Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout31A - CUP 2009-11 - 2000 N FAIRVIEW STREETREQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AUGUST 3, 2009 TITLE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2009-11 TO PERMIT AN EXISTING CHURCH AND EXPANSION PROJECT AT 2000 NORTH FAIRVIEW STREET - WINTERSBURG PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, APPLICANT t~ ~ U ~-z'~-'== CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDED ACTION CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: APPROVED ^ As Recommended ^ As Amended ^ Ordinance on 15t Reading ^ Ordinance on 2nd Reading ^ Implementing Resolution ^ Set Public Hearing For_ CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER Receive and file the staff report approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-11 as conditioned. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION On July 13, 2009, the Planning Commission approved and adopted the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2008-180; and adopted a resolution approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-11 as conditioned by a vote of 6:0 (Turner absent) to permit Wintersburg Presbyterian Church as well as allow the expansion of the church in the Agriculture (Al) zoning district at 2000 North Fairview Street. The Planning Commission made no changes to the recommended conditions of approval outlined in the attached staff report (Exhibit A). FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. ~, Jays Trevino Exe tive Director Planning & Building Agency VF:rb of\reports\cup09-11 Wintersburg Presbyterian.cc 31 A-1 REQUEST FOR Planning Commission Action PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: JULY 13, 2009 TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING - FILED BY THE WINTERSBURG PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2009-11 TO PERMIT AN EXISTING CHURCH AND EXPANSION PROJECT AT 2000 NORTH FAIRVIEW STREET PLANNING COMMISSION SECRETARY APPROVED ^ As Recommended ^ As Amended ^ Set Public Hearing For DENIED ^ Applicant's Request ^ Staff Recommendation CONTINUED TO Prepared by Vince Fregoso i Executive D' ctor Planning Manager RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Approve and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2008-180. 2. Adopt a resolution approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-11 as conditioned. DISCUSSION Request of Applicant The Wintersburg Presbyterian Church is requesting approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-11 to permit an existing church as well as allow an expansion of the church at 2000 North Fairview Street. Specifically, the applicant is requesting approval per Section 41- 201.5(1), which requires a conditional use permit for churches in the General Agriculture (A1) zoning district. Property Description The subject property is a 4.6 acre parcel located on the west side of Fairview Street between Seventeenth Street and Trask Avenue in the General Agriculture (A1) zoning district. The property was within an unincorporated section of the County until it was annexed to the City in 1997. Surrounding land uses include single-family and multi-family residential to the north and south, an intermediate school to the west, and multi-family residential and a vacant health care facility to the east (Exhibits 1 and 2). EXHIBIT A 31 A-2 Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-11 July 13, 2009 Page 2 The site is improved with several low-rise church buildings that were originally constructed in 1966. In 1994, a new sanctuary and administration building was built on the church campus to accommodate the expanded church ministry. Approximately 28,376 square feet of building area, including a 564-seat sanctuary, are located on the property. A total of 327 on-site parking spaces are currently found on the site. In 2001, the church obtained a conditional use permit (Conditional Use Permit No. 2001-02) to operate Keiro Services, a non-profit adult daycare program for up to 44 adults aged 55-plus. This facility operates from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and is located within the Activity Center. The church also operates the Lighthouse Ministry, a low key community service that provides food, showers and used clothing for those in need. This service, which has been operational for eight years, is provided on Tuesday and Thursdays from 9:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. (women only) and 12:30 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. (men only). Project Description The Wintersburg Presbyterian Church is proposing several improvements to their existing church campus. These include the demolition of the 5,221 square foot former sanctuary building, the installation of new parking lot planters, and the construction of approximately 34,348 square feet of building area that consists of a multi-use gymnasium, classrooms, a parent's room and an expanded community outreach room. The project is intended to be constructed in two phases. The first phase will consist of a 31,545 square foot, two story multi-use building with a gymnasium and nine classrooms. The second phase will include a 480 square foot expansion to the Social Hall for an expanded Lighthouse Ministry facility, a 963 square foot sanctuary expansion to be used as a Parents Room and a 1,943 square foot Nichigo Classroom addition to the sanctuary (Exhibits 3 and 4). The total parking demand for the church and related uses varies from 77 to 222 spaces, while 305 spaces will be provided. The architectural design of the addition to the sanctuary and the new multi-use gym is contemporary and is consistent with the design of the existing campus. A lightly textured stucco finish, doors, windows and building color will match the buildings. Further, glass block will be used to allow natural lighting inside of the multi-use building (Exhibit 5) . 31 A-3 Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-11 July 13, 2009 Page 3 A comprehensive landscape plan has also been prepared for the project that will complement the existing palette. New landscape planters will be provided at the rear of the site to bring the parking lot into compliance with code. Further, dead or missing landscape materials will be provided within existing planters (Exhibit 6). The church holds one service on Sunday morning at 10:10 a.m. Adult bible study classes are held from 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. and end prior to church services. The children's ministry, which consists of seven classes, meets from 9:00 to 11:30 a.m., with two Junior and Senior High classes gathering from 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. Other classes and activities are also held at various times during the week. Analysis of the Issues The Wintersburg Presbyterian Church was formed in 1904 as a Presbyterian Mission in the small town of Wintersburg, which was located in an area now known as the City of Huntington Beach. The Mission was formed to minister to the needs of the immigrant Japanese farm workers who worked the celery fields of Orange County. Over the years, the church continued to grow as Orange County's population grew, with the church eventually outgrowing its facilities and relocating to its present site which was within a County island in 1966. The church became part of Santa Ana in 1997 when the City annexed the County Island along Fairview Street. Due to its nonconforming status and lack of development activity, the church never obtained a conditional use permit as required by the zoning code. As a result, the church is now requesting approval of a conditional use permit to operate as well as expand the church use. The church is proposing to expand their existing facility and provide additional spiritual, recreational, educational and social opportunities to their congregants and the surrounding community by expanding their current facilities. The new Parents Room addition will provide a location for parents to provide care to their children during worship service. The Nichigo Classroom is a place for their Japanese speaking parishioners to be taught in their native language. The expansion to the Lighthouse Ministry facility will allow the church to modernize the space and allow the continued distribution of food, showers, clothes and Christian literature to the homeless two days per week. Finally, the new multi-use facility will provide additional classrooms for the children's, youth and adult bible studies as well as a gymnasium to be used for volleyball and/or basketball leagues on weekends. 31 A-4 Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-11 July 13, 2009 Page 4 The proposed 305 parking spaces are sufficient to accommodate the various uses to be provided. As identified on the church's operational plan, during the week, activities occurring on the site include the Keiro adult day care program, operations of the church office and administrative functions from Tuesday through Friday, the Lighthouse Ministry on Tuesday and Friday afternoons, Senior Fellowship on Wednesdays, Moms in Ministry every other Friday and the Youth Ministry on Friday evenings (Exhibit 7). During the peak demand, a maximum of 77 parking spaces are required. On Saturday and Sunday afternoon, a total of 222 parking spaces would be required for the gymnasium use. During church services on Sunday mornings, a total of 200 parking spaces are required for the sanctuary. To ensure the remaining spaces are not utilized during church services, a condition of approval has been included which limits the use of the social hall and multi-use building to hours before and after church services. The church use is consistent with the General Plan's Land Use Element policies of encouraging the development of nonprofit facilities and services as well as promoting uses that provide a positive contribution to neighborhood character and identity. To ensure the expansion of the Wintersburg Presbyterian Church will not impact surrounding residential neighborhood, conditions of approval have been incorporated. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-11 as conditioned. CEQA Compliance In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, a mitigated negative declaration and mitigated monitoring program has been prepared for this project. The Mitigation Negative Declaration has been circulated for a 20-day public review period, which ran from June 18, 2009 through July 8, 2009. The report identifies potential environmental impacts and identifies mitigation measures that reduce the impacts to less than significant levels. The report identified no parking and traffic related impacts resulting from the church expansion. Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2008-180 will be filed for this project (Exhibit 8). ~ _ -,~ c Vince Fregoso, AICP Principal Planner VF: jm of\reports\cup09-11 Wintersburg Presbyterian.pc 3 1 A- R1 R1 R1 ~I Ciry of Garden Grove Al GENERALAGRICULTURAL -B PARKING MODIFICATION Ci COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL C7-MD COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL-MUSEUM DISTRICT C2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL C3 CENTRAL BUSINESS C3-A CENTRAL BUSINESS-ARTISTS' VILLAGE C4 PLANNED SHOPPING CENTER C5 ARTERIAL COMMERCIAL CR COMMERCIAL RESIOENTIAL PROJECT SITE °""`°" "" 4 . ~, ~ , , ^r ~~« a, C-SM SOUTH MAIN STREET COMMERCIAL DISTRICT -F FLOOR AREA RATIO GC GOVERNMENT CENTER M1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL M2 HEAW INDUSTRIAL MO MILITARY OPERATIONS O OPEN SPACE -OZ OVERLAY ZONE P PROFESSIONAL PCD PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PRD PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT R1 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE R2 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENCE R3 MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE R4 SUBURBAN APARTMENT RE RESIDENTIAL ESTATE SD SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT SP SPECIFIC PLAN CUP 09-11 ~ WINTERSBURG PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH EXPANSION ..~~.. ~ 2000 NORTH FAIRVIEW STREET - = 500 FEET 1" = 1000 FEET P L A N N I N G A N D B U I L D I N G A G E N C Y VICINITY MAP ~~HJ~1~1 CUP 09-11 WINTERSBURG PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH EXPANSION 2000 NORTH FAIRVIEW STREET P L A N N I N G A N D B U I L D I N G A G E N C Y LAND USE MAP 3E~CF11B~j 2 ~~ ~w.` ~ ~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~qq~€~~ w~ ~ ~ ~~ "m~~b g 3 §43Ww~£ 4~ ~~~g ~&~F ~a: €gg~tl ~~£~h &~~ ~3 w ~~~~~; ~~=7~;~~~5a k~ ~^~~~a~$~~s~~g~i a~~~~s~s r 4 gas -- - - 1 r..- _ .. _-,.~~ ~3'~ ~~~ ~~3; gW~= I a >5~~£~~ €~~' ~ ~9` I 'r I j Y _' ~ ~ T_ ~ {~~+a-- d ~ ~ , yyS s Y~ 4 ~e Ro~g~°~s ~~8m?a ®~s"~ ias 5a ~~~~Y ~~~~~a ~~~~~~~ ~~~`'w ~~o€~ gW W~e~ d~a~o, a to~~ag w ~4a yy ~~~~i~Y~ b e 4 ~ ~~~ ~ ~~"~ ~ 8"y" °~ o Pg~Z ~ ~ ~~y:~~ $~ ~ ~~38§~, 1~3 ~d ~: ~b ob ~ qqqq ~$S R. ~~Z oi~ci ~kyy~ry~S~~RR~~~y L$mp §( w~m~~~~t6=~ ~ ~A ~Ia g~~F~~ ~ €~ Lai°'t~~'g -.~~§ao;.8= ,- j ali ~. Y~ -~~~~ s Q } F- Z_ U 3 ~~-t~dr 3 N -3 a ~ oacra e~ ni i; vo ~+V ,,., Z O ~I Z Q ~, ~, U J N W ~ ~ Q. II o a 1 t _ ~. ~~.-,.- LLJ wo w ~~ ~ Hs Q ~ \ ~ -__- ~ ~ ~ W ~qF a; s W I a U ~_~ ~ N ~m Ts ~ _ ._. ~_ ~ ~ ,• ~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ax a ~ Y~~~ €y ~a 3 w ~ ~ ~~~ w _ spa €r ~€ ~ ~- ~g ~~9 ~~ ' c~ ~ ~ ~ £ ~ ~ Q ~. E ~ d o ° ~~ t7 ~s al ,~ _y ~ Z ~o ~ a,w ~~ E w~ ~ „4 ~ ~g¥g Z ~ g g ~~o `mil( $ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ d;• fn SS ~ ~~ ,~z~d€ N N LL W a ~ .~ ~~ ~~~n } ~s ._ m "' _-__ J` ~ ygey z R~ ~~YY Z Q 3 ~~3 6g ~~ W ~~ ~ ~w ~ Y I~ U f i. I~ ~~YS d ~o ~~d~ m I /~ r ~ L_ -~~ ~ _ i ~ . /~ LL _ ---_- - ~ ~ ' ~ ~ I I ~~I '~ffi I `_ I ~ ~~ ~ _ _ _ LL r I i - ~ 1~ sr ~ I ~ C F f y MM W e . ' 1 //~ VJ I ~/ _____-, G W o r ~ ~ ~~}: Ym ~_ _.. m ~F .R ~ fypp Fp1 P6 _ ~ ~ i ~ i J ~~--__-._ ^ © 9sze-ece is cezzs -va ^i uLN• ~..J Z Q Q '^ V J N U w ~~ F" ~ ~ Q - - - -- -- -- t _ - _ V` ~- W lY '1S M31/~LIIVd H12iON.._~._- w ,~ _. _. ~~ ~ Z ~ ~~i i ~__ _ ____ -~~~ - ~ '- 1 -__-- i ~ s~' ~-..-_ ~~ ~ F= -- - -~ -- r i ~ ~ i ~ -- ±-- -- ~ - __ ~ ~ 1 ~- a-= ~~ i I ~ _ L ~', - ~-~~~ +- ~- ~_ - '8 g~3 bB ~ ~`~ ~ m fi ~. s„ ~ m • ` I -,- s~ ---- ~- , W -.. ~4 1 S ~ N n 1 ~~ dz bia d j eS? __._._.. il~ °~$ r ' i U F:_ i `~-_-- ~. r o ~ ~ ~j ~~ ~¢ ~ r e ~ ~ ~ U ~~--~ ~ ~~ ~~~ _ -- na s~,- ~, it Z r- ~~ Q ~ --- __ --, ~ -- ~ -- - - ~ w _ __ t~ zc~~ W - --- ----{ ~ C7 --- _ ~' ~I ~~~_LL ~~im ~ m - _~_ - -- - W - ~- ~. ~~ - $ F- ~~ Z _ , _s ---f- ~~ --1 I-- - - - ~ - _. __ _ -i - -,-~ O C~)' ~ 00 _~_~ !~~~~ 1J~ ~. 31 A-9 ® Bt . OflCZE 5 nC ZCiIt 1~if 1 ],fit I ~ Z ~ ~ g ; VJ ~ U ~ ° Q o J ~ W ~ U 'w Cn ~ . ~~ _~ ~~ H ~~ J_ m (/~ Q W LL. 2 U 2 U Z Q W F- } m C~ W W (~ m C~ W H Z --- __ _ ti ~,=a - - - -- - - >., ~~ 4 -* ® 5fZ B LZ6 ] N~Sn. 15 0 S ei ~PllPJP ald I i ~--~ Z o ~~ Z ~ (n a U ~ O Q ~ J Z W Z o U w ~ w ~ . ~ LL N J ~ ~ ~ J_ m (/~ Q W LL 2 U U Z Q W H ~- m W d C~ m W I- Z fi ~`g,s 1 __ W _ ~ c~ z X ~ ( ~ w x ~~~ ~~ s~ ~~ 0 w J 0 z w J 31 ~ 5 w w 7 J w o ~ 00 z~- U ~ p T Q W J w W W cA ~U~//~~ J yJ ~_ J_ _m f/~ Q W LL U 2 U Z W ~- m W L.L m W H Z_ .rs ~... _.. s ~... _ __ _ ~. ® ~ ~ ~ ~ . __ a x --- -__. _~. _.soz '~. e._ I I t ' z o ~~ U Uzi z Z w a a 2 d' O Z O C7 v_ Z ~~ ~ - I- - -~~ k a W ,~~rl_ _ ~~:,~ _ ~ ~6~, J ~ ,_ a oe~ ®m®~e ~ . ~ r' ~ T ,_„ - ~ ~ i w ~ Z W _ ~ ~ ' J %~ ~ g~8 , 7 ~ ~ ~ , „ ~ a 0 '. \\ E~ ~ ~ a 4 ~ J ~ r -.4bT y w __ ~- F w 7. -l Q a ~_ _ ~ I I i i i -_ - . ~~ ~~ ~ <-- -- ~ _-, ~~ ~~ ~~ F w 0 U 1 Y I F w O U 2 ~~~~ ~~ 2 F- O O ~_ U Z a i i _ ;~ ~ w w ____ .__ rc ~- ., a ~ ' s w~ _ _- -0 mE ,- s ~- ~, ~~ I0 _tt~ b ~~ T 1 j' y _. _. __ ~.$5~ ~ v ~. Y _.___:~, _..,~_ ~. -'--- ~W.. ~ iJ' a rc gn b / ' ~• ~ __. l I :bra ~ :~a~ ~_~F.e-II --._ -a-nr _-. ... ,Y ~z~~ I I I I i `- 31 A-'l 3 +_~- w 3 w O x F x c7 J _- _~I L- o~~~ ~ r z O LL C7 uj i~ U ~ Z ~- O O z LL d ~_ Z W 7 O ~ 2 ~ ~~ J V O Z W O x F- 2 O J S F O w 0 J ~_ J_ m Q W Z U U Q W } m W LL 1~1~ M~/y~ ``W^ VJ W Z Z YMIlIOd1~Y0 'YNY Y1NYS 133Fi1S M31AWYd HlklON OOOd - - r - -- < I„ s <" ~bs ~r t "~8d, (A~ ~ ,~ ~ . - ~~.~ H~a(1H~ N111li31~19S3~1d J~1f19Sa31N'M t - ~~ ~ Y o, ~ ',"~ ~ .d ~~d :,aew,~ "~ ~ ~~ ' cd,~ ~ ~~ ~>~~ i ~)~r J ~ao~ swvia iYtm1~31ieoeY 3avosowYi 3dVDSONV~ 7Y(11d3DN0~ .,.a.., . M ...,,,n~a w. , ~ .. . ,, ~..v , ,,.. ,.. ~~M.~. . , ,, ,,,,. ,,« ,., ., ,..N .,, ~, ~ m~,,, ., , ,.w„~. ,. ,.,;., ,,a ...~ , . , a,.. ~ ,., ,., ,::,, wu,~ ,. , ,,a ,, ~ , ,,, m ......., m ,M ., m.....~ ,,,. ~~~ 1S M31n211Vd HILTON r ~ "fl" ~ .~ ~ z~ ., ~ -~ 11 ~ I I Ifs( ~ ~~ ~~~I ~_ ~ - 4 Y;' ~ P r ~ ~ I I i ' ~~ ~ a' 3 i ,/ 1 ~ ® i ~ ~ C s ~9 ~~ s ~~ ~. ~~g a3 f7 ~ ~ ~~ ~~ g~ ~... ~ ~~~ ,~~ ~~ ~ ~ iL Ip~ 1II _ ~~~,,,,~~ ~ ~~~ ,~j-~__ u L ` Its 4 ll ~. -~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ , a ~' ~ ~ w~ ~ ~ __ _.~ r ~ , ~E ~~ ~ fir- ~ t-~,. ~. ~ i ~~ ~I - ~. __ -- ~ _ _~ g ~ e ~ ~~ x ~ ~~" ~,~~ Lam- IL ~- .~ .~„a,a.~ Imo` 'w~4g"`~n`{ ..,T I ~ ~ ~~ I'~ i '; __ ` L- r t - - -_ t ld I QI_T~6 J W W L~L /r V Z F x W W H 0 Z W a at v N D Z Q J W W J a a H Z Q J a ~ Z Q Q - ~ £~~ S ~ J S ~ ~ ee~ ~ AAA ', O `^ ~ ~ Z ,I wEdw~g ~" I Q __ ~ { F _ __'i., ~~ S~~ I~~I H1HON ~• I'i g L g £ffi3§~` 884 3 ~ ~ p g$ " ~ W 3 f ___., U . e ~ ~e ~wa~°w _ -£ a a _... ~ w $~9~~ ~ }; ~{ ~p ~~j~P pp y $f~j~, ji~ L $~(~f L B e~ ~pE iE~Y ~~ ;~Sg~~ g g % ~m ~ ~s gg~~t E~~ ~ ~F~•~ Egg ~~i N: ~$~~~~~5 O g P~~3 ~~## ~~~Piii gyP~F ~~~p'~p~~45~ U O $s~~~s ci ~ 7e ~~ ~~ ~~~€ F ~I ~a~l~$~ ° ~ ~ ~!, a g ~~ ~ ~ ~~ 5 _ "~~ ?~ o~g~ ~~s a °~ ~ ~~ 3 ~sw h o c~ " ¢I~ w4° g~~ ~ ~ Gi!LL ~~~~ uP ~~; o~,~ ~ 5 a r' o z' • ~c ¢;~ o^ c~ s ° ~ ~ o H i ~ ° ~ 0 o w + ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ < ~ o ~ - g ~ N o ~, _ w w ~ g w 2I ~ ` °~ Z e 0 d F ^. r o~e V W O W Z 0 W a a °z O N ^^ Gy WaOJ O~Z~ c~aao zZo~ ~~~o yma~ ~~ a~Wo o~ ~~ZmO o~a ~ 4 O> a~ o ~F ~ Jm a ~a J ~~ Q O ~~ ~~ O >yW-OOC~O~ o~S ~ N J = ~ J ~ V ~ ~ °zaa~ts-a ~N ~o oZ w v= c~= W~oc ~o 0~3 03 Z O W N a 0 W ~ .. c ~ w ,~ C J 0 ~ O Q. ~ N E.. ~ m ~ ~.wy N aw ,. ~ "g OD ~~O WF.. ~O~ ~O ac°~ ~a }} Z a ~ 0 0 J O = V NHH= O~z- >>1- F-~ ~OOOW~O O~~ ~~o~ N cRNNa1-N E- F- 1- J_ f- ' J J J z W J G~GC~LL'p ~,aaa~soa ~-ao- o°z =N= ..,~w ~p~ cai~= X03 ~~ Zz rn O rwN o~ ~~a as ~~~ as a t~ O O r0 ~ M 0 0~ V' M O T C O r ~~ O O r C~Q1r rr Cpplr rr O o~' W N v U Z as fl = W ~ Q '" 0 w 0 O N c~a a W a o, s= O ~3 oz o~ J ~a z ~i » ~ oo,~ o!! o!f ~p J J v °a a z ~~ ~d z~v g a~°z ~- O t) W ~ ~ ~ Q QQo O 000 ~:: 00c O ao b~ e- ~ a '" 0 00~ N ,{ E a a~ =o 03 ~o ~~ O~ ~~ ~- O d w~= N~ F>3 w~Z o W 00 NN = r _ t- F- ~ 00 ~ ~, } Wyy o!f otf ~A JJ v as Z ~~ ~d y~g ~ .. ~ °~ z° ~ OVW ~ ~~ ~Qo O oo°•p ~~o ~ a °z 0 r N .. a =a ~N ~3 ~o 00 moo}} W F- ~O d ~~~ w~0 o ; ~°- ~ Z o~~ ~~ Z 0 J J v °a °a z ~~ 0 0 my .. a~z! O v WO ~4 QQo O 000 00o O 0o ci ~ ~ 31 A-16 .~. ~_ O~G ~A Q V Z J W F g d 0 g~ i v a_ ~ ~ = w ~a ~ F- 0 Z ~~~ ~ N~ ~N~ 'Q' p JOOy v VO CW7~r ~ W =vNi~ ~ Z~ O~Wa~ Q ~~¢ ~~ ~a~w.~~ N ~Vo~ W ~W °~~m o w >> ~ ~a ~~m°~ O g ~ ~ ~O vajy otf ~ °~ ~ ~ v~ ~~~Z~ ~ y,,,~ Q z ~2 C~WO~Q ~ ~SW~ ~ VU otfF-QQotf =01-w2 t/~N~~ Z ZZ ~WW..1~ o Z~~ N °~Jw o cn c~a =o'oo ~ woN z ts~¢~ ~ oWw w ~ _ ~ = J m ~ a Na 00 ° Z F-==Om WJ ~" W Q W=W~a WQ m o a~~~=gym ~w V a~ ~ r =__°~ QV Q OV3 V N C~t~C)t~.,N J~ 0 ~~ ~d ~ ~ a~~ ~~ d: MOO 00 ~. ~ Q C X 0 0 O M i- o~ Q> r !~ r r r r 1~ P 31 A-17 MAYOR Miguel A. Pulido MAYOR PRO TEM Claudia C. Alvarez COUNCIL MEMBERS P. David Benavides Carr 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 Mitigated Negative Declaration for the following project: Project Title: Wintersburg Presbyterian Church expansion Project Description: The project consists of the demolition of a 5,221 square foot building, new landscaping and the construction of approximately 34,348 square feet of new building area. The new square footage will consist of a 480 square foot expansion to the Social Hall for an expanded Lighthouse Ministry facility, a 963 square foot sanctuary expansion for a Parents Room, a 1,943 square foot Nichigo Classroom addition to the sanctuary, and a new 31,545 square foot multi-use building with a gymnasium and nine classrooms. A conditional use permit to allow the church use in the General Agriculture (A1) zoning district is required. Project Location: Project Number: Public Review Period: Hearing Date: Hearing Location: 2000 North Fairview Street Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-11 June 18, 2009 to July 8, 2009 July 13, 2009 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, the Santa Ana Public Library at 26 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, and on the web on the Planning Division's Home Page at www.santa- ana.org/pba. Please submit any comments on the Negative Declaration to the City on or before July 8, 2009. Please direct your comments to: Vince Fregoso, Principal Planner, City of Santa Ana, P.O. Box 1988, M-20, Santa Ana, CA, 92702. If you have any questions or would like any additional information, please contact Vince Fregoso at (714) 667- 2713. 