed project may also include ancillary exterior lighting for security and lighting of signage on-site. The surrounding area is developed and currently experiences light and glare from surrounding buildings, streetlights, parking lot lights, traffic signals, and motor vehicle lights. However, adherence to applicable local ordinances will minimize light and glare impacts to less than significant levels. Furthermore, to ensure the safety of workers and proper operation of equipment, nighttime lighting may be required if construction activities occur during dusk or nighttime hours consistent with City permitted construction work hours. Construction lighting fixtures shall be shielded away from adjacent residences and fully confined within the site boundary so that direct lighting does not shine on or produce glare upon any residential properties. Mitigation Measures AES-3 For the proposed commercial building, subterranean parking, and surface parking lot, all lighting shall comply with all City zoning, building, and NHSP design guidelines and will utilize directional and/or shielded lighting in order to minimize spillover effects to adjacent vicinities. The Applicant will provide the City, for their approval, a lighting plan with a photometric study that shows the point-by-point foot-candle layout to 20 feet outside the property line (NHSP 6.2.3). Additionally, all new projects shall provide an ornamental night lighting plan, prepared by an electrical engineer, and approved by the building, planning, and police departments (NHSP 6.2.3). Agricultural Resources In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model prepared by the California Department of Conservation an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agricultural farmland. A. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? No Impact. A portion of the proposed project site, less than 1-acre, is currently an agricultural field planted with row crops of strawberries and vegetable. Section 66474.4 of the Subdivision Map Act identifies certain categories of agricultural resources that are significant and require special consideration. According to the ' Santa Ana General Plan and the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Project (FMMP), the City does not contain any Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance parcels. The project site is classified as being 1 located in an urbanized area and therefore, the proposed project will not adversely 36 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 1 Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A-6 9 affect these categories of farmland. No further study is necessary and no mitigation measures are required. B. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Contract? No Impact. The Williamson Act 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 project site, which is classified as General Commercial (GC) in the City's General Plan and in the North Harbor Specific Plan (NHSP), is ' approximately 2.28 acres in size with the western portion currently planted with row crops and the eastern portion utilized as a used car sales lot. Additionally, given that Santa Ana neither contains any parcels of Prime Farmland, nor contains any parcel consisting of more than 40 acres of farmland, the Williamson Act Contract is not applicable to the project site or to any other parcel within the City of Santa Ana. No further study is required and no mitigation measures are necessary. C. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? No Impact. Given that the current agricultural portion of the project site is slightly over an acre in size and currently designated as General Commercial in ' the General Plan and the NHSP, the conversion of the site to a commercial use will not have a significant impact (less than 0.0002°Io) on the total agricultural lands within the State. No further study is required and no mitigation measures are necessary . Air Quality Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to .make the following determinations. Would the project: A. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less than Significant Impact. An Air Quality Analysis Technical Memorandum (URS Corporation, 2008) was prepared for the proposed project to assess potential project-related air quality impacts. The Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) for the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) sets forth a comprehensive program that will lead the SCAB into compliance with all federal and state air 1 quality standards. The AQMP controls measures and related emission reduction estimates are based upon emissions projections for a future development scenario derived from land use, population, and employment characteristics defined in consultation with local governments. Accordingly, conformance with the AQMP for development projects is determined by demonstrating compliance with local land use plans andlor population projections. ' The project site is within the boundaries of the North Harbor Specific Plan (NHSP). The project site is designated and zoned for commercial land uses in both NHSP and the City's General Plan. Since the project involves the 37 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 ' Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5/'"'~-7 0 ~~ fi development of medical and retail centers, which is consistent with the current zoning and land use designations of the City's General Plan, the project complies with the AQMP. The impact is considered less than significant. No further study is required and no mitigation measures are necessary. B. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Less than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporation. The project is within the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The SCAQMD has developed thresholds of significance for both regional and localized air quality impacts, with which the project must comply. Construction was assumed to begin in 2008 and take 12 months to construct the project in one phase. A summary of the construction emissions generated by the project, under unmitigated and mitigated scenarios, compared to the SCAQMD's regional significance thresholds are presented in the table below. Table 1 -Daily Construction Emissions Regional Significance VOC NOX CO SOX PMIO PMzs (Ibs/da) (Ibs/da) (lbs/da) (lbs/da) (lbs/da) (lbs/da ) SCAQMD Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Unmiti ated Dail Construction Emissions - Re Tonal Si nificance Gradin 2.54 29.27 11.70 0.01 10.69 3.12 Building 26.24 33.32 28.34 0 05 10.69 3 12 Construction . . Maximum 26.24 33.32 28.34 0.05 10.69 3.12 Exceed No No No No No No Threshold? Miti ated Dail Construction Emissions - Re Tonal Si ni~cance Gradin 2.54 29.27 11.70 0.01 3.43 1.61 Building 26.24 33.32 28.34 0 05 2 26 2 01 Construction . . . Maximum 26.24 33.32 28.34 0.05 3.43 2.01 Exceed No No No No No No Threshold? Source: Air Quali Anal sis Technical Memorandum, URS Co oration. Febru 12, 2008. Maximum short-term daily emissions with specified mitigation measures are 26.24 lbs for VOC, 33.321bs for NOx, 28.34 lbs for CO, 0.05 lbs for S02, 3.43 lbs for PMIO, and 2.01 lbs for PM2.5, which are below all applicable SCAQMD regional significance thresholds. In addition to the regional analysis, the project's emissions and impacts on a localized scale were also analyzed. The maximum disturbance area for the proposed project is approximately 2 acres per day, therefore the SCAQMD localized thresholds fora 2-acre project was utilized. The nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are residences adjacent to the project site, to the west, north, and south, therefore the thresholds for a distance of 25 meters were used. This represents the worst-case analysis of the project's localized impacts. 38 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center 75/'"'~-7 1 1 A summary of the construction emissions, with and without mitigation measures incorporated, are compared to the SCAQMD's localized significance thresholds and presented in the table below. Table 2 -Daily Construction Emissions Localized Significance NOX (lbs/da) CO (lbs/da) PMIO (lbs/da) PM25 (Ibs/da ) Unmiti ated Dail Construction Emissions -Localized Si nificance SCAQMD 198 649 6 4 Threshold Maximum 26.24 33.32 10.69 3.12 Exceed No No Yes No Threshold? Miti ated Dail Construction Emissions - Localized Si nificance Maximum 26.24 33.32 3.43 2.01 Exceed No No No No Threshold? Source: Air Quali Anal sis Technical Memorandum, URS Co oration. Febru 12, 2008. Under the unmitigated scenario, the project's emissions of CO, NOX, and PM2.s do not exceed the applicable SCAQMD localized significance thresholds. However, the project's emissions from construction will exceed the thresholds for PMIO under the unmitigated scenario. With implementation of mitigation measure AQ-1, the proposed project's emissions from construction will be reduced and will not exceed the SCAQMD localized thresholds of significance. The emissions from area sources including consumer products such as home ' appliances, lawnmowers, water heaters, and stoves can generate a significant amount of pollutants. Furthermore, mobile sources from vehicles traveling in and out of the proposed project also emit pollutants. The area and mobile source emissions, including daily trips were analyzed for the proposed project and presented in the table below. Table 3 -Daily Operational Emissions -Regional Significance ROG NOx CO SOZ PMIO PMZ.S COZ (Ibs/da) (lbs/da) (lbs/da) (Ibs/da) (lbs/da) (Ibs/da) (lbs/da ) SCAQMD 55 55 550 150 150 55 N/A Threshold Summer 15.18 19.91 194.38 0.18 26.67 5.54 17,248.62 Max Emissions Winter Max 16.82 24.08 183.36 0.14 28.66 5.53 15,620.85 Emissions Exceed No No No No No No No Threshold? Source: Air Quali Anal sis Technical Memorandum, URS Co oration. Febru 12, 2008. 39 July 2008 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Harbor Medical and Retail Center ~ C /~ ~~ 1 The maximum daily long-term emissions are 15.18 lbs for ROG, 19.91 lbs for NOx, 194.381bs for CO, 0.18 lbs for 502, 26.671bs for PMIO, and 5.541bs for PM2.5 in summer and 16.821bs for ROG, 24.081bs for NOx, 183.36 lbs for CO, 0.141bs for S02, 28.66 lbs for PMIO, and 5.53 lbs for PM2.5 in winter. Emissions of all criteria pollutants are below the SCAQMD regional threshold. Additionally, the project's emissions were found to not cause an exceedance of the localized significance thresholds, as shown in the table below. Table 4 -Daily Operational Emissions -Localized Significance NOX (lbs/da) CO (lbs/da) PMIO (lbs/da) PM2S (lbs/da ) SCAQMD 198 649 2 1 Threshold Summer Max 1.46 15 67 1 61 0 32 Emissions . . . Winter Max 1.64 10.51 1 60 0 31 Emissions . . Exceed No No No No Threshold? Source: Air Quali Anal sis Technical Memorandum, URS Co oration. Febru 12, 2008. As indicated in the Air Quality Analysis Technical Memorandum, implementation of mitigation measure AQ-1 would reduce the air quality impacts from the construction of the proposed project. ' Mitigation Measures AQ-1 The following measures will reduce air quality impacts from construction related activities. ^ Apply soil stabilizers to inactive areas; ^ Water exposed surfaces two times a day; I Position equipment staging areas away from the sensitive receptors. C. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for ' which the project area is non-attainment under applicable federal or state ambient air quality standards (including releasing emission, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? ' Less than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporation. Refer to response in Air Quality (B), above. In consideration of the relatively small scale ' and nature of the proposed project, the project would not generate emissions that exceed SCAQMD thresholds with implementation of the mitigation measure AQ- 1. There are no cumulatively considerable air quality impacts anticipated with ' respect to the proposed project. D. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? ' Less than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporation. There are sensitive receptors located directly north, south, and west of the project. However, both construction and operational emissions from the project have been shown to ' be less than the applicable SCAQMD thresholds of significance on both the 40 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 ' Harbor Medical and Retail Center 75/`173 ' regional and localized level with the implementation of mitigation measure AQ-1. Therefore, the project will not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ' concentrations and the impact is less than significant. E. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Less than Sign cant Impact. The project presents the potential for generation of objectionable odors during construction in the immediate vicinity of the project site. Construction activities associated with the proposed project may generate odors from the use of heavy-duty equipment. Potential odors may include diesel and gasoline fumes from construction vehicles and equipment. However, these fumes are transitory in nature and would not create objectionable odors affecting a 1 substantial number of people. The proposed project would implement standard construction practices to minimize potentially adverse effects related to odors, including compliance with SCAQMD Rule 402 Nuisance, placing construction ' equipment as far as possible from sensitive receptors, and utilizing non-residential routes for construction vehicle traffic when possible. Recognizing the short-term duration and quantity of emissions from the project, as well as, the results of the localized significance threshold analysis, the project will not expose substantial numbers of people to objectionable odors. Therefore, impacts from short-term construction odors are considered less than significant. Furthermore, long-term operations of the proposed project are not expected to generate significant emissions. Therefore, no significant long-term atr emissions or odors are associated with the proposed project. No further study is required, and no mitigation measures are necessary. Biological Resources A. Have a substantial adverse effect, 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 Service? No Impact. The project site is located in an urbanized area of the City of Santa ' Ana. The site does not contain any sensitive habitat and will not have any direct impact on species identified as 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 Service. The agricultural portion of the project site has been in continuous agricultural service as early as 1938 (Alliance ' Environmental Services 2006: 7) and consequently does not contain any native habitat or species. No further study is required, and no mitigation measures are necessary. B. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? ' No Impact. As mentioned above, the project site is in an urbanized area and does not contain any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community. Refer to 41 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration A July 2008 ' Harbor Medical and Retail Center 75/'"'~-7" response in Biological Resources (A.), above. No further study is required, and no mitigation measures are necessary. ' C. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? No Impact. The proposed project site is located in an urbanized area that does not ' contain any federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. No further study is required, and no mitigation measures are necessary. D. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife ' corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? No Impact. Due to the location and the disturbed condition of the project site, it is not anticipated to disrupt any movement of native resident or migratory fish or 1 wildlife species. Additionally, the project is not anticipated to disrupt any established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. No further study is required, and no mitigation measures are necessary. E. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, ' such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact. The project site, in its current condition, does not contain any trees or biological resources. The proposed project will comply with all City policies and ordinances pertaining to trees and landscaping. No further study is required, and no mitigation measures are necessary. F. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural ' Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? ' No Impact. As discussed earlier, the project site is located in an urbanized location not covered by a Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community ' Conservation Plan, or any other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. No further study is required, and no mitigation measures are necessary. ' Cultural Resources A. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as ' defined in Section 15064.5? No Impact. The project site does not contain any structures that are listed on local, state, or federal historic resource lists. Additionally, the City of Santa Ana ' Historic Resources Map (City of Santa Ana 1998: A-54) does not list any historic resources on or near the project site. No further study is necessary, and no mitigation measures are required. 42 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration c July 2008 1 Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5/'"'~-7 ii B. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resource pursuant to defined Section 15064.5? No Impact. The project site is located within an urbanized area that has been previously disturbed; therefore, the probability of discovering archeological resources is considered low. According to the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan, the project site is categorized as neither having historic/archaeological resources nor being located in an archeologically sensitive area. No further study is necessary, and no mitigation measures are required. C. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? No Impact. The project site is located within an urbanized area that has been previously disturbed; therefore, the likelihood of discovering paleontological resources is very unlikely. No further study is necessary, and no mitigation measures are required. D. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. The project site is not known to contain any human remains interred inside or outside formal cemeteries. Discovery of human remains during construction is governed by State Law; work shall cease immediately and the County Coroner shall be contacted to make necessary findings as to the origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American decent, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) shall be notified. The NAHC will identify the ancestry of the remains and determine which course of action should be taken in addressing the findings. Potential impacts would be less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT- l . Mitigation Measures CULT-1 If human remains are unearthed during construction, work shall cease immediately and the County Coroner shall be contacted to make necessary findings as to the origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American decent, the NAHC shall be notified. The NAHC will identify the ancestry of the remains and determine which course of action should be taken in addressing the findings. Geology and Soils A. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving? Al. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State 43 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ' Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5/'"'~-7 6 July 2008 1 C Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. Less than Significant Impact. A Geotechnical Investigation Report (Don Solis Engineering, 2006) was prepared for the proposed project.. According to the most recent Alquist-Priolo Zoning Map, no known fault traces are located in the City of Santa Ana. Nonetheless, the project site is located in seismically active Southern California with numerous geologic faults within 50 miles of the City's borders. The most significant faults that may affect the City of Santa Ana are the offshore branch of the Newport-Inglewood system, located approximately nine miles to the southwest, and the Whittier-Elsinore system, located approximately ten miles to the north. Additionally, though further from the City, the San Andreas and Raymond faults could produce large earthquakes. Of all these faults, the Newport-Inglewood system is the one most likely to produce large earthquakes within the next 20 years. The proposed project would not affect subsurface geology or the probability of a seismic event; however, if an earthquake were to occur, the building could sustain damage. Adhering to standard engineering practices and design criteria as contained in the current Uniform Building Code (UBC) relative to seismic and geological hazards, and implementations of recommendations from the Geotechnical Investigation Report, the impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels. A2. Strong seismic ground shaking? Less than Significant Impact. The seismic hazard from ground shaking is typical for the vast majority of areas in Southern California. The greatest potential for a large earthquake comes from the Newport- Inglewood fault, with experts predicting a large damaging earthquake on this fault within the next 20 years. A 7.0 magnitude earthquake on this fault is expected to cause significant and widespread regional damage. However, the implementation of seismic design provisions for structural protection will help minimize threats to life-safety in the event of an earthquake. All structures will be designed in accordance with the seismic design provisions of the UBC to promote maximum safety in the event of an earthquake. Conformance with these standard design parameters would reduce any potential impacts associated with ground shaking to less than significant levels. A3. Seismic related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less than Significant Impact. Liquefaction occurs with the sudden loss of soil strength due to the rapid increase in pore pressure within cohesionless soils as a result of repeated cyclic loading during seismic events. Several conditions must be present for liquefaction to occur including the presence of relatively shallow ground water, generally loose soil conditions, the susceptibility of soils to liquefaction based on grain- size characteristics and the generation of significant and repeated 44 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declazation Harbor Medical and Retail Center ~ ~ w ~~ July 2008 ii ' seismically induced ground acceleration. The proposed project site has several factors required for liquefaction to occur. Groundwater was encountered at a depth of 5 feet below surface and surface soils were cohesionless uniform soils. The proposed project site would be suitable for construction, with the implementation of recommendations included in ' the referenced Geotechnical Investigation Report. A4. Landslides? ' No Impact. The proposed project site is located on flat, featureless terrain, hence the potential for earthquake induced landslides or landslides due to cuts into slopes are nonexistent. No further study is necessary, and no mitigation measures are required. B. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ' Less than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporation. The soil in the proposed project area consists of Hueneme fine sandy loam. This soil type is nearly level and generally occurs on large alluvial fans or flood plains. The soil is characterized by slow runoff and slight erosion hazard. The current site is composed of an asphalt-paved parking lot and an agricultural field currently ' planted with row crops. Construction activities, including grading, would displace soils and temporarily increase the potential for soils to be subject to wind and water erosion. The proposed project will be required to comply with standard engineering practices for erosion control and qualified personnel will monitor soil compaction during the construction phase. Preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) would reduce potential soil erosion impacts to less than significant levels. Furthermore, construction impacts would be short-term and ' cease upon completion of the proposed project. The proposed project will also convert the existing agricultural field, a site that ' most likely experiences substantial erosion and top soil loss, into a parking lot with various pervious and impervious surfaces. As mentioned in the Geotechnical Investigation Report, an adequate drainage system should be provided behind ' applicable retaining walls to prevent the build-up of hydrostatic pressure. Implementation of mitigation measures including the City's Best Management Practices (BMPs) applied to minimize losses related to soils, recommendations in ' the Geotechnical Investigation Report, and implementation of standard engineering practices would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. ' Mitigation Measures GEO-1 Refer to WQ-1 and WQ-2 in Hydrology and Water Quality, below. C. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? ' Less Than Significant Impact. The soil in the proposed project area consists of Hueneme fine sandy loam. This soil type is nearly level and generally occurs on large alluvial fans or flood plains. The soil is characterized by slow runoff and 45 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center ~ C /~ ~ Q ' slight erosion hazard. The project site has been disturbed in the past and does not contain any unique geological features. The proposed project site has been ' deemed suitable for construction with implementation of recommendations identified in the Geotechnical Investigation Report. Construction, including grading, will implement standard engineering practices to minimize geotechnical ' constraints. Also, refer to response in Geology and Soils (A3) above. D. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building ' Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Less than Significant Impact. As previously mentioned, the proposed project site is located in an area consisting of Hueneme fine sandy loam characterized by ' slow runoff and slight erosion hazards. The project site also has the factors required for liquefaction to occur. However, adhering to standard engineering ' practices, recommendations included in the project's Geotechnical Investigation Report, the City's design criteria, and as contained in the UBC relative to geologic hazards, will mimriuze the subsidence and liquefaction dangers to less ' than significant levels. E. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the ' disposal of waste water? No Impact. Sewer access is available in the project area. No further study is ' necessary, and no mitigation measures are required. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ' A. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. Construction of ' the proposed project will involve the use of materials typical for commercial building construction projects. All construction materials will be transported, utilized, and stored in a manner consistent with all applicable local, state, and federal regulations and would not otherwise be used under hazardous conditions. Furthermore, construction activities, including grading, may expose surface or subsurface hazardous materials. The project site contains two temporary mobile- ' home structures that were converted into offices. The estimated build date of these structures is around 1972, six years before the U.S. EPA prohibited the use of Asbestos Containing Materials (AGMs) in 1978. It is possible that these ' temporary structures included AGMs, and lead-based paint in their construction materials and therefore, care must be taken in preventing the dispersal of AGMs, ' and lead into the environment if the structures are to be demolished or removed from the site. The proposed project would be constructed on previously developed parcels and potential impacts associated with hazards or hazardous materials ' would be reduced to less than significant levels with the implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 and HAZ-2. ' 46 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 ' Harbor Medical and Retail Center ~ ~ w ~ ^ r Mitigation Measures HAZ-1 If the temporary structures are to be demolished, then as a condition of approval for the project, an asbestos and lead containing materials survey will be performed by a qualified environmental professional before any demolition permit is issued. Said survey will adhere to federal, state, and local regulations and will be sent to the City for approval. If the survey finds ACMs in the temporary structures, then those materials containing ACMs will be removed and disposed of in accordance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations. HAZ-2 If lead-based paint is discovered during on-site investigation, all building materials containing lead-based paint will be removed, transported, and disposed of at landfills that meet acceptance criteria for the waste being disposed. Demolition and removal shall be performed in conformance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations pertaining to lead-based paint. B. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. The project is not expected to handle hazardous materials or create a significant hazard to the public or environment in the case of an upset or accident. Refer to response in Hazards and Hazardous Materials (A.), above. No further study is necessary, and no mitigation measures are required. C. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No Impact. The project site is located within a quarter mile of Russell Elementary School but is not expected to impact the school due to the site's lack of handling or generating hazardous materials, acutely hazardous materials, or hazardous wastes. No further study is necessary, and no mitigation measures are required. D. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? No Impact. The project site is not listed on any Federal, State, or local (Santa Ana Fire Department) list as a hazardous materials site. No further study is necessary, and no mitigation measures are required. 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 result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 47 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ' Hazbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A 8 0 July 2008 ' No Impact. There are no public airports in the City of Santa Ana; however, John Wayne International Airport is located one-mile southwest of city limits, and approximately 7.3 miles southwest of the project site. Consequently, the proposed project is not located within atwo-mile radius of-any airport and therefore, the proposed project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or ' working in the project area. No further study is necessary, and no mitigation measures are required. ' F. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. The project site is not located in the vicinity of a private airstrip. The ' closest heliport is located at the Orange County Sheriff's Department 2.9 miles away and would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the ' project area. No further study is necessary, and no mitigation measures are required. G. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency ' response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. According to the ' Public Safety Element of the General Plan, the City of Santa Ana maintains an Emergency Services Plan. The purpose of this plan is to provide direction and gutdance for officials and citizens in the event of an emergency, which may ' include earthquakes, floods, major fires andJor explosions, industrial accidents, bomb threats, and so forth (City of Santa Ana, 1998: 18). The proposed project will not interfere with any adopted emergency response plan or emergency 1 evacuation plan. In addition, a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) would be implemented to ensure that activities associated with construction of the proposed project would not interfere with emergency response vehicles or evacuation plans. Refer to response in Transportation and Traffic (A.). H. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or ' where residences are intermixed with wildlands? No Impact. The project site is located in an urbanized sector of the City, ' surrounded by developed parcels. The immediate vicinity of the project site does not contain any wildland-urban interfaces that are susceptible to wildland fires. No further study is necessary and no mitigation measures are required. Hydrology and Water Quality A. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? ' Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. The proposed project is not expected to have any special waste discharge requirements other than the connection to the public utility sewer. However, the existing agricultural ' field and paved used car sales lot will be replaced with a commercial 2-story building, a parking lot, and associated driveways, sidewalks, and landscaping. ' This change in surface area of permeable surfaces to impermeable surfaces will be 48 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Q July 2008 ' Harbor Medical and Retail Center 75A-V 1 I~ I~ significant and measures will have to be implemented to mitigate said impacts. The primary water quality concern associated with the operation of the project site is urban runoff during the daily operation of the complex. Adherence to BMPs as part of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) during the operation of the project site will reduce the impact of urban water runoff. The construction phase also has the potential to impact water quality through surface water runoff. Since the project site is greater than one acre, a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for construction activities must be obtained from the State Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). This permit requires the development and implementation of a SWPPP, which identifies BMPs that will protect stormwater runoff during the construction phase. Potential impacts would be less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measures WQ-1 and WQ-2. Mitigation Measures WQ-1 As part of the design of the proposed project, a WQMP will be prepared and implemented. The WQMP will include structural and nonstructural BMPs, which will avoid or minimize, to the greatest extent possible, the water quality impacts associated with the daily operation of the project site. WQ-2 The proposed project will require a NPDES permit and will require the preparation of a SWPPP incorporating BMPs to reduce stormwater impacts during construction. 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 (e.g., 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 Impact. As of 2005, the City of Santa Ana owns and operates 19 wells that range in depth from 650 to 1,500 feet, eight reservoirs with a total capacity of 49.3 million gallons, and seven import connections to the Metropolitan Water District (MWD). Thirty-six percent of the water used in the City comes from wholesale water sourced from MWD. The remaining 64% is pumped from the 19 local wells. Currently, the City in conjunction with the Orange County Water District (OCWD) use natural and artificial recharge strategies to recharge the groundwater in the basin. Artificial recharge includes water injection into groundwater aquifers and the use of percolation ponds. Water injection replenishes the groundwater and additionally, prevents the intrusion of salt water into the groundwater reserves. Furthermore, as mentioned in the Geotechnical Investigation Report, six test borings were drilled to depths ranging from 15 to 50 feet below the existing ground surface to analyze subsurface conditions of the project site. Groundwater was encountered in the test borings at a depth of 9 feet. Temporary and permanent dewatering during construction was recommended in the project's Geotechnical Investigation Report. Given the capacities and the large amount of water injected into the aquifers, it is anticipated 49 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 Hazbor Medical and Retail Center ~ ~ w Q that the proposed project is not anticipated to substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge. ' C. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would ' result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? Less Than Significant Impact. The project site in its current state is composed of an asphalt parking lot and an agricultural field planted in row crops. Stormwater and urban water during the drier months most likely flow from the agricultural field through the parking lot and on to the curb and gutter on Harbor Boulevard. The proposed project would convert the field and parking lot into a commercial ' building and parking lot. As mentioned in the Geotechnical Investigation Report, an adequate drainage system should be provided behind applicable walls to ' prevent the build-up of hydrostatic pressure. Furthermore, by adhering to the requirements of the NPDES and WQMP regulations, and recommendations from the Geotechmcal Investigation Report, the proposed project would not have a ' significant impact on runoff and flooding. Additionally, no streams or rivers pass through the project site. D. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including ' through the alteration of the course of a 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? ' No Impact. The proposed project is not expected to produce significant increases in flooding potential or changes in drainage patterns on or adjacent to the project ' site. Nonetheless, a Hydrologic Analysis Report will be prepared and approved by the City as part of the project design packet submission. A properly designed and implemented City-approved drainage system will mitigate the increase in ' impervious surfaces resulting from the project. No further study is necessary, and no mitigation measures are required. E. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or ' planned Stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? ' Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. The proposed project site development has the potential to increase the amount and the sources of polluted water runoff. Preparing and implementing a WQMP with associated BMPs) as required under Mitigation Measure WQ-1 will mitigate the effects of the proposed project to less than significant levels. Refer to response Hydrology and Water Quality (A.), above. ' F. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. The project ' construction and the long-term operation of the project site could have potentially significant impacts on regional water quality by increasing water pollutants and sediments. Implementing Mitigation Measures WQ-1 and WQ-2 will lessen the ' impact on water quality to less than significant levels. 50 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declazation July 2008 Hazbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A 8 3 G. Place housing within a 100-year flood plain, as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? Less Than Significant Impact. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) number, 06059C0256H dated February 18, 2004, the project site is located in Zone X. This area is in the 500-year floodplain (0.2% annual chance flood) and is protected from the 1 percent annual chance flood event by dikes, levees, or other structure. Furthermore, as mentioned in the City of Santa Ana General Plan Public Safety Element, the City has two major drainage courses, the Santiago Creek and the Santa Ana River, with both presenting high potential for significant flooding. The Santa Ana River has a history of overflowing its banks and flooding its surrounding area. There have been fourteen incidents of flooding, most recently as 1980. The potential also exists for downstream flooding throughout the Santa Ana River Basin resulting from the failure of Prado Dam, located approximately 20 miles northeast of the proposed project site. To assure the acceptable levels of risk to people and property from flooding, the City of Santa Ana has established flood plain management regulations in flood prone areas. Compliance with the City of Santa Ana's flood plain management regulations would result in less than significant impacts. Furthermore, no housing is proposed with the implementation of this project. No significant impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. H. Place housing within a 100-year floodplain structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? No Impact. As stated above, the project site is not located in the 100-year flood zone. Recent improvements to the Prado Dam have decreased the chance of inundation by a dam failure in the area of the project site. No housing is proposed with the implementation of this project. Therefore, no significant impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. I. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located within the Prado Dam Inundation Area according to the City of Santa Ana General Plan Public Safety Element. Compliance with the City of Santa Ana's flood plain management regulations would result in less than significant impacts. Refer to response in Hydrology and Water Quality (G), above. J. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ' No Impact. There are no large bodies of open water located on or near the proposed project site that could result in seiche or tsunami hazards. Hazards ' associated with seiche, tsunamis, and mudflow are not expected to affect the proposed project. ' S1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center 75A 84 u ii Land Use and Planning A. Physically divide an established community? No Impact. The project site is located in a General Commercial zoned parcel of the North Harbor Specific Plan (NHSP) area. The project site fronts Harbor Boulevard, a commercial corridor, and a significant image-maker for the city. The proposed project adheres to the Land Use Goals of the General Plan and therefore, would not cause significant impacts or require any mitigation measures. 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? No Impact. The project site is zoned as SP2 indicating that it falls under the auspices of the NHSP, where it is designated as General Commercial (GC). The proposed project will comply with the requirements of the NHSP, the City's General Plan, and applicable Zoning Code. The proposed site use will be compatible with the Zoning Code through a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and a zoning ordinance amendment. No significant impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. C. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? No Impact. The project site is located in an urbanized area, which is not within the boundaries of any habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. No significant impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. Mineral Resources A. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? No Impact. Pursuant to the Land Use Element of the Santa Ana General Plan, there are no areas in the City designated as Significant Mineral Aggregate Resource Areas or existent oil fields (City of Santa Ana 1998: A-44). No significant impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. B. Result in the loss of availability of alocally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No Impact. The State of California designates Mineral Resource Zones (MRZs) under the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA). As the City of Santa Ana is a built-up, developed urban community, there are no MRZs in the project site or general vicinity. Noise 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? 52 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration c July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center 75/`1~~ C Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. A Noise Study Report (URS Corporation, 2007) was conducted to assess the noise impact of the proposed project on the surrounding community. The primary existing noise source in the area is South Harbor Boulevard, which borders the east side of the project site. The project is proposed in an existing commercial area surrounded by commercial developments, multi-family residences, mobile home park, and single-family residences. Mobile noise sources in the area consist of motor vehicle noise including automobiles, trucks, buses, and motorcycles. The noise produced by these sources occur primarily on South Harbor Boulevard and may be of sufficient magnitude to expose various land uses to excessive noise levels. Stationary noise sources in the area include equipment and operation of surrounding commercial land uses, noise from air conditioner units, pool and spa equipment, stereo and amplified music equipment, children, and domestic animals from nearby residences. "Noise" is defined as unwanted sound and is measured using the decibel (dB) scale. Additionally, the "A"-weighted sound level, dBA, is a "filter" or adjustment curve applied by the measuring instrument to shape the frequency content of the sound in a manner similar to the way the human ear responds to sounds. A change of 1 dBA is very difficult to perceive except in the laboratory. In the outside environment, a 3 dBA change is considered just perceptible, while an increase of 5 dBA is considered readily perceptible and would generally result in a change in community response. Finally, a 10 dBA increase is perceived as a doubling in loudness and would likely result in a widespread community response. The City of Santa Ana has adopted standards and guidelines for specific noise levels associated with various land uses. These guidelines are listed in Table 5, where the desired maximum noise value along with the acceptable maximum noise values for each land use category is shown. Table 5 -Ambient Noise Exposure Level Guidelines Noise Level (dBA CNEL or DNL) Land Use Desirable Maximum Ma~mum Acce table Residential -Low Densi 55 65 Residential -Medium Densit 60 65 Residential - Hi h Densit 65 70 Schools 60 70 Commercial Office 65 75 Industrial 70 75 Source: Noise Stud Re ort, URS Co oration. Febru 2007. Table 6 shows the daytime and nighttime guidelines for ambient noise levels, which the entire city is designated as Zone 1 by ordinance. 53 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 ' Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A 8 6 Table 6 -Ambient Noise Ordinance Level Guidelines Noise Zone Noise Level Time Period 1 55 dBA 7:00 am - 10:00 m 50 dBA 10:00 m-?:00 am Source: Noise Stud Re ort, URS Co oration. Febru 2007. Furthermore, the City of Santa Ana Noise Ordinance does not allow the noise level at any location within the City to create noise that would exceed the noise standard when measured at any residential property to exceed: • The noise standard for more than thirty minutes in any hour; ' • The noise standard plus S dBA for more than fifteen minutes in any hour; • The noise standard plus 10 dBA for more than five minutes in any hour; ' • The noise standard plus 15 dBA for more than one minute in any hour; and • The noise standard plus 20 dBA for any period of time. ' Noise sources associated with construction activities, repairs, remodeling, or grading of any property, are exempted from the above noise ordinance except between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Monday through Saturday, all day ' on Sundays, and on federal holidays. The noise study report included long-term and short-term noise measurements at ' several locations within the project site. The long-term (LT-1) noise measurement indicates that the hourly noise levels generally peak during the morning rush hour and again during the afternoon rush hour. The ambient environment was mostly a ' result of the volume of traffic on South Harbor Boulevard with the quietest time during the early morning hours when traffic is at a minimum. The results of the long-term noise measurement are shown in Table 7. ' Table 7 -Long Term Noise Measurement Summary Range of Range of Range of Daytime Evening Nighttime Hourly Leq Hourly Leq Hourly Leq Site Location CNEL (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) LT-1 520 Harbor Blvd, 250 feet 63.5 55.5 - 67.0 56.40 - 56.9 51.0 - 59.3 west of west curb, 25 feet southeast of mobile home ro ert line. Source: Noise Stud Re ort, URS Cor oration. Februa 2007. Four short-term noise measurements (ST-1, ST-2, ST-3, ST-4) were conducted at 1 locations around the project site including the nearest noise sensitive receptors. The noise level measurements varied from 53.5 dBA Ley at the nearest single- family residence to 69.7 dBA Ley near South Harbor Boulevard. The short-term ' noise measurement data results are presented in Table 8. ' S4 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center ~ ~ w u ~' Table 8 -Short Term Noise Measurement Data Site ID Location Leq (dBA) 520 South Harbor Boulevard, 50 feet west of west curb, 100 ST-1 feet north of south ro ert line. 69.7 520 South Harbor Boulevard, 50 feet west of west curb 50 ST-2 , feet south of north ro ert line. 68'8 520 South Harbor Boulevard, 250 feet west of west curb 10 ST-3 , 67 8 feet south of residential ro ert line. ' 520 Harbor Boulevard, 300 feet west of west curb 5 feet ST-4 , north of residential ro erty line. 53.5 Source: Noise Stud Re ort, URS Cor oration. Februar 2007. Construction Noise Construction of the proposed project will result in short-term increases in the ambient noise level. The magnitude of the increases would depend on the type of construction activity, the noise levels generated by the various pieces of construction equipment, the duration of the construction phase, and the distance between the noise source and receptors in the area. Noise levels generated by construction equipment generally decrease at a rate of approximately 6 dBA per doubling of distance from the source. As such, at a distance of 100 feet, the noise levels will be about 6 dBA lower than at the 50 foot reference distance and similarly, at a distance of 200 feet, the noise levels would be approximately 12 dBA lower than at the 50 foot reference distance. The subterranean parking facility will require extensive grading to accommodate the base of the parking facility 13 feet below the existing grade of the site. The southwest corner of the subterranean parking facility will be located approximately 10 feet from the property line of the adjacent single family residences. The proximity of the subterranean parking facility to the noise sensitive land uses presents the probability that noise and vibration will be experienced during the construction phase. Furthermore, piles will be required to provide structural support for the subterranean parking facility. As a substitute for pile driving, casings will be drilled into the foundation floor to accommodate the piles. This procedure results in significantly lower noise levels of 10 to 15 dB compared with traditional pile driving methods. With implementation of the following mitigation measures, limiting the hours of construction hours in accordance with local noise ordinances, and the temporary nature of construction, impacts from construction activities would be reduced to less than significant levels. Mitigation Measures NOI-1 Construction activities shall comply with the applicable local jurisdiction's construction noise requirements. The City of Santa Ana Noise Ordinance prohibits construction activities between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Monday through Saturday, anytime on Sundays, and federal holidays. 55 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ' Harbor Medical and Retail Center ~ ~ w ~ Q Q July 2008 1 CSI L~ NOI-2 To avoid unnecessary annoyance from construction noise, the foll owing best practices for construction noise shall apply: a. All noise-producing project equipment and vehicles using internal combustion engines shall be equipped with mufflers and air-inlet silencers, where appropriate, in good operating condition that meet or exceed original factory specifications. Mobile or fixed "package" equipment (e.g., arc-welders, air compressors) shall be equipped with shrouds and noise control features that are readily available for that type of equipment. b. All mobile or fixed noise-producing equipment used on the project, which is regulated for noise output by a local, state, or federal agency, shall comply with such regulations while in the course of project activity. c. Material stockpiles and mobile equipment staging, parking, and maintenance areas shall be located as far as practicable from noise-sensitive receptors. d. Locating fixed noise generating equipment as far from noise sensitive land uses as practical. e. The hours of construction, including noisy maintenance activities, shall be restricted to the periods and days permitted by the City of Santa Ana Noise Ordinance. f. Limit the loudest construction activities, such as concrete breaking and jack hammering, to the middle of the day when the sensitivity to such noises will be at its lowest. g. Noise producing signals, including horns, whistles, alarms, and bells shall be used for safety warning purposes only. h. No project related public address or music systems shall be audible at any adjacent receptor. i. If complaints arise, the contractor shall initiate a construction noise-monitoring plan to ensure the construction noise levels at the nearest noise sensitive land uses are within the limits of the noise ordinance. j. Use of temporary noise barriers shall be considered where project activities and equipment is unavoidably close to noise sensitive receptors. k. Use of on-site trailers and containers as temporary barriers between any fixed construction noise source and nearby sensitive receptors. 56 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center ~ ~ A ~ ~ ^ ' Operational Noise ' Implementation of the proposed project consists of a commercial building with a mix of retail, restaurant, and medical-office uses that will result in an increase in vehicular traffic along the roads located closest to the project site. According to ' the Traffic Impact and Parking Analysis prepared for the proposed project, three roadways will show increases in traffic volume. The three roadways are Harbor Boulevard, 1St Street, and McFadden Avenue. The proposed project is anticipated ' to increase the total traffic volume on Harbor Boulevard by approximately 1,600 vehicles per day with a majority of the project-related traffic traveling south on Harbor Boulevard toward McFadden Avenue and the remaining traffic traveling ' north towards 1St Street. This increase in traffic volume due to the proposed project will result in an increase in noise of approximately 0.1 dB CNEL. This level of noise increase would be imperceptible to the human ear, and therefore, ' will not result in a significant impact due to project related traffic volume increases. ' As the proposed project involves a commercial building and a subterranean parking facility, mechanical equipment associated with the building, including air conditioning units, condenser units, and fans will be used. The architectural plans ' for the proposed project indicate that 15 air conditioning units and 15 condenser units will be equipped on the roof of the building. The roof will consist of a 7 foot facade element and parapet, measured from the base of the roof, around the ' perimeter of the roof. The subterranean parking structure will require a mechanical ventilation system to evacuate the carbon dioxide when vehicle exhaust levels become too high. Sensors will be placed within the parking facility ' which will trigger the fans when exhaust concentrations exceed apre-determined level. The ventilation exhaust fan will be located in the northeast corner of the parking facility which will ventilate the exhaust fumes through vents installed on ' the north side of the main driveway. The exhaust ventilation system will operate during normal business hours expected to be from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. Sound level data of the exhaust ventilation fan was obtained from the manufacturer and ' calculated to be 87 dBA at a distance of 3 feet from the ventilation discharge grille. The results of the mechanical noise analysis indicate worst case mechanical noise levels will be experienced at the southeast corner of the mobile home park, near the center of the project site. The worst case unmitigated mechanical noise level at ' this location will be approximately 47 dBA Ley, when the ventilation exhaust fan is operating. The existing block wall located between the project site and the mobile home park will provide a minimum 5 dB of noise reduction to the ' residents within the mobile home park. The mitigated mechanical noise level within the mobile home park is expected to be less than 42 dBA Lam. The mitigated noise level from the mechanical equipment proposed for this project is ' expected to be less than the measured ambient noise level at the project site, and it is expected to be less than the daytime noise ordinance level of 55 dBA L~ at all of the sensitive noise receptors adjacent to the proposed project site. Noise ' impacts due to the mechanical equipment is not anticipated for this project. 57 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 ' Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A 9 0 u As the proposed project involves the operation of a commercial building, vehicles will be entering and exiting the site during the daytime operating hours to access the retail, restaurant, and medical-offices anticipated to be occupying the building. The retail, restaurant, and medical-offices tenants that will occupy the building are also anticipated to receive deliveries of supplies, maintenance, and other deliveries related to the day-to-day operations of the individual businesses. As a result, the activities associated with day-to-day operations are anticipated to generate noise with vehicular traffic in and around the site. This includes noise associated with vehicle engine start-ups, vehicle doors, horns, and noise associated with vehicles driving through the parking facility including the subterranean parking facility. Typical parking facility noise levels associated with common activities in parking facilities are presented in Table 9. Table 9 -Common Parking Facility Noise Level Noise Source Ran a (dBA L,,,ax) Car startin at 10 feet 53 - 66 Car drivin b at 10 feet 58 - 66 Car drivin at 15 feet 55 - 63 Car door closin at 10 feet 60 - 67 Car trunk closin at 10 feet 43 - 52 Car door o enin at 10 feet 48 - 58 Car en ine shut off at 5 feet 52 - 60 Source: Noise Stud Re ort, URS Cor oration. Existing noise barriers around the perimeter of the project site will reduce the noise levels from parking lot activities by a minimum of 5 dB and a wall with a height of 6 feet can provide approximately 8 dB of noise reduction. The noise levels expected to be experienced by the existing residences adjacent to the proposed project will be less than the values listed in the table above. Furthermore, the noise levels associated with the parking facility of the proposed project should not exceed the noise values and time durations, previously mentioned above, of the City of Santa Ana Noise Ordinance. To further reduce noise levels associated with the parking facility of the proposed project, the following provisions shall be agreed upon by the tenants and visitors of the building. • No deliveries will be allowed before 7 a.m. or after 10 p.m. • Loitering shall be prohibited in the parking lot before 7 a.m. or after 10 p.m. • Delivery vehicle engines shall be shut down when the vehicles are parked. Furthermore, the parking facility has been designed to maintain traffic flow in one direction. Signs and direction arrows will signal the direction of movement within the parking facility and will contribute to the efficient movement of vehicles maneuvering through the site. The vehicle movement will also allow trucks and commercial vehicles to travel in a forward direction within the parking facility thereby reducing sound-emitting safety beepers associated with these vehicles shifting into reverse gear. 58 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 ' Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A 91 ' B. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? ' Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. As previously mentioned above, the subterranean parking facility will require extensive grading to accommodate the base of the parking facility 13 feet below the existing grade of the site. The southwest corner of the subterranean parking facility will be located approximately 10 feet from the property line of the adjacent single-family ' residences. The proximity of the subterranean parking facility to the noise sensitive land uses presents the probability that noise and vibration will be experienced during the construction phase. Furthermore, piles will be required to provide structural support for the subterranean parking facility. As a substitute for pile driving, casings will be drilled into the foundation floor to accommodate the piles. This procedure results in significantly lower noise levels of 10 to 15 dB compared with traditional pile driving methods. Therefore, the proposed project as mitigated will not produce excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. Refer to response in Noise (A.), above. Implementation of mitigation ' measures, as mentioned in Noise (A.), above, would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. ' C. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. The proposed project involves the construction and operation of commercial building with retail, restaurant, and medical-office uses. The proposed project will result in the ' increase in noise associated with the day-to-day activities of a typical commercial building including increases in vehicular traffic along roadways, an increase in noise levels associated with mechanical operation of the building, and noise from i vehicles accessing and maneuvering through the parking facility. However, as mentioned above, the projected increase in traffic volumes associated with the proposed project represents an increase in noise of approximately 0.1 dB CNEL and imperceptible to most people. Mitigated noise levels from the mechanical equipment proposed for the project is expected to be less than the measured ambient noise level at the project site and less than the daytime noise ordinance level of 55 dBA Ley at all sensitive noise receptors adjacent to the proposed project site. Noise associated with the parking facility will be reduced with the existing 6 feet wall and would not exceed the noise values and time durations of the City of Santa Ana Noise Ordinance. Refer to response in Noise (A.), above. ' D. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. Refer to response ' in Noise (A.), above. ' S9 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 ' Harbor Medical and Retail Center ~ ~ w ^ i 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, t would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. The proposed project site is not within an airport land-use plan and, therefore, no further study is required and no mitigation measures are necessary. F. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose ' people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. The project site is not located in the vicinity of a private airstrip. The closest heliport is located at the Orange County Sheriff's Department 2.9 miles from the site and would not result in excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area. No further study is necessary and no mitigation 1 measures are required. Population and Housing A. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? ' No Impact. The proposed project will develop a 45,744 square foot, two-story commercial building, with a mix of retail, restaurant, and medical offices. The ' construction of the project will require an increase in workers and would most likely draw on the local existing skilled labor population. Upon completion of the building, the daily operation will require a small additional labor force and would ' draw on the local labor pool. The proposed project would also provide goods and services to the surrounding area; however, due to the relatively small scale of the project, population growth is not anticipated with daily operation of the building. Additionally, the project will not require any new roads, as it is located within a ' fully developed urbanized area. Therefore, the proposed project will not directly or indirectly induce a substantial growth m population. No significant impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. B. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? ' No Impact. The proposed project will replace a field of agricultural row crops and a used car sales lot with a 2-story commercial building and subterranean parking. The proposed project is not anticipated to require a large workforce and ' therefore will not necessitate the construction of housing elsewhere. Therefore, no further study is required and no mitigation measures are necessary. ' C. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. Refer to response Population and Housing (B), above. ' 60 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 ' Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A 9 3 Public Services Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: ' A. Fire Protection Less than Significant Impact. The City of Santa Ana Fire Department provides both fire protection and emergency medical services from 10 well distributed fire stations located within a standard 1.5 mile service radius to most locations in the City. The Fire Department prides itself on fire prevention and suppression, which includes averaging a two to three minute emergency response time throughout the ' City. The nearest fire station to the project site is the Santa Ana Fire Department located at 1439 South Broadway Street, approximately 4 miles southeast of the project site. The proposed project is not expected to have significant impacts on City fire resources by conforming with fire prevention measures such as those specified in the UBC including installation of fire alarms and fire suppression systems. r B. Police Protection Less than Significant Impact. Law enforcement services are provided by the ' Santa Ana Police Department. The City maintains a police presence through a central police station located in Civic Center Plaza and four "store front" communications points in strategic locations in the community. Approximately 50 sworn police officers are stationed at the Westend District Substation, which is located at the intersection of Harbor Boulevard and McFadden Avenue. The proposed project is not expected to have significant impacts on police services as ' the project will incorporate design features such as perimeter walls and security lighting and reduce areas that visually block police patrolling opportunities. No significant impacts would occur and no mitigation measures would be necessary. C. Schools No Impact. The project area contains three schools; Russell Elementary, Hazard Elementary, and Newhope Elementary, that serve local residents. Implementation of the project is not expected to generate any new students that would impact schools services provided by the Santa Ana Unified School District and no new 1 schools would be required. No significant impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. ' D. Parks No Impact. The project area is served by two parks; Campesino Park and Santa Anita Park. As the project does not include any residential uses and neither park takes access off Harbor Boulevard, implementation of the project is not expected to impact the parks. No significant impacts would occur and no mitigation ' measures are necessary. 61 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 ' Harbor Medical and Retail Center 75A 94 ' E. Other Public Facilities No Impact. The proposed project is not expected to impact other public facilities such as libraries since it does not contain a residential component. No significant impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. t Recreation A. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks I or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? No Impact. The proposed project is not expected to increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks. Therefore, no further study is required and no mitigation measures are necessary. 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? ' No Impact. The project does not include any recreational facilities or require the construction of additional recreational facilities that might have an adverse effect on the environment. Therefore, no further study is required and no mitigation measures are necessary. Transportation and 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 ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. A Traffic Impact 1 and Parking Analysis (Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., 2007) The proposed project would create short-term increases in congestion in the area as a result of construction-related activities. However, the construction-related traffic volumes are anticipated to be nominal due to the relatively small scale of the project. Construction workers' vehicles and equipment will utilize designated parking areas as set forth in the TMP. Through-traffic will be permitted at all times along South Harbor Boulevard. Additionally, access to adjacent businesses and residences will be maintained at all times. On-street parking is currently not permitted along South Harbor Boulevard, however, appropriate detour signs and safety precautions will be implemented for pedestrians, as set forth in the Traffic Management Plan. Construction vehicles, including trucks, will utilize established ' construction routes as approved by the City of Santa Ana and minimize construction traffic on local streets. With implementation of the mitigation measures and temporary nature of construction activities, construction related traffic impacts are anticipated to be less than significant. U l i f pon comp et on o the construction, the daily operation of the proposed project would create less than significant impact on traffic in the project area or along South Harbor Boulevard. Access to the project is provided by a single right- 62 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 ' Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A 9 5 L i~ J in/right-out only driveway on Harbor Boulevard. A raised median on Harbor Boulevard prevents left turns in and out of the project site. The proposed project is estimated to generate 1,370 new trips per day, with 61 inbound/27 outbound trips in the morning peak hour, and 49 inbound/83 outbound trips in the evening peak hour. Table 10 depicts existing conditions using Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) and Level of Service (LOS) for both the Harbor Boulevard/First Street intersection and the Harbor Boulevard/McFadden Avenue intersection. ICU is defined as the volume of traffic divided by the capacity of the intersection. LOS is an alphabetical scale, with (A) being best service and (F) being worst service, in relation to levels of corresponding ICU numbers. The Harbor Boulevard/First Street intersection is currently experiencing LOS (D) during the AM peak hour and LOS (C) during the PM peak hour. The Harbor Boulevard/McFadden Avenue intersection is currently at LOS (C) during both the AM and PM peak hours. Table 10 -Summary of Peak Hour Intersection Operation Existing Conditions N Si li d I t ti AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour o. gna ze n ersec on ICU LOS ICU LOS 1 Harbor Boulevard @ 1S` Street 0.805 D 0.782 C Harbor Boulevard @ McFadden 2 Avenue 0.781 C 0.772 C Source: Traffic Impact and Parking Analysis For The Hazbor Medical and Retail Center, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Februa 2007. Table 11 shows the Levels of Service (LOS) with a description of each level where LOS (A) is the least congestion and LOS (F) is the most congestion. The City of Santa Ana considers a significant impact to an intersection when the level of service drops to an unacceptable LOS (E) or (F). Table 11 -Levels of Service Descriptions for Signalized Intersections Level of Service ICU Value Description Excellent operation. All approaches to the intersection appear quite A 0.00-0.60 open, turning movements are easily made, and nearly all drivers find freedom of o eration. Very good operation. Many drivers begin to feel somewhat B 0.61-0.70 restricted with platoons of vehicles. This represents stable flow. An approach to an intersection may occasionally be fully utilized and traffic ueues be in to form. Good operation. Occasionally drivers may have to wait more than C 0.71-0.80 60 seconds, and back-ups may develop behind turning vehicles. Most drivers may feel somewhat restricted. Fair operation. Cars are sometimes required to wait more than 60 D 0.81-0.90 seconds during short peaks. There are no long-standing traffic queues. This level is typically associated with design practice for eak eriods. 63 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A-J 6 July 2008 1 1 Level of Service ICU Value Description Poor operation. Some long-standing vehicular queues develop on E 0.91-1.00 critical approaches to intersections. Delays may be up to several minutes. Force flow. Represents jammed conditions. Back-ups from locations F Over 1.00 downstream or on cross street may restrict or prevent movement of vehicles out of the intersection a roach lanes. Source: Traffic Impact and Pazking Analysis For The Hazbor Medical and Retail Center, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Febru 2007. Table 12 shows the expected traffic LOS for year 2008, the project-opening year, without the proposed project. This forecasted growth includes a compounded 1% per year growth rate (2% total for this calculation) and the addition of any related projects in the vicinity of the proposed project, but not the proposed project itself. Table 12 -Summary of Peak Hour Intersection Operation Opening Year Conditions Without Project N Si li d I t ti AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour o. gna ze n ersec on ICU LOS ICU LOS 1 Harbor Boulevard @ 1S` Street 0.853 D 0.820 D Harbor Boulevard @ McFadden 2 Avenue 0.837 D 0.833 D Source: Traffic Impact and Pazking Analysis For The Hazbor Medical and Retail Center, Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. Febru 2007. As can be seen from the previous tables, the future Year 2008 traffic will slightly degrade at both intersections from LOS (C) to LOS (D), with the exception of the Harbor Boulevard/First Street intersection, where the AM peak hour LOS will continue unchanged at LOS (D). Since the intersections have not degraded to LOS (E) or (F), the change is considered acceptable under the requirements of the City of Santa Ana. Table 13 depicts the forecasted, Year 2008, traffic levels with and without the proposed project. As can be seen from the table, the LOS with the addition of the project does not significantly degrade the level of service. The ICU at the study intersections decreases less than 1% except for the Harbor Boulevard/First Street PM peak, which decreases by 3%. This is still within the less than significant impact criteria as defined by the City of Santa Ana. Table 13 -Summary of Peak Hour Intersection Operation Opening Year with Project Si li d fear 2008 Conditions Year 2008 + Pro'ect Project gna ze NO' Intersecti AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak Impact on ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS AM PM Harbor Blvd 1 @ 1 Street 0.853 D 0.820 D 0.861 D 0.823 D 0.008 0.003 Harbor Blvd 2 @ 1 Street 0.837 D 0.833 D 0.839 D 0.858 D 0.002 0.025 Source: Traffic Impact and Pazking Analysis For The Harbor Medical and Retail Center, Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. Febru 2007. 64 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declazation July 2008 ' Harbor Medical and Retail Center ~ ~ w 1 As previously mentioned, on-street parking is not permitted on Harbor Boulevard. The proposed project site provides parking in excess of the City's Zoning Code, which requires 245 spaces, and the project would provide 247. Therefore, off-site vehicle parking is not anticipated to be required. 1 TRF-1 The proposed project will implement a TMP to be prepared, in consultation with the City of Santa Ana, prior to construction. The TMP shall consist of prior notices, adequate sign-postings, detours, and temporary driveways, if required. Adequate access shall be maintained at all times to and from existing driveways serving adjacent land uses. Proper detours and warning signs shall be ' established to ensure public safety. The TMP shall be devised so that construction will not interfere with any emergency response or evacuation plans. The TMP shall specify construction routes so that construction workers and vehicles will not travel residential streets, as practical. ' B. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or haghways? ' Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. As previously mentioned in Transportation and Traffic (A), the proposed project will create temporary, short-term increases in traffic as a result of construction activities. However, construction activities are considered temporary and would cease upon completion of the proposed project. Additionally, the operation of the project will not degrade level of service to unacceptable levels. 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? No Impact. Due to the nature of the proposed project, no impacts to air traffic patterns are anticipated to occur. Therefore, no further study is required and no mitigation measures are necessary. ' D. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? No Impact. Due to the nature of the proposed project, hazards related to design features are not anticipated to occur. Access to the project site is provided via a 26-foot wide, single right-in/right-out only driveway with a median on Harbor Boulevard preventing left-turn in or out maneuvers. The curb lane on Harbor Boulevard is 20-feet wide and therefore, allows turning vehicles to move out of the flow of traffic when turning into the project site. Impacts are not anticipated in ' this regard.. 65 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 1 Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 ~ w 1 n fl E. Result in inadequate emergency access? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. Short-term construction related congestion impacts would be mitigated with the implementation of a TMP. Refer to response Transportation and Traffic (A), above. F. Result in inadequate parking capacity? No Impact. Currently, no on-street parking is permitted on South Harbor Boulevard. Temporary parking for construction related vehicles, including workers' vehicles, will be provided on-site. The proposed project would construct 247 on-site parking spaces, including 147 surface parking spaces and 100 subterranean parking spaces. The amount of parking spaces is greater than the City required 245 parking spaces. Table 14 breaks down the required parking by the proposed site use square footage. Table 14 -Parking Requirements Site Use Parking Requirements Site Qty Parking Required Retail 5 spaces / 1,000 square feet 8,880 SF 44.40 Restaurant 10 spaces / 1,000 Square feet 2,724 SF 27.24 Medical 6 spaces / 1,000 square feet 28,775 SF 172.65 Total Parking Required 245 Total Parking Provided 247 Source: Traffic Impact and Pazking Analysis For The Hazbor Medical and Retail Center, Kimley-Hom. and Associates, Inc. Februazy 2007. As seen in the table above, implementation of the proposed project would not result in inadequate parking capacity. G. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? No Impact. The proposed project would not conflict with any adopted policies supporting alternative transportation. Utilities and Service Systems A. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. The Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) is the service agency providing wastewater treatment for the City of Santa Ana. The OCSD wastewater treatment plant is required to treat wastewater to meet applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) standards. The proposed project will not exceed the wastewater treatment requirements of the RWQCB. Refer to response Hydrology and Water Quality (A), above. 66 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Harbor Medical and Retail Center ~ ~~ w w July 2008 B. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the constructio~z of which could cause ' significant environmental effects? No Impact. As the proposed project is located in a developed, urban area, it has a well-established system of water supply distribution, sewer conveyance, storm drains, and other flood control infrastructure. The Santa Ana Public Works Department provides an average of 43 million gallons of water daily through 19 ' groundwater wells, 444 miles of water mains, 7 import connections, and 8 storage tanks/reservoirs. Wells make up approximately 64 percent of the City's water supply, with the remaining 36 percent provided by MWD. The City's wells can provide up to 71 million gallons per day (mgd) or (79,520 acre-feet) and MWD can provide up to 65 mgd or (72,800 acre-feet) (City of Santa Ana 1998: A49). In the year 2000, the total water consumption within the City was 50,977 acre-feet, ' with that level dropping slightly in 2005 to 44,944 acre-feet. The projected year 2010, 2020, and 2030 water usage levels are 52,700, 58,770, and 62,520 acre-feet respectively, which is well within the total capacity of the Santa Ana Public Works Department and MWD (City of Santa Ana 2005). Therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to have a significant effect on the water supply of the City. 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? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. The proposed project has the potential to impact storm water drainage facilities. These impacts can be reduced to below significant levels by developing and implementing a SWPPP and a WQMP as required by Mitigation Measures WQ-1 and WQ-2. These plans will implement BMPs to reduce storm water impacts. Therefore, no ' further study is required and no mitigation measures other than WQ-1 and WQ-2 are necessary. ' D. Have suj~cient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? No Impact. As discussed in Utilities and Service Systems (B), the project will have sufficient water supplies without any new entitlements or resources. No further study is required and no mitigation measures are necessary. ' E. Result in a 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? No Impact. Sewage from the City of Santa Ana is diverted to OCSD's Reclamation Plant Number 1 in Fountain Valley. The plant is currently equipped ' to handle 60 million gallons per day (mgd) with planned expansion to increase capacity to 120 mgd by 2012 (OCSD 2008). The reclamation plant has enough capacity to handle the increase in project related wastewater, therefore, no further study is required and no mitigation measures are necessary. 67 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 ' Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A 10 0 1 ~i F. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Less Than Significant Impact. Implementation of the proposed project would produce waste during the construction phase and during operation. Area landfills currently serving the project indicate capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs. G. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste ? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will comply with federal, state, and local statues and regulations related to solid waste. 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? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. With implementation of the recommended mitigation measures mentioned above, the proposed project would not 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 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, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. Implementation of the proposed project would not involve significant cumulative impacts. With the implementation of mitigation measured mentioned above, the project's contribution to effect cumulative impacts is considered to be less than significant. Furthermore, due to the relatively small scale of the proposed project and likelihood that all future projects proposed in the area would not occur at once, mitigation measures would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. C. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 68 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declazation July 2008 Hazbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A-101 1 i~ Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. As mentioned previously, due to the relatively small nature of the proposed project, environmental effects which would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings is not anticipated. Construction-related activities will have some minor, short-term impacts (including aesthetics, dust, noise, and traffic congestion) which can be mitigated to less than significant levels. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ' Harbor Medical and Retail Center 69 75A-102 July 2008 Chapter 4 ' Miti ation Monitorin Plan and Re ort g g P 1 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 where a MND identifies measures to reduce potential adverse environmental impacts to less-than-significant levels. As the lead agency for the proposed project, the City is responsible for adopting and implementing the MMP. ' An IS/MND has been prepared for the Harbor Medical and Retail Center 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 0 {I 0 The project proponent proposes to develop a 2-story 45,744 square foot medicaUcommercial building on a site that is currently occupied by an agricultural field and a used car sales lot. The project site is zoned GC, and the proposed project is in conformance with the requirements of the General Plan, Zoning Code, and the NHSP. The proposed project includes the following improvements: ^ Zoning Code amendment for ancillary parking; ^ Conditional Use Permit to allow restaurants in the North Harbor Specific Plan; ^ Construction of a 2-story 45,744 sq. ft. commercial building with - 8,880 sq. ft. of retail use, - 2,724 sq. ft. of restaurant use, - 28,775 sq. ft. of medical office use; ^ construction of a 100-space 35,898 sq. ft. under ground parking garage; ^ construction of a 147-space surface parking lot; and ^ closure of one existing curb-cut driveway entrance/exit. Additional details regarding the proposed project and a more in depth project description can be found in Chapter 2 (Project Description). 70 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A-10 3 ' Monitoring and Reporting Procedures ' The MMP for the proposed Harbor Medical and Retail Center will be in place through all phases of the project, including the design, construction, and operation phases. The City will be responsible for administering the MMP. Additionally, the City will ensure that all ' parties comply with the provisions of the MMP, though the City may delegate monitoring activities to staff, contractors, or consultants. Further, the City will ensure that monitoring is documented using periodic reports and 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 the problems. ' Mitigation Monitoring Plan Implementation Table 15 lists, by resource area, each mitigation measure included in the IS/MND. ' Certain inspections and technical reports may require preparation by qualified individuals and these are specified as needed. The timing and method of verification of each measure is also specified. u 71 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ' Harbor Medical and Retail Center 75A 104 July 2008 a 0 a Z z O M~1 d 1-1 bA Q ..~ 'Cj U .~ 'C3 O~ N N N ~ i w ~ U ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ Q a" .~ ~; ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ `~ a ~ ~ ~; ~ ~ ~ o ~ O ~ O cd ~ ~, ~ ~ o Q ~ ~ 'r ~., x ~ ~ ~ ~ C/1 ~ ~ O x ~ U U a O W z 0 a W O W z ~, ~ .. o ~ o a v ~ o w z a z a a W U U ~ U 0 0 0 ~ z a a a`~. a ~ L3r .~ S O bA .R C~ H ~ ~ U ~" CC a O U w O C O r CC v w . y eo A u y cd ~ ~ ~ ~ . • ~ C o, ~ C ~ ~ c v~ oo ~ w C ,.., p ~ :.. ~ ~ ~ Q w ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ ~~+ .~. ~ W ~ C ~ ~ O .. ~ .Y U Eo ~ [~~ , H~ .~~o Q O. U .~ ,, .~ ~ ° it . r, N ~ C .. ^+ .d N 7 O 3 ~ ~ id N ~ U~" U ~ y O •~ .''G cGV ~ ~ ~ 'i ~ y . . ~ ~ o o ~~~~ ~ ~ ~~~~o~ ~~ ~~ °' ~ ~~ _ a o ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~ • ~ ~o ~ , ~~~~o~.~o~~~~ ~, z Q 75A-105 00 0 0 N ~, ~•-, N 0 N Q ~ ~~ ~U z~ ~x ~~ -d ~~ ~~ ~~ .~ ~x [] ii .!i V ir ~ ~ F~1 O U w O C O eE U . ~ 6~ A w .~ NI u a> ~ ~ ~ c Q ~ Q C bD O O `~ C ~ ~ aS ~ ;a C ~' ~ ~ y GL qty ~ .~ ~ Cq bQ v.. Q C ~ C/] OA cti q ~ (~ "~7 O C b c~ O C b c~ O rT+ ~ ' G' C aW ~ aT+ ~ Oti U aA J ( aP ` `~ w° ~ ° a a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' E c '+~ o a w o a a. F ~ Q cOa v O '~ Q c C a ~ a -~ ~. ~ °r.' y ~ a ~ L1 ' ~ ~ ~ [ ~ N ~ ~ C G U r n 3 C .~ '~' . .. ~ ,~ ~ y ~ . c C ~+ U N 3 a a~ ° G ~ •o -o -o o ~ ~ ~ °' •c o ~ ~ ~' ~ `~ ~,~ ox x ~ ~ do ° ~~ o a,~ .~ Z ~ ~ ° a opo a"i c o '~ °' ~ y ? 'o i Z ~ a a ~ °' °a. x ' U ' Oi.~ c~a U O i-. ~ eA w bt1 O 'O ;: 'O N C ~ O bQ U C ~ ,~', O O ?D ,'~ y eq t: L^, ~ ~ ~ . . cC C, ~ y ~„~ 7..i . ~ a ~--~ U > . ~ 6,1 ..V. 4-i L' ~ N (]y .~ o :°~.. o a a ~o~x moo..: ~ ~ >,o.D ~ oo ~~ G N M z 75A-106 0 0 N T ti M a 0 Q ~ ~U z~ bQ ~ ~.~ •o ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~~ ~ ~x i U Cd O U w 0 C 0 e~ u . ~ y A :? :.. .~ U G) ~ C ~ ~ Q Q .-.i Q ~ C ~ Q N ' c. % rn cn ~ v~ on a ° Gs" o ~ 'O o a a c Y ~ ~ b U UPgO c. °~ ~ :3 ,w C ~ .~ ~," w i+ ~ c~ Q cC y ~ ~+ ~ O p ~ ^ ~ ca O ~ ~ C . ~~~ U ~ M'~ U ~~ '~ a ^ •~ a A a° A a~ o ~ 3 0 ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~-d"~" UUw ~ ~ °~ ~ . .3 Y ~ ° i ~ ~ v ~ ~ c a °~ °~ x ~ ° ;~ a~ ~ a ~ Q ~ ~ cv o ~, ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ . ;~ ~, ~ ~ py c Z ~, 3 e° , ' o io o ° ' 3 ki ~ ~ ~' [ ~ ~ ~ o '° o ~ ° ' '* ~ O `~ ~ ~ a y Y U >' • ° . :3 ~ o ~ , ~ ~ b O y ~ p [ cd w cC iC V G bq .: y rn ti c0 o ~, o o. ~ ~ • ~ ~a ~ ,~ ~ y ~ ~ .y ~ ~ .~ ~ . ~ °° • ~ ~ ~ ~ ° G ~ o 0 t U -i a ~ n 3 ~s.nwvxv,b¢ ~ 3~ ~ ~~: ~ xx w .~ o Z a .-• ~ F" o d O d V U C7 75A-107 0 0 N A ti .a. c 0 U Q ~~ ~U a~i :~ z~ a~ a~i ~+ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ o .[ x it .~ u ~ ~ O U w 0 C 0 u . ~ .° ? . e~ A it .~ H V L"' ~ ~ a2 Q c~ Q p b0 +d ...~ :~ .~ ` ~ w a 3 ~ ~+-~ C ~ ~ U~Q U AQ G °~ ` o q y., c o [ o d ~ ~ ~ •~ ~ ~ '~ ~ i ~ • 8 ~ ~ c o ~ b ~ .. o F ~ 0 0 • w r,,.a a . a ° b ° ^ ~ a ' ~ ~ ~ d o ~ °' rs,° ° ~ ' ~ ,fib aU ° ~, :, ~ ~ y ~ . . -o ° 3 • : x ~ .D O ~ ~ N C N ~ ~ ~ N i>•+ ~ O U ~ b 'O ^+ y > icS "'' ~ ^~" ~ C ~"' C ~ b~iD ~ . e~ ~ C z ~ ... ¢ N N x x x 75A-108 0 0 N T ti 0 a~i Q ~ > ~ •~ a~ ~U z~ b~ :? cd b a~i ~ ~, ~° cx x y u L C~ + ~ ~ ~ 0 U w 0 C 0 w v . ~ ~ ~ A .~ u a~ ~ a ~ ~ Q ~ Q ~ Q . .,, bA ° +d .~G ° 0 ~ ::.sC ~, ~ +d ~, o, ~~ ~ °~ w3~ 0 v~ °~ 3 ~ v~ bn °~ ~ rs' w ~, ~ o o ~ ~.fl ~ Ua ~.a ~ a ~~ . P Q Q U La U G t"' C w bq b0 . U a> ° C ~ o 'rte ~ ,~ '° a > ~ .~ ''~ a > ~ ° , t E ~ a ~ ~ •'" ~ a . ~ . .~ R. U o o ~ ~r H~ Q ~ U a Q U a c d pr c .~ ~ •~ ~. c b a .° ai ~ ~ o T ~ ,~ .~. ~ oo ~ °~ ~ U ~ •~ ~ ° ~ a~ wi ° ~ 3 ~ a~ o y a, •y •~ 0 3 ~ ~, •~ a ~ o w, b o ~ .~ a o a d a ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ° ~, ~ ~ a, ~ p. a. o a c ~ `° ~ U, -0 3 . ~ . ~ Q c. d ~ . ~ . ~ c ~ ~ ~ °a. a o . i H °~ Q Z ~; ~ a . [ ~ ° b n U ° ° c o a .o ~ v~ c°a Z 't3 ~ cv i '-+ i x 3 3 z °z 75A-109 0 0 N >, ti ~O 0 '~ A ~. > c •~ a~ ~U "z° U .~ 7 ~' ~ N O .~ ~ ~x t 1 "~ u ~ a O U w O C O V . ~ +~+ Cd A :~ .~ U C ~ d ~ .~ ~ Q Q C bD C ~+ ~ ~~+ ~ N a. ~ 6l a~+ ~ o0 w ~ O :.d o ~ ~ ~ a c. ~A J °~ o w a x ~ ~ ~ t"' U • ~ ~ O ~ d ~'"' • " 6> ' O y0 H O a ~ a o ~ o ao ~ ~ ~ 3 °~ ai ~ on ~ ~ ~ .~ a ^ v, pq ~ ca s.. .c? ~ v v, o C ~ ~ '~ V ca ~ `~ ~ 'B q ~ ti a G y v a~ C C w O ~ O. 'b ~ ~ ~ i a~ """ 3 C a ~ ,~ y aS ~' ~ Q p. ~ o;, °'° °" Q o a ° '~ ~ ~. o o ~ ,~,~ o ~• ~ • • ~:b ° c s ai '-= - >~:.ox'~ ~ ~ '~a H c a c o. ~ ° a i . ~ ~ c a ca" ° o ~ ~ ' ~ ~ a °~ o '° a '~ w° ~ ° 3 ~ ~ .~ °~ b O c' 1 z o z 75A-110 0 0 N T ti 0 Q ~ > ~ •; ~ ~U z~ b~ •~ ~ -o ~ ~~ ~ w ~ O °x [l t U a 0 U w 0 C 0 u . ~ eC A .~ ~, v C a> ~ ~ ~ . L a`~ ~ ~ w ~ a~ « .C ~ ~ C es C s. d y ~ o ~ a~ E+ ~ h o 'o ~ y ''' y' ~ ~ o w -o ~ -" ~ a ~.O ~ ~ y.. O 'O C ~ ~~-~ U .1C O ~ v' ~ N "" ~ 'i. U C b "Cf C7 Q , ~ h C `n a' Q N 'd b rn ".' ~ ti ^~ ~ 'C ~ ~ .-U N OO Q ~ ~ y L'". b N Q f + ~ U ~ ~ y ~ t-. O ~ N ° °~ ~ . ~ ` a ~~ ~ ,,.,, ' a . ~ c .y ~ ~ y ° U U • wi a •" v ~ i ' ~ 3 • o a ~ N > ~ en ~ ~ ° ~ ~ o 0 O U ' ~ ~ N ~ ~ > • v o ~ ~ o Q a-. ~ cC .C 'C U N ed[i C .~-Y > ~+ «J G ~ .... ~ O .b w ~ O ~ 'O U cC ~J ~ ~ ' ~ cC ~ y a~ O ~" ` a ^ ~ p p p~' U ~ ~ N bn ~ ~~ C U y >, ~ ...... ~ ..o ~ 0 O .., ~ 0 cd ~ ~ ,~ ~ 7v A C ~ 0 w 0 ,~ 'O N o `. ~ p y^ .:, ~ ~ O ~ a c N ~ ~ b ~ o :~ n ' 3 . . . 0 z 75A-111 0 0 N >, ~-, 0 `~ U N Q ~ > a ~U a~i '" z~ b ~ aU.+ C .~ -o ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~x fl [! '~ U ~" O U w 0 0 U tai . ~ w r w .~ YAM u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ bA o ~ `+~ ~ .~ ,~ ar ~ o ~ . a~ ° xo ~~ ~ w ~ .+ o. Yea ~ UaA c °~ . ~«°, ~ ,~G ~ w ~ ~ , , U ~ + q ~ ~i~r ~ i'r y V ~ y ~ O n'3 , O > ~ ',..~ y, O ~" Hi7 o i"' • G+ '-' ~ a ~ ~ ~, ~ GL c~ ~ 0 Q ~ O w ~ ~ v~ . + O ~ G ~ ~ ~ ~ O Q C ~ h v' Q c ~ O ~ .~ ~ a ~i aoi o r . ~ ~."^„ y h a ~ a o c '~ E" . > . w °o, ~ a°i ~ ~ .b ~ `~ ~ 'n ~" b°',o a ~ o ° ~ :b y ' ~, a ~ ~ 3 ~ : ~ ewo ~ ro ~ ~ ~ . o ~ °`' w v ~ to v ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 a~i c ~ ~ > a e e bA ~ C O ~+ y w cd .,, rn ~ O • rn ~ it H a i ~ C C ~ Q O ''.~ ~ w O • fl, • ~ 'Cl cUd C ~, O ~ > ~ ~ C y 'b •~, .~ .., .n N ~ ~ .O y : i T cd •p tr •w., '.~'J ~ fr (A ° y y Lr .fl `n ~"+ ~ C~ ~ ~ Q ~i O a:~ ~ i O ~ w cd T ~ ~ y ~ ~ ~ '~ b q ~ h L]. ~ O ~ O 0 ~ ~ ~ ' [~ C ' U U cd K O y H F' o. '-' , i i ~ . ~ ~ ~ Li ea G GQ o, a; ns e`d '.1- . c ~ „~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ O 3 ~ ., q y ~ -O . as c~ r + .V. ~ rn a~ a ~ `~ o a ' ' o ,~ ~ .~ o ~ .n o ~ a~ o o w; ~ ~ ~: y H . ~ a. ~ ~ b ~ o .d ~ o ~ ° °° a .~ o ~ ~ v -o Q ~ ~ ~ a ' ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ w 3 0 .c o 3 ~ ~ 0 ca. o z ~ ~ ~+ ~ F F-+ 75A-112 00 0 0 N T ~-, O~ 0 Q ~ ~U ~~ zy .D N bA ~ .~ .~ -o a~i ~ ~ ~ o .~ ~ ~= x Chapter S ' References Printed References Alliance Environmental Services. 2006. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 520 South Harbor Boulevard, Santa Ana, CA. ' Don Soils Engineering Co. 2006. Geotechnical Investigation Report, 520 South Harbor Boulevard, Santa Ana, CA. Kimley-Horn and Associates Inc. 2007. Traffic Impact and Parking Analysis for the Harbor Medical and Retail Center. ' Santa Ana, City of. 1987. City of Santa Ana General Plan. Airport Environs Element. Santa Ana, City of. 1998. City of Santa Ana General Plan. Circulation Element. ' Santa Ana, City of. 2000. City of Santa Ana General Plan. Conservation Element. Santa Ana, City of. 1998. City of Santa Ana General Plan. Economic Development Element. Santa Ana, City of. 1988. City of Santa Ana General Plan. Education Element. Santa Ana, City of. 1982. City of Santa Ana General Plan. Energy Element. Santa Ana, City of. 1991. City of Santa Ana General Plan. Growth Management Element. ' Santa Ana, City of. 2000. City of Santa Ana General Plan. Housing Element. S A Ci f 1998 Ci f S anta na, ty o . . ty o anta Ana General Plan. Land Use Element. Santa Ana, City of. 1982. City of Santa Ana General Plan. Noise Element. S t A Cit f 1992 N rth H b S if Pl an a na, y o . . o ar or pec ic an. Santa Ana, City of. 1982. City of Santa Ana General Plan. Open Space, Parks, and Recreation Element. Santa Ana, City of. 1982. City of Santa Ana General Plan. Public Facilities Element. ' Santa Ana, City of. 1982. City of Santa Ana General Plan. Public Safety Element. Santa Ana, City of. 1982. City of Santa Ana General Plan. Scenic Corridors Element. Santa Ana, City o£ 1982. City of Santa Ana General Plan. Seismic Element. Santa Ana, City of. 1998. Santa Ana General Plan, Urban Design Element. Santa Ana, City of. 2005. Urban Water Management Plan. URS Corporation. 2008. 520 S. Harbor Boulevard Air Study. ' URS Corporation. 2008. 520 S. Harbor Boulevard Noise Study. ' 80 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declazation July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A 113 1 ~i Web Sites California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB). 2006. Jurisdictional Profile for City of Santa Ana. http://ciwmb.ca.gov/Profiles/Juris/JurProfilel.asp? California Scenic Highway Mapping System. 1999. http://www.dot.ca.gov /hq/LandArch/scenic_highways/index.htm. Department of Conservation. 2006. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP). http://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp/Pages/Index.aspx Department of Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas and Thermal Resources. 2006, December. Oil and Gas Maps District 1. http://www.consrv.ca.gov /DOG/maps/index_map.htm. Department of Conservation. 1998. Seismic Hazards Zone Map Anaheim Quadrangle. http: //gmw. consrv. ca. gov/shmp/MapProcessor. asp? Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2004. Map Service Center. http://msc.fema.gov /webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/MapSearchResult? Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD). 2008. Fountain Valley Wastewater Reclamation Facility. http://www.ocsd.com/construction/fountain_valley_ Santa Ana, City of. 2004. Historic Resources Map. http://www.ci.santa-ana.ca.us /pba/planning/documents/HistoricMap_2004.pdf. U.S. Census Bureau. 2000. State and County Quick Facts, Santa Ana (city), California. http://quickfacts.census.gov/gfd/meta/long 71061.htm. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ' Harbor Medical and Retail Center 81 75A-114 July 2008 Chapter 6 List of Preparers City of Santa Ana URS Corporation Pedro Guillen Associate Planner Court Morgan Environmental Planner/Project Manager Jillian Baker, Ph.D. Air Quality Ted Lindberg Noise and Vibration Youji Yasui Environmental Planner 82 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A-115 Appendix A List of Technical Studies Bound Separately • Air Quality Analysis (URS Corporation, 2008) • Noise Study Report (URS Corporation, 2007) • Geotechnical Investigation Report -Site of Proposed Commercial Building at 520 South Harbor Boulevard, Santa Ana, California (2006) • Traffic Impact and Parking Analysis for the Harbor Medical and Retail Center, Santa Ana, California (Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., 2007) 83 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration July 2008 Harbor Medical and Retail Center 7 5A-116 ORDINANCE NO. NS- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING AND ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW NO. 2006-87 AND AMENDING THE NORTH HARBOR SPECIFIC PLAN (SP2) ZONING DISTRICT TO REZONE THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 520 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARD FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL (ZOA NO. 2008-02) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. The North Harbor Specific Plan (SP-2) was created in June 20, 1994. B. Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2006-87, Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2008-02 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-23 came before the Planning Commission on August 11, 2008 for a duly noticed public hearing. By a vote of 7:0, the Planning Commission voted to recommend the City Council approve Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2006-87, Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2008-02 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-23 as conditioned. C. The City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on September 2, 2008 and at that time considered all testimony written or oral on Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2006-87, Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2008-02 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-23. D. Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2008-02 has been filed to change the zoning of 520 South Harbor Boulevard which is located within the North Harbor Specific Plan (SP-2) from its current zoning of single family residential and general commercial to general commercial. Section 2. The City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the initial study, the mitigated negative declaration, and mitigation monitoring program for Environmental Review No. 2006-87, prepared 75A-117 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 mitigated negative declaration adequately addresses the expected environmental impacts of this Project. On the basis of this review, the City Council finds that there is no evidence from which it can be fairly argued that the Project will have a significant adverse effect on the environment which have not been mitigated. The City Council hereby certifies and approves the mitigated negative declaration and mitigation monitoring program and directs that the Notice of Determination be prepared and filed with the County Clerk of the County of Orange in the manner required by law. Pursuant to Title XIV, California Code of Regulations ("CCR") § 735.5(c)(1), the City Council has determined that, after considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have the potential for any adverse effect on wildlife resources or the ecological habitat upon which wildlife resources depend. The proposed project exists in an urban environment characterized by paved concrete, roadways, surrounding buildings and human activity. Therefore, pursuant to Fish and Game Code § 711.2 and Title XIV, CCR § 735.5(a)(3), the payment of Fish and Game Department filing fees is not required in conjunction with this project. Section 3. Attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by this reference as though fully set forth herein is the change to North Harbor Specific Plan (SP2) which changes the zoning of 520 South Harbor Boulevard from its current zoning of single family residential and general commercial to general commercial. 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. Section 5. The city clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause the same to be published in the manner prescribed by law. ADOPTED this day of , 2008. Miguel A. Pulido Mayor 75A-118 APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joseph W. Fletcher, City Attorney By: Kylee O. Otto Assistant City Attorney AYES: Councilmembers NOES: Councilmembers ABSTAIN: Councilmembers NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, PATRICIA E. HEALY, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the attached 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 75A-119 .. - _ _.~. _ ~ ~, ~ _.. ~ - ~ , i ,~ t, _ ~ ~ _~_.. _ , - r., ., ,, _ ; . .. ,~. , ,. .. :. . E _.. P4~ _ .. .. ' ~ COA~MPRCIAL. • INAUS7RlAL. f " •~ - .. .. - ~ ~ ~ 4.-...~ x , ~ - ~ R. ~ , ;_ ~~ v:,. _ .. . ~ ~ l j. i r ti` y Z - ~ Tom. ' . ~ .. a ' _. -- y ~ ~ i ry '~ ~ '~' s~ ,~ rt_ u f ~ ,-y , ~y„ F r ~ "~~ ~ ~ F { y~ ~ ~ _ .~-. _ A 4~ _ OPF,N SPACE s , _ .. ., ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ' , ~ , - ~ . `~. .. A ~ FLNAL GENERAL COb1MERCIAI, J LL f ~. T ~ ~~ ' _, r. a,.. '*• f ~" . t } ~~ _ ~ ~ .. .a GENERAL ~ ~ ~.~ ~' ~~~~+"t ~ ~A~t ~?? COMMERCIAL ~ _ r " ' r ' .. ~ t* 4 ~ n . .. » ~ „ 'X n y k , C ~ ' ; ~ * ~ ~ t ~ a z - ~ ~ ~ t . ,,.~~.~. r~ a ~~_ - t 9 `_, Y ` Y y ~ ~ ~~, h ~ •_ * S ~~ ~Y..v rf ~~'s_ ~s a ~~ *~, ~ . - ~ E%HIBIT A 75A-120 ~~.>KI~H H,IRBUR SPEt;IPIC PL~1\ Pi~~uc ~ 1 ~nrh f [ar[xir Spey: ific Plan EuEj>l~[sis 7r~rrs 75A-121 KO- 7/26/08 RESOLUTION NO. 2008- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2008-23 AS CONDITIONED TO ALLOW 2,696 SQUARE FEET OF RESTAURANT SPACE AT THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 520 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARD 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 Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-23 to allow 2,696 square feet of restaurant space at the property located at 520 South Harbor Boulevard which is located in the North Harbor Specific Plan (SP-2). B. Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2006-87, Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2008-02 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-23 came before the Planning Commission on August 11, 2008 for a duly noticed public hearing. By a vote of 7:0, the Planning Commission voted to recommend the City Council approve Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2006-87, Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2008-02 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-23 as conditioned. C. The City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on September 2, 2008 and at that time considered all testimony written or oral on Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2006-87, Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2008-02 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-23. D. Pursuant to the North Harbor Specific Plan (SP-2), restaurants and other eating establishments, including take-out, but not including drive-through facilities are permitted subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit. E. Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-638 authorizes the City Council to grant a conditional use permit upon making certain findings. Resolution No. 2008- Page 1 of 9 75A-122 Will the proposed use provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood or community? The proposed restaurant use will add an additional service to the existing community by providing an additional location for existing residents and business to eat. This will provide patrons with the convenience of purchasing food, while waiting for medical appointments or shopping at the proposed retail uses. Policy 2.2 of the Land Use Element encourages commercial land uses in adequate amounts to accommodate the City's needs for goods and services. Additionally, the inclusion of conditions of approval will help to ensure that the applicant will operate the project in a manner that will not create additional problems for the neighboring residents and Police Department. In addition, the proposed development complies with Policy 5.5 of the Land Use Element that encourages projects that are compatible with and supportive of surrounding land uses. 2. Will the proposed use under the circumstances of the particular case be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity? The proposed restaurant use will not be detrimental to persons residing or working in the area because of placement conditions of approval on the project. Policy 5.5 of the Land Use Element encourages projects that are compatible with and supportive of surrounding land uses. The restaurant use will be a supportive use and provide additional dining and eating opportunities for the neighboring area and will not create any negative impacts to the surrounding residences and commercial businesses. 3. Will the proposed use adversely affect the present economic stability or future economic development of properties surrounding the area? The project will not negatively affect the economic stability of the surrounding area. Policy 2.5 of the Land Use Element encourages projects that balance economic and fiscal benefits of commercial development with its impacts on the quality of life in the City. A restaurant will not affect the surrounding neighborhood or City. The addition of the restaurant space will create an additional service for the surrounding residential and commercial neighborhoods. The conditions of approval will help to mitigate any potential Resolution No. 2008- Page 2 of 9 75A-123 problems and will minimize the possibility of the restaurant affecting the economic stability for the area. 4. Will the proposed use comply with the regulations and conditions specified in Chapter 41 for such use? The proposed project is a new development and will be in complete compliance will applicable regulations and standards specified in Chapter 41. In addition, conditions of approval will be placed on the conditional use permit to ensure compliance with City standards. The proposed project complies with the intent of the City's codes and the intent of the North Harbor Specific Plan goals and objectives. 5. Will the proposed use adversely affect the General Plan or any specific plan of the City? The proposed use will not have adverse affects on the General Plan as it is permitted in the General Commercial land use designation. Policy 2.2 and 2.5 of the Land Use Element encourage commercial land uses in adequate amounts to accommodate the City's needs for goods and services and encourages projects that balance economic and fiscal benefits of commercial development with its impacts on the quality of life in the City. The proposed use will give the neighborhood an additional restaurant use to purchase food. Additionally, Policy 5.5 of the Land Use Element encourages projects that are compatible with and supportive of surrounding land uses. The proposed project is located within an existing commercial corridor and the addition of the restaurant use will not affect the General Plan of the City. F. Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for Environmental Review No. 2006-87 came before the City Council on September 2, 2008 with the ordinance adopting ZOA 2008-03. This resolution incorporates by reference, as though fully set forth herein, the ordinance and resolutions and said Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for Environmental Review No. 2006-87 in support of this resolution. Section 2. The City Council after conducting the public hearing hereby approves Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-23 as conditioned in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein, to allow the operation of 2,696 square feet of restaurant space at the property located at 520 South Harbor Boulevard. The approval of the restaurant does not include adrive-through facility. This decision is based upon the evidence submitted at Resolution No. 2008- Page 3 of 9 75A-124 the above said hearing, which includes but is not limited to: the Request for City Council Action dated September 2, 2008 and exhibits attached thereto; and the public testimony, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference. Section 3. This Resolution shall take effect thirty (30) days after its adoption by the City Council; provided however, that if Ordinance No. NS-2773 is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, or otherwise do not go into effect for any reason, then this resolution shall be null and void and have no further force and effect. ADOPTED this day of 2008. Miguel A. Pulido Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joseph W. Fletcher, City Attorney By: Kylee Otto Assistant City Attorney AYES: Councilmembers NOES: Councilmembers ABSTAIN: Councilmembers NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers Resolution No. 2008- Page 4 of 9 75A-125 CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, PATRICIA E. HEALY, Clerk of attached Resolution No. Council of the City of Santa Ana on Date: the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the to be the original resolution adopted by the City Clerk of the Council City of Santa Ana Resolution No. 2008- Page 5 of 9 75A-126 Conditions for Approval for Conditional Use Permit No 2008-23 Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-23 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 California Building Standards Code and all other applicable regulations. The applicant must comply in full with each and every condition listed below riot to exercising the rights conferred by this conditional use permit. The applicant must remain in compliance with all conditions listed below throughout the life of the conditional use permit. Failure to comply with each and every condition may result in the revocation of the conditional use permit. A. Planning Division The project shall remain in compliance with Site Plan Review (DP No. 06- 43). 2. Any amendment to this conditional use permit 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 conditional use permit must be amended. 3. Prior to final issuance of a building permit, a sign program shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval. 4. Construction areas shall receive appropriate routine maintenance to reduce unnecessary debris piles. 5. Construction areas shall have appropriate erosion and dust control programs in place. 6. Construction lighting shall be limited to safety and security and directed to minimize light and glare impacts to any adjacent sensitive receptors. 7. The proposed project will comply with the design standards outlined in the City of Santa Ana's North Harbor Specific Plan. 8. For the proposed commercial building, subterranean parking, and surface parking lot, all lighting shall comply with all City zoning, building, and NHSP design guidelines and will utilize directional and/or shielded lighting in order to minimize spillover effects to adjacent vicinities. The applicant will provide the City, for their approval, a lighting plan with a photometric study that shows the point-by-point foot-candle layout to 20 feet outside the property line (NHSP 6.2.3). Additionally, all new projects shall provide Resolution No. 2008- Exhibit A Page 6 of 9 75A-127 an ornamental night lighting plan, prepared by an electrical engineer, and approved by the building, planning, and police departments (NHSP 6.2.3). 9. The applicant shall apply soil stabilizers to inactive areas; water exposed surfaces two times a day to reduce air quality impacts from construction related activities. 10. The applicant shall apply position equipment staging areas away from the sensitive receptors to reduce air quality impacts from construction related activities. 11. If human remains are unearthed during construction, work shall cease immediately and the County Coroner shall be contacted to make necessary findings as to the origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American decent, the NAHC shall be notified. The NAHC will identify the ancestry of the remains and determine which course of action should be taken in addressing the findings. 12. If the temporary structures are to be demolished, then as a condition of approval for the project, an asbestos containing materials survey will be performed by a qualified environmental professional before any demolition permit is issued. Said survey will adhere to federal, state, and local regulations and will be sent to the City for approval. If the survey finds ACMs in the temporary structures, then those materials containing ACMs will be removed and disposed of in accordance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations. 13. If lead-based paint is discovered during on-site investigations, all building materials containing lead-based paint will be removed, transported, and disposed of at landfills that meet acceptance criteria for the waste being disposed. Demolition and removal shall be performed in conformance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations pertaining to lead based paint. 14. As part of the design for the proposed project, a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) will be prepared and implemented. The WQMP will include structural and nonstructural Best Management Practices (BMPs), which will avoid or minimize, to the greatest extent possible, the impacts associated with the daily operation of the project site. 15. The proposed project will require a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and will require the preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) incorporating BMPs to reduce stormwater impacts during construction. Resolution No. 2008- Page 7 of 9 75A-128 16. Construction activities shall comply with the applicable local jurisdiction's construction noise requirements. The City of Santa Ana Noise Ordinance prohibits construction activities between the hour of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Monday through Saturday, anytime on Sundays, and federal holidays. 17. All noise-producing project equipment and vehicles using internal combustion engines shall be equipped with mufflers and air-inlet silencers, where appropriate, in good operating condition that meet or exceed original factory specifications. Mobile or fixed "package" equipment (e.g., arc-welders, air compressors) shall be equipped with shrouds and noise control features that are readily available for that type of equipment. 18. All mobile or fixed noise producing equipment used on the project, which is regulated for noise output by a local, state, or federal agency, shall comply with such regulation while in the course of project activity. 19. All material stockpiles and mobile equipment staging, parking, and maintenance areas shall be located as far as practicable from noise sensitive receptors. 20. The applicant shall locate fixed noise generating equipment as far from noise sensitive land uses as practical to avoid unnecessary annoyance from construction noise. 21. The hours of construction, including noisy maintenance activities, shall be restricted to the periods and days permitted by the City of Santa Ana Noise Ordinance. 22. The loudest construction activities, such as concrete breaking and jack hammering, shall be limited to the middle of the day when the sensitivity to such noises will be at its lowest. 23. Noise producing signals, including horns, whistles, alarms, and bells shall be used for safety warning purposes only. 24. No project related public address or music systems shall be audible at any adjacent receptor. 25. If complaints arise, the contractor shall initiate a construction noise- monitoring plan to ensure the construction noise levels at the nearest noise sensitive land uses are within the limits of the noise ordinance. 26. Use of temporary noise barriers shall be considered where project activities and equipment is unavoidably close to noise sensitive receptors. Resolution No. 2008- Page 8 of 9 75A-129 27. The use of on-site trailers and containers as temporary barriers between any fixed construction noise source and nearby sensitive receptors shall be used to avoid unnecessary annoyance from construction noise. 28. The proposed project will implement a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) to be prepared, in consultation with the City of Santa Ana, prior to construction. The TMP shall consist of prior notices, adequate sign- postings, detours, and temporary driveways, if required. Adequate access shall be maintained at all times to and from existing driveways serving adjacent land uses. Proper detours and warning signs shall be established to ensure public safety. The TMP shall be devised so that construction will not interfere with any emergency response or evacuation plans. The TMP shall specify construction routes so that construction workers and vehicles will travel non-residential street, as practical. B. Police Department Subterranean parking to be equipped with a rolling overhead grille equipped with an Emergency Knox Access System. 2. Parking garage design: Each door within the structure leading into a stairwell, lobby, and storage area must be outfitted with a 100 square inch rated window. Convex mirrors minimum of 12-inch in diameter must be provided at each stairwell landing and at each corner along a walkway. The area underneath the last flight of each stair must be fully enclosed at its base. Elevator lobbies must be glass encased (glass entry doors) to provide the user with maximum visibility. Elevations of the glass-encased lobby are to be submitted for review and approval prior to installation. Elevator lobbies must open directly into the parking garage. Elevators are to be equipped with a minimum 12-inch shatterproof convex mirrors or are to have mirrored backing. 3. One State licensed uniformed security guard will be required of the exterior of the property seven days a week, twenty-four hours a day. 4. Underground parking garage elevator lobby to be glass encased to provide maximum visibility. Resolution No. 2008- Page 9 of 9 75A-130