311~rMi~Br 8 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 wwwsanta-ana.org CITY MANAGER David N. Ream CITY ATTORNEY Joseph W. Fletcher CLERK OF THE COUNCIL Patricia E. Healy MITIGATEDNEGATIVE DECLARATION Pursuant to the Procedures of the City of Santa Ana for implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Environmenta{ Evaluator has completed an Initial Study for the project described below: Project Number: Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-11 and ER 2008-180 Applicant: Larry LaBonte/Wintersburg Presbyterian Church Project Location /Address: 2000 North Fairview Street, Santa Ana, CA Project Title /Description: Wintersburg Presbyterian Church expansion The proposed project consists of the demolition of a 5,221 square foot building, new landscaping, and the construction of approximately 34,348 square feet of new building area that will consist of a 480 square foot expansion to the Social Hall for the Lighthouse Ministry facility, a 963 square foot sanctuary expansion for a Parents Room, a 1,943 square foot Nichigo Classroom addition to the sanctuary, and a new 31,545 square foot multi-use building with a gymnasium and nine classrooms. A conditional use permit to allow the church use in the General Agriculture (A1) zoning district is required. And does hereby find: That although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because of revisions to the project and mitigation measures placed on the project, and agreed to by the applica t, reduce each impact to below a level of significance. Signature: ~ Date: ~ 1 ~ rincipal Planner This determination is not final until adopted by the decision-making body or administrative official, and a Notice of Determinatio~i~fij,~d ~ 9 Initial Study CEQA Compliance PLANNING DIVISION 1. Project Title: Wintersburg Presbyterian Church and expansion II. Project Numbers: Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-11 III. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Santa Ana Planning Division (M-20) P.O. Box 1988, Santa Ana, CA 92702 IV. Contact and Phone Number: Vince Fregoso (714) 667-2713 V. Project Location: 2000 North Fairview Street VI. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Larry LaBonte, 14732 Livingston Street, Tustin, CA 92780 VII. General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential (LR) VIII. Zoning: General Agriculture (A1) IX. Description of Project: The proposed project consists of the demolition of a 5,221 square foot building, new landscaping and the construction of approximately 34,348 square feet of new building area. The new square footage will include a 480 square foot expansion to the Social Hall for an expanded Lighthouse Ministry facility, a 963 square foot sanctuary expansion for a Parents Room, a 1,943 square foot Nichigo Classroom addition to the sanctuary, and a new 31,545 square foot multi-use building with a gymnasium and nine classrooms. A conditional use permit to allow the church use in the General Agriculture (A1) zoning district is required. X. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project site is a 4.6 acre, rectangular shaped parcel located on the west side of Fairview Street between Seventeenth Street and Trask Avenue in the General Agriculture (A1) zoning district. The property was within an unincorporated section of the County of Orange until it was annexed to the City of Santa Ana in 1997. Surrounding land uses include single-family and multi-family residential to the north and south, an intermediate school to the west, and multi-family residential and a vacant health care facility to the east. The site contains the Wintersburg Presbyterian Church, which has operated on the site since 1966. Vehicular access to the site is from two existing driveways on Fairview Street, which is listed as an arterial street in the Circulation Element of the City's General Plan. XI. Other agencies whose approval is required. No approval is required from outside agencies. LL\M:\WP511PCnoticing\Wintersburg MND.docx 31 A-20 Initial Study CEQA Compliance Environmental Factors Potentially Affected: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by that project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. O Aesthetics O Agricultural Resources O Air Quality O Biological Resources O Cultural Resources O Geology and Soils O Hazards and Hazardous Materials O Hydrology and Water Quality O Land Use and Planning O Mineral Resources O Noise O Population and Housing O Public Services O Recreation O Transportation and Traffic O Utilities and Service Systems O Mandatory Findings of Significance Environmental Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation, I find that: A. ^ The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. B. ® Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions to the project have been made by or agreed to by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. C. ^ The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. D. ^ Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR (EIR No. -)pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the project, nothing further is required. E. ^ Pursuant to Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR {EIR No. -)has been prepared earlier and only minor technical changes or additions are necessary to make the previous EIR adequate and these changes do not raise important new issues about the significant effects on the environment. An ADDENDUM to the EIR shall be prepared. F. ^ Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR (EIR No. -)has been prepared earlier; however, subsequent proposed changes in the project and/or new information of substantial importance will cause one or more significant effects no previously discussed. A SUBSEQUENT EIR shall be prepared. ~ June 16. 2009 Signature Date Vince Fregoso Principal Planner Printed Name LL\M:1WP5'I\PCnoticing\Wintersburg MND.docx 31 A-2 Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: I. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on aproject-specific screening analysis). II. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. III. 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 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. IV. "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 "Earlier Analyses," as described in (V) below, may be cross-referenced). V. 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: 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. VI. 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. VII. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. VIII. 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. IX. 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 31 A-22 Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources Less than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact I. Aesthetics -Would the project: A. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ^ ^ ^ B. Damage scenic resources, including but not limited ^ ^ ^ to, trees, rock outpourings and historic buildings within a state highway? C. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? ^ ^ ® ^ D. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? ^ ^ ® ^ 11. Agricultural Resources - In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agricultural farmland. Would the project: A. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or ^ ^ ^ Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) to non-agricultural use? (The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program in the California Resources Agency, Department of Conservation, maintains detailed maps of these and other categories of farmland.) B. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a ^ ^ Williamson Contract? C. Involve other changes in the existing environment ^ which, due to their location or nature, could individually or cumulatively result in loss of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? ® ^ 31 A-23 Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Less than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues & Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact III. Air Quality -Where available, the significant criteria established by the applicable air quality management or pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: A. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of ^ ^ ^ applicable Air Quality Attainment Plan or Congestion Management Plan? B. Violate any 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 emission which exceeds 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. Adversely impact, either directly or through habitat ^ modifications, any endangered, rare or threatened species, as listed on Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (section 670.2 or 670.5) or in the Title 50, code of Federal Regulations (section 17.11 or 17.12)? B. Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly ^ or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive or special status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services? ^ ^ ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ^ 31 A-24 Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources C. Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less than Significant Potentially with Significant Mitigation Impact Incorporated ^ ^ D. Adversely impact federally protected wetlands ^ (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) either individually or in combination with the known or probable impacts of other activities through direct removal, filling hydrological interruption, or other means? E. Interfere substantially with the movement of any ^ resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? F. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances ^ protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance? G. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat ^ Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community 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 which is either listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register or Historic Resources, or a local register of historic resources? Less Than Significant No Impact Impact 31 A-25 Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Less than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues & Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact B. Cause a substantial adverse change in the ^ ® ^ ^ significance of a unique archaeological resource (i.e., an artifact, object or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions, has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest or best available example of its type, or is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person? C. Disturb or destroy a unique paleontological ^ ® ^ ^ resource or site? D. Disturb any human remains, including those ^ ® ^ ^ interred outside of formal cemeteries? VI. Geology and Soils -Would the project: A. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 1. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as ^ ^ ^ delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? ^ ^ ® ^ 2. Strong seismic ground shaking? 3. Seismic-related ground failure, including ^ ^ ® ^ liquefaction? ^ ^ ^ 4. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ^ ^ ^ 5. Landslides? Flooding, including flooding as a result of the ^ ^ ^ 6. failure of a levee or dam? 31 A-26 Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Less than Significant Potentially with Less Than Issues 8~ Supporting Information Sources Significant Impact Mitigation Incorporated Significant Impact No Impact Wildland fires, including where wildfires are ^ ^ ^ adjacent to urbanized areas and where 7. residences are intermixed with wildland? B. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion ^ ^ ® ^ or the loss of topsoil? C. Would the project result in the loss of a unique ^ geologic feature? D. Is the project located on strata or soil that is ^ unstable or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? ^ ^ E. Is the project located on expansive soil creating ^ substantial risks to life and property? F. Where sewers are not available for the disposal of ^ wastewater, is the soil capable of supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems? VII. Hazardous and Hazardous Materials -Would the project: A. Create a significant hazard to the public or the ^ environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? B. Create a significant hazard to the public or the ^ environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving likely release of hazardous materials into the environment? C. Reasonably be anticipated to emit hazardous ^ emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substance or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 31 A-27 Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Issues 8 Supporting Information Sources D. Is the project located on a site which is located on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 659662.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Less than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact ^ ^ ^ E. Is the project located within an airport land use ^ plan or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles where of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? F. For a project located 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 the risk of loss, ^ injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? VIII Hydrology and Water Quality -Would the project: A. Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board ^ water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? B. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or ^ interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? ^ ^ No Impact ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 31 A-28 Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Less than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues & Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact C. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of ^ ^ ® ^ the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, 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 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 run-off? F. Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as ^ ^ ^ mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? G. Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which ^ ^ ^ would impede or redirect flood flows? 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? 31 A-29 Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources X. Mineral Resources -Would the project: A. B. Less than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource classified MRZ-2 by the State Geologist that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? XI Noise -Would the project result in: A. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise ^ levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? B. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ^ groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? C. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise ^ levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? D. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ^ ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without project? E. For a project located within an airport land use plan ^ or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? ® ^ ® ^ ^ ^ 31 A-30 Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Less than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues 8~ Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact F. Fora project located within the vicinity of an ^ ^ ^ 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 business) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? B. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ^ ^ ^ necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? C. Displace substantial numbers of people, ^ ^ ^ necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? XIII. Public Services A. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service rations, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public service: 1. Fire protection? ^ ^ ® ^ 2. Police protection? ^ ^ ® ^ 3. Schools? ^ ^ ^ 4. Parks? ^ ^ ^ 5. Other public facilities? ^ ^ ^ 31 A-31 Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Less than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Issues 8~ Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Significant No Impact Impact XIV. Recreation A. Would the project increase the use of existing ^ ^ ^ neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? B. Does the project include recreational facilities or ^ ^ ^ require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XV. Transportation /Traffic A. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in ^ ^ ® ^ relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? B. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level ^ ^ ® ^ of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? C. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including ^ ^ ^ either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? D. Substantially increase hazards 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 supporting ^ ^ ^ alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? 31 A-32 Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance --- Less than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues 8~ Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XVI. Utilities and Service Systems A. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the ^ applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? B. Require or result in the construction of new water ^ or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? C. Require or result in the construction of new storm ^ water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? D. Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the ^ project from existing entitlements and resources or are new or expanded entitlements needed? E. Has the wastewater treatment provider which ^ serves or may serve the project determined that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? F. Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient ^ permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal? 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? ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ® ^ ® ^ ^ 31 A-33 Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Less than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues & Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact B. Does the project have impacts that are individually ^ ^ ® ^ limited but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, effects of other current projects and the effects of probable future projects.) C. Does the project have environmental effects which ^ ® ^ ^ will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 31 A-34 Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance The following is an analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed project based upon the City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist. The analysis incorporates by reference information from the Santa Ana General Plan Land Use Element No. EIR 97-1. I. Aesthetics- A. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? B. Damage scenic resources, including but not limited to trees, rock outpourings and historic buildings within a State highway? No Impact According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element FEIR and Urban Design Element, there are no scenic vistas on the project site or within the immediate vicinity of the project site. The Santa Ana Interstate Freeway (I-5), Orange Freeway (SR-57), Newport Freeway (SR-55), and Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22) are the four state highways that can be found in the City of Santa Ana. The proposed project site is not visible from any of those highways and therefore will not damage or destroy any scenic resources that are located within the vicinity of these highways. C. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surrounding? D. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Less than significant impact The proposed project will alter the visual quality of the site, but impacts are anticipated to be beneficial, not adverse. The project will expand the existing church building and add a new multi-use building on an existing parking lot. The project has been reviewed by the City's Development Review Committee who has determined that the proposed project is consistent with the existing design and would not degrade the existing visual character of the surrounding area. Major sources of light and glare from the project include light from street and parking lot lights, headlights from vehicles, security lighting, and indoor lighting. The proposed project will not introduce substantial new lighting which will be discernable over existing conditions. Agricultural Resources A. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non- agriculture use? C. Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could individually or cumulatively result in loss of Farmland, to non-agriculture use? No Impact According to the City's General Plan, the project site does not contain any prime or unique farmland. Additionally, based on a site visit conducted by City staff, the proposed project site contains a church use with ancillary church buildings and landscaping and is not in agricultural production. Presently, there are no areas in the City that are under existing Williamson Contracts. Therefore the proposed project will not result in any adverse impacts to agricultural resources. 31 A-35 Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance B. Conflict with existing zoning for agriculture use or a Williamson Contract? Less than significant impact The proposed project is currently zoned General Agriculture (A1). Although zoned agriculture, the site contains a church use that has been operating on the site since 1966. Due to the existing development pattern and lack of agriculture use on the site, the conflict between the use and zoning is less that significant. Further, church uses are a conditionally permitted use in the agriculture zoning district. Air Quality A. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of applicable Air Quality Attainment Plan or congestion Management Plan? E. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? No Impact The City of Santa Ana is included within the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and subject to the requirements of the Clean Air Act at both the Federal and State level. The South Coast Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) is SCAQMD's ongoing program for meeting federal and state air quality standards with the South Coast Air Basin. The AQMP uses land use assumptions derived from local general plans and regional growth projections developed by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), which are based on Orange County projections (OCP-2006) developed in concert with Orange County jurisdictions to estimate stationary and mobile air emissions associated with projected population and planned land uses. If a proposed land use is consistent with the 2006 OCP, then the added emissions generated by the new project are considered consistent with the baseline emissions forecasts used in the AQMP and the project is consistent with the AQMP. Because the population and employment growth resulting from the church expansion are consistent with SCAG's regional growth forecast and the project would not conflict with the applicable 2007 AQMP, no impacts will result. Further, the church expansion will not generate any objectionable odors from its expanded operation, including a new multi-use building and expansion to the sanctuary. Therefore, approval of the proposed conditional use permit will not be in conflict with the South Coast AQMP. B. Violate any stationary source air quality standard or contribute to an existing or proposed air quality violation? C. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emission which exceeds quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? D. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less than significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated As mentioned previously, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) regulates air quality in the South Coast Air Basin. The South Coast Air Basin is currently anon-attainment area for carbon monoxide, ozone, and particulate matter. The SCAQMD considers an air quality impact to be significant if it exceeds the thresholds identified below. 31 A-36 Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance EMISSION THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Project Pollutant Construction Operations PoundslDay Pounds/Day Reactive Organic Com ounds ROG 75 55 Nitro en Oxides NOx 100 55 Carbon Monoxide CO 550 550 Respirable 10-micron dia. articulate Matter PM10 150 150 Fine 2.5-micron diameter 55 55 articulate matter Oxides of Sulfur Sox 150 150 Long-Term Operational Air Quality Impacts The primary source of long-term operational emissions associated with the proposed project would be generated by vehicle travel to and from the project site. A relatively minor amount of gaseous emissions would also occur from natural gas and electricity usage and the operation of outdoor maintenance equipment and space cooling devices. The proposed project would contribute long-term emissions that are less than the SCAOMD's threshold of significance, therefore the operational impacts is less than significant. Short-term Constructed Related Air Quality Impacts Construction operations associated with the proposed project could potentially result in short-term increases in particulate matter, and to a lesser degree increases in carbon monoxide and ozone. Peak day construction emissions for most pollutants arising from construction of the proposed project would occur during the grading and utilities phase, vertical construction and exterior finishing and the installation of landscaping improvements and paving. Using the South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook as a general guideline, the threshold for potentially significant short-term air quality impacts would involve the grading of an area larger than the 40,000 square feet of graded lot area proposed for this project. The amount of grading activities for the proposed project would be considerably less than the threshold of significance outlined in the CEQA Air Quality Handbook. While the construction related emissions associated with the proposed project would not exceed the thresholds established by the SCAOMD, the emissions could be a nuisance to other existing land uses in the nearby vicinity of the project site. To minimize short-term construction related to air impacts within the project area, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented. MM AQ-1 As required by South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 403- Fugitive Dust, all construction activities that are capable of generating fugitive dust are required to implement dust control measures during each phase of project development to reduce the amount of particulate matter entrained in the ambient air. These measures include the following: 31 A-37 Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance - Application of soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas - Quick replacement of ground cover in disturbed areas - Watering of exposed surfaces three times daily - Covering all stock piles with tarp - Sweep streets adjacent to the project site at the end of the day if visible soil material is carried over to adjacent roads - Cover or have water applied to the exposed surface of all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials prior to leaving the site to prevent dust from impacting the surrounding areas - Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto paved roads to wash off trucks and any equipment leaving the site each trip MM AQ-2 All clearing and earthwork activities shall cease during period of high winds (winds greater than 25 mph averaged over one hour) or during Stage 1 or Stage 2 smog episodes. MM AQ-3 During grading, the construction disturbance area shall be kept as small as possible. MM AQ-4 Prior to issuance of any grading permit wind barriers shall be installed along the perimeter of the site and/or around areas being graded. MM AQ-5 During construction, operators of any gas or diesel fueled equipment, including vehicles, shall be encouraged to turn off equipment if not in use or left idle for more than five minutes. Equipment engines shall be maintained in good condition and in proper tune according to manufacturer's specifications. MM AQ-6 The Applicant shall require by contract specifications that the architectural coating (paint and primer) products used would have aloes-VOC rating. Contract specifications shall be included in the proposed project construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the City prior to issuance of a building permit. Finally, objectionable odors are a localized phenomenon and are generally confined to the vicinity of the emitter of the odor. The proposed project is a church land use and would not generate long-term operational odors. Construction activities do not usually emit offensive odors. Although construction activities occurring in association with the proposed project could generate airborne odors associated with the operation of construction vehicles (i.e., diesel exhaust) and the application of interior and exterior architectural coatings, these emissions would be temporary in nature, would generally be restricted to the immediate vicinity of the construction site and activity, and would not affect a substantial number of people. Compliance with City of Santa Ana required maintenance and waste management practices would reduce the potential for objectionable odors. The operation of the proposed project would be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 402 with regard to odors. In general, operational activities associated with land uses similar to the proposed project do not ordinarily emit offensive odors and as such, this impact would be considered less than significant. 31 A-38 Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance IV. Biological Resources A. Adversely impact, either directly or through habitat modifications, any endangered, rare or threatened species, as listed on Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (section 670.2 or 670.5) or in the Title 50, code of Federal Regulations (section 17.11 or 17.12)? B. Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive or special status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services? C. Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? D. Adversely impact federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) either individually or in combination with the known or probable impacts of other activities through direct removal, filling hydrological interruption, or other means? E. Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? F. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance? G. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? No Impact The City of Santa Ana General Plan Land Use Element EIR indicates that Santa Ana is predominantly built-out and that all sizable expanses of undisturbed native vegetation have been eliminated. The site has been utilized by a church use and has contained church buildings since 1966. The property does not contain potential for nesting birds as the trees are not mature trees. In addition, the property is surrounded by development and a major roadway. There is no riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community on the proposed site. Finally, there is no adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Communities Conservation Plan, or other local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan that is applicable to the project site. Approval and implementation of the proposed project will not result in impacts to any on-site biological resource. V. Cultural Resources A. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource which is either listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register or Historic Resources, or a local register of historic resources? No Impact The proposed project site is utilized by a church use. No historical resources have been identified on the site. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in an adverse change to an historical resource. 31 A-39 Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance B. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resource (i.e., an artifact, object or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions, has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest or best available example of its type, or is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person? Less-Than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The project site was subject to extensive disruption when it was developed with church buildings over 40 years ago. Given the prior history of construction, it is likely that any archaeological resources that may have existed at one have already been disturbed. Nonetheless, construction activities associated with project implementation could potentially unearth previously undocumented resources and result in a significant impact. If archaeological resources are discovered during construction, the Applicant will implement mitigation measure MM CR-1, which will ensure proper evaluation and treatment of archaeological resources, if found. MM CR-1 In the event that archaeological/paleontological resources are unearthed during project subsurface activities, all earth-disturbing work within a 100-meter radius shall be temporarily suspended or redirected until an Orange County certified archeologist has been provided the opportunity to assess the significance of the find and implement appropriate measures to protect or scientifically remove the find. Construction personnel shall be informed that unauthorized collection of cultural resources is prohibited. If the resource is determined to be significant, the archaeologist or paleontologist, as appropriate, shall prepare a research design for recovery of the resources in consultation with the State Office of Historic Preservation that satisfies the requirements of Section 21083.2 of CEQA. The archaeologist or paleontologist shall complete a report of the excavations and findings and shall submit the report to the City of Santa Ana and to the South Central Coastal Information Center at the California State University at Fullerton. After the find has been appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. Compliance with mitigation measure MM CR-1 would ensure that implementation of the proposed project would not result a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource, and therefore, potential impacts would be reduced to aless-than-significant level. C. Disturb or destroy a unique paleontological resource or site? Less-Than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The project site has already been subject to extensive disruption. Any paleontological resources that may have existed at one time have most likely been disturbed. Nonetheless, construction activities associated with project implementation could unearth undocumented resources and result in a potentially significant impact. Implementation of mitigation measure MM CR-1 would reduce any potential impact to a less-than- significant level. 31 A-40 Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance D. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Less-Than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. No formal cemeteries are known to have occupied any portion of the project site nor does the site history indicate any potential use of the site as a burial ground. Because the area is underlain by disturbed soils, the presence of human remains is remote. However, if remains are encountered, disturbing these remains could violate Section 5097 of the California Public Resources Code (PRC) and Sections 7050.5, 7051, and 7054 of the California Health and Safety Code (HSC), as well as resulting in the destruction of a potential resource. Implementation of mitigation measure MM CR-2 would ensure that this potential impact is reduced to aless-than-significant level by ensuring appropriate examination, treatment, and protection of human remains, if any are discovered. MM CR-2 If human remains are unearthed, in accordance with State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 the applicant shall require from the construction contractor that no further disturbance will occur until the County coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) of the findings within 24 hours. The NAHC will then contact the most likely descendant of the deceased Native American, who will serve as consultant on how to proceed with the remains. VI. Geology and Soils A-1. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? No Impact According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, the project site is not located within a current Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. Therefore, the potential for surface rupture due to faulting occurring beneath the site during the design life of the proposed project would be considered low and unlikely to occur. A-2. Strong Seismic Ground shaking? Less Than Significant Impact Although there are no documented active faults projecting towards or transecting the site, the project site is situated within a highly active seismic region of Southern California. A total of 38 active faults have been identified within an approximate 60-mile radius of the project site. The Newport/Inglewood Fault located approximately 13 miles south from the City of Santa Ana is considered to be one of the most dominant faults in regard to potential seismic shaking impacts. The project site could potentially be subject to a maximum credible horizontal ground acceleration of 0.30g from a magnitude 6.9 earthquake along the Newport/Inglewood fault zone. A seismic event of this scale could potentially result in significant damage to the project site. However, the risks at the project site are similar to many other areas in the Southern California region. To minimize potential seismic shaking impacts, the proposed project would be subject to Seismic Safety Standards of the California Standards Building Code. Compliance with the Code would reduce potential impacts associated with seismic shaking activity to a level that would be less than significant. 31 A-41 Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance A-3. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less Than Significant Impact Soil liquefaction occurs when loose soil deposits below the water table are subject to large ground accelerations generated from seismic events. According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, the project site is located in an area that is characterized with high to medium liquefaction hazard potential. To minimize potential liquefaction impacts, the proposed project would be subject to Seismic Shaking Standards of the 2007 California Standards Building Code. Additionally, a soils and geotechnical report is required as part of the plan check review for all new construction. Compliance with the recommendations of the report, including, but not limited to, measures associated with the site preparation, fill placement and compaction, temporary and permanent dewatering, groundwater, soil improvements techniques, seismic design features, excavation stability, soil stabilization, pavements, surface draining, cement type and corrosion measures, erosion control, shoring and internal bracing and plan review are required. Compliance with the Building Code would reduce potential liquefaction impacts to a level considered less than significant. A-4. Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow? A-5 Landslides? A-6 Flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? A-7 Wildland fires, including where wildfires are adjacent to urbanized areas and where residences are intermixed with wildland? No Impact The project site is flat without any topographical relief. According to the City's General Plan, there are no landslide planes on the project site. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in adverse impacts in regards to landslides. Additionally, the proposed project would not expose people to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving inundation by a tsunami, seiche or mudflow. Impacts by tsunami are associated with proximity to the ocean. The project site is located approximately 11 miles from the Pacific Ocean, which is a sufficient distance to protect the site from such impacts. The closest enclosed bodies of water that could result in an earthquake induced seiche are the Prado Dam located 16 miles northeast of the project site near the City of Corona, and the Santiago Dam located approximately 10 miles east of the project site in Silverado. The Santa Ana River Main Stem Project has implemented flood control improvements to both the Prado Dam and Lower Santa Ana River which has reduced the risk of inundation in the event of a seiche in Prado Dam. Therefore, there would be no impact to the project site as a result of overflow caused by seiche. The project site located on a parcel with limited topographical relief. The project site is not located downhill from any slope of sufficient size to cause mudflows. Finally, there are no wildlands in the immediate vicinity of the proposed project site. Consequently, development of the proposed project would not result in the exposure of people or structures to hazards associated with wildland fires. Therefore, no impact would occur. B. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less than Significant Impact Erosion refers to the removal of soil from exposed bedrock surfaces by water or wind. The effects of erosion are intensified with an increase in slope, the narrowing of runoff channels and by the removal of groundcover, which leaves the soil exposed. Construction operations for the proposed project would require excavation of onsite soils. The uncovered soils on the project site could potentially result in erosion and sedimentation impacts to onsite and offsite drainage facilities absent appropriate measures 31 A-42 Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance to limit topsoil losses. All new developments in the City of Santa Ana, including the proposed project, are required to prepare a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) post-construction storm water management plan in accordance the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) and the city of Santa Ana Local Implementation Plan (LIP) that must include all applicable post construction BMPs for this project. In addition, to the implementation and maintenance of post- construction Best Management Practices (BMPs), erosion would also be controlled by the landscaping proposed for all remaining pervious areas of the project as proposed by the applicant. Compliance with existing State, regional and local regulations, NPDES permit requirements and implementation of SWPPP-specified project-specific BMPs, together with the installation landscape in the post construction phase and on-going maintenance and monitoring of construction and subsequent post-construction BMPs would ensure that the project impacts with respect to topsoil loss and erosion would be less-than- significant. C. Would the project result in the loss of a unique geological feature? No Impact According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR the project site does not contain any unique geologic features. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in adverse impacts to any unique geologic feature. D. Is the project located on strata or soil that is unstable or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? E. Is the project located on expansive soils creating substantial risks to life and property? Less Than Significant Impact According the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, the project site is located on soils that have low shrink /swell potential, high corrosion potential to uncoated steel and low corrosion potential to concrete. The soil conditions on the project site would not provide a constraint that would prevent the development of the proposed project. As part of the City's development review process a geotechnical study is required to be prepared to identify geotechnical design recommendations to ensure the long-term geotechnical stability of the project site as well as the recommendations for site preparation, foundations and overall structural design specific to this project. The report will address the issues of liquefaction, differential settlement, and soils sampling and testing for expansive soils as they apply to the current project and provide recommendations for foundation design which will address any stability or expansive soils issues. Compliance with all the recommendations contained in the report, and compliance with Chapter 33 of the 2007 CBC, project impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level. F. Where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater is the soil capable of supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems? No Impact The City of Santa Ana will provide sanitary sewer services to the proposed project. Accordingly, the project will not use septic tanks or alternative wastewater systems to dispose of wastewater and no impact would occur. 31 A-43 Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance VII. 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? B. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving likely release of hazardous materials into the environment? C. Reasonably be anticipated to emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substance or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? D. Is the project located on a site which is located on a list of hazardous material sites compiles pursuant to Government Code Section 659662.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? No Impact Approval of the proposed church buildings would have no impact on transport or disposal of hazardous material in that the proposed project would not involve activities that would emit hazardous or acutely hazardous material. Additionally, according to the City of Santa Ana Fire Department and the City's General Plan, the project site is not included on a list of hazardous material sites. Implementation of the proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. E. Is the project located within an airport land use plan or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles where of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? F. For a project located 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 the 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 not located within an airport land use plan nor is it located within 2 miles of a public airport or a public use airport nor is it located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Additionally, the site does not currently, and would not in the future, serve a function in any emergency response or evacuation plan. The proposed driveway access would be constructed per City codes to allow adequate emergency vehicle access. The proposed project would not constrain implementation of the City's existing Emergency Management Plan. Finally, the project and surrounding area are characterized by features typical of the urban landscape. There are no wildlands in the immediate vicinity of the proposed project site. Consequently, development of the proposed project would not result in the exposure of people or structures to hazards associated with wildland fires. Therefore, no impact would occur. VIII. Hydrology and Water Quality A. Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? 31 A-44 Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance E. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted run- off? Less Than Significant Impact The City of Santa Ana implements the goals, objectives and requirements of the Basin Plan and Drainage Area Management Plan through the City's Local Implementation Plan (LIP). All construction contractors and subcontractors are required by contract provisions to comply with the conditions of the City's LIP, including the implementation of appropriate BMPs to control storm water runoff so as to prevent any deterioration of water quality. The proposed project is required comply with the requirements of the State NPDES Permit and to prepare a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), which would incorporate BMPs and water quality management practices. With full compliance with the WQMP, project impacts to water quality would be less than significant. B. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. No Impact The proposed project would not interfere with ground water recharge because the project area is not located in an area that is known to recharge the ground water system. Additionally, construction operations for the proposed project would not encroach onto the underground water basin. No impacts would occur C. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of 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 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? Less Than Significant Impact The project site is generally flat and located in an urbanized area currently served by an existing storm drain system. The proposed project will not alter the existing drainage pattern of the site and will connect to the storm drain system as required by the City regulations. As previously noted, erosion or siltation could occur during construction related earthmoving activities. The project would be required to comply with the requirements of the NPDES General Construction permit and project approved SWPPP. During the site grading and construction short-term runoff impacts would be addressed through the incorporation of construction erosion and sediment control and flooding BMPs. Compliance with the permit requirements, the project's construction-related impacts of erosion and/or flooding would less than significant. F. Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? G. Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? 31 A-45 Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance No Impact The City of Santa Ana is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Communities participating in the NFIP must adopt and enforce minimum floodplain management standards, including identification of flood hazards and flood risks. Participation in the NFIP allows communities to purchase low cost insurance protection against losses from flooding. The published Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) for the project site is included on Community Panel No. 0602320144H. The project site is located entirely in Zone X, which is defined as areas beyond the limits of the 100-year flood and 500-year flood. The project site protected from the 1 percent annual chance flood by a levee constructed above the natural bank of the Santa Ana River to the east of the project site. Since the implementation of the proposed project would not place housing within a mapped flood hazard area, there would be no impact. IX. Land Use and Planning A. Physically divide an established community? C. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community plan? No Impact The project site is currently occupied by an existing church. The new development will continue the existing development pattern and will not divide existing neighborhoods. The proposed project is located in an urbanized setting and no locally designated species or natural communities are known to exist in the project area. The site is not part of any habitat conservation plan or natural community preservation plan. Therefore, there would be no impact. B. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Less than Significant Impact The existing General Plan land use designation for the proposed project site is Low Density Residential (R1) and the site is zoned General Agriculture (A1). Churches are a permitted use in the Al zone with a conditional use permit. As proposed, the project consists of a 34,348 square foot expansion of an existing church facility. Implementation of the proposed project would not be in conflict with the General Plan or other applicable planning programs in the City. X. Mineral Resources A. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource classified MRZ-2 by the State Geologist 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? No Impact According to the City's Updated General Plan Land Use Element EIR, there are no areas in Santa Ana that are designated significant Mineral Aggregate Resource Areas. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in the loss of any regionally or locally important mineral resource. As the project site does not contain any natural mineral resources, no impact would occur 31 A-46 Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance XI. Noise A. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. D. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without project. Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The project site is subject to noise standards and guidelines in the General Plan Noise Element and Municipal Code Noise Ordinance. The primary purpose of the City of Santa Ana Noise Element is to "Prevent significant increases in noise levels in the community and minimize the adverse effects of currently-existing noise sources." In accordance with the Noise Element, the City has adopted noise standards and guidelines for land use planning. These guidelines for exterior noise levels are presented in Table N-1. Table N-1 ci of Santa Ana Land Use Gu idelines For Exterior Noise Land Use Noise Level dBA CNEL or Ldn Desirable Maximum Maximum Acce table Low Densit Residential 55 65 Medium Densit Residential 60 65 Hi h Densit Residential 65 70 Schools 60 70 Commercial, Office 65 75 Industrial 7p 75 A significant noise impact would occur if a proposed land uses does not comply with the General Plan noise standards identified in Table N-1, or when a proposed land use results in an 3dB increase to existing noise levels when the existing noise level is at least 65 dB CNEL. The operation of the proposed project would not significantly increase noise levels within the project site. A significant increase in noise would be a 3d6 increase over existing noise levels. Typically, a 3db increase in noise levels occurs when existing traffic volumes are doubled. The proposed project would not double existing traffic volumes within the project area. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in a 3db increase to existing noise levels within the project area. Implementation of the proposed project would result in short-term construction related noise impacts. Short-term noise impacts would result from site preparation, excavation, grading, and other construction operations. The construction-related short-term noise levels would be higher than the existing or ambient noise levels in the project area today, but would no longer occur once construction of the project is complete. The Municipal Code recognizes that some forms of noise are required for urban development and maintenance and are difficult to control. Section 18-314(e) exempts noise sources associated with construction, repair, remodeling, or grading of any real property, but establishes certain requirements to reduce the temporary impacts of construction noise. These include limiting the construction activity, including all warming up and repair of construction equipment within the project site so that they do not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or any time on Sunday or a federal holiday. To further reduce potential noise impacts on adjacent residences, the following project requirements and mitigation measures shall be implemented as part of the proposed project: 31 A-47 Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance MM NOI-1 The Applicant shall require by contract specifications that the following construction best management practices (BMPs) be implemented by contractors to reduce construction noise levels: - Notification shall be mailed to owners and occupants of all developed land uses immediately bordering or directly across the street from the project site area providing a schedule for major construction activities that will occur through the duration of the construction period. In addition, the notification will include the identification and contact number for a community liaison and designated construction manager that would be available on site to monitor construction activities. The construction manager will be located at the on-site construction office during construction hours for the duration of all construction activities. Contract information for the community liaison and construction manager will be located at the construction office, City Hall, and the police department. - Ensure that construction equipment is properly muffled according to industry standards. - Place noise-generating construction equipment and locate construction staging areas away from the adjacent residential uses. - Implement noise attenuation measures to the extent feasible, which may include, but are not limited to, noise barriers or noise blankets. MM NOI-2 The Applicant shall require by contract specifications that construction staging areas, along with the operation of earthmoving equipment within the project site, are located as far away from vibration- and noise-sensitive sites as possible. Contract specifications shall be included in the proposed project construction documents, which shall be reviewed and approved by the City. MM NOI-3 The Applicant shall require by contract specification that construction activities generating the loudest noise levels (e.g. site grading) shall not occur prior to 9:00 a.M. or after 5:00 P.nn. Monday through Friday. Further, such activities shall be prohibited on Saturdays, Sundays and federal holidays. MM NOI-4 The Applicant shall require by contract specifications that no delivery of materials or maintenance of equipment shall occur at the project site after 6:00 P.nn. on weekdays and Saturdays, before 7:00 a.M. on weekdays and Saturdays, and at no time on Sundays. Pursuant to mitigation measure MM NOI-1, the implementation of noise attenuation measures may include the use of noise barriers (e.g., sound walls) or noise blankets. As a general rule, a sound wall is able to reduce noise by 5 dBA. In addition, mitigation measure MM NOI-2 requires location of construction staging areas and earthmoving equipment as far away from noise and vibration-sensitive land uses as possible to reduce construction-related noise levels. Additionally, implementation of MM NOI-3 would require that the construction contractor limit the loudest construction activities to occur between the hours of 9:00 A.nn. and 5:00 P.nn. to reduce construction noise during times when sensitive receptors would be most sensitive to elevated noise levels. Implementation of MM NOI-1, MM NOI-2, MM NOI-3, and MM NOI-4 would ensure compliance with the City's Noise Ordinance for construction activity and reduce, to the extent feasible, impacts associated with construction activities resulting from implementation of the proposed project to aless-than-significant level. 31 A-48 Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance B. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. C. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Less than Significant Impact The construction of the proposed project would involve conventional construction equipment that generates vibration velocity not generally exceeding the threshold of perception resulting in less than significant ground borne vibration impacts. During operation of the proposed project, background operational vibration levels would be expected to average around 50 VdB, which is typical of an urban environment. This is substantially less than the FTA's vibration impact threshold of 85 Vd6 for human annoyance. Groundborne vibration resulting from operation of the proposed project would primarily be generated by automobiles entering and leaving the site, occasional truck deliveries, and trash removal. No substantial sources of groundborne vibration would be included in the design of the proposed project. Therefore, operation of the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors on-site or off-site to excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. Aless-than-significant impact would occur. 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 located within the vicinity of an airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No impact There are no private or public airports in the City of Santa Ana; however, John Wayne International Airport is located one-mile southwest of city limits. The proposed project is not located within atwo-mile radius of the airport or airstrip. According to the Santa Ana General Plan Environmental Impact Report, no area of the City of Santa Ana is within the noise impact area or 65 CNEL of John Wayne International Airport. Therefore, people residing or working in the project area will not be exposed to excessive noise levels. No impact is anticipated. XII. Population and Housing A. Induce substantial population growth in extension of roads or other infrastructure. B. Displace substantial numbers of existing replacement housing elsewhere. C. Displace substantial numbers of people, housing elsewhere? an area, either directly or indirectly through housing, necessitating the construction of necessitating the construction of replacement No Impact The proposed project would allow additional buildings on an existing church campus. Implementation of the proposed project would not increase the population within the project area or displace existing households within the project area, as there are no residential units or residents on the project site. Therefore, no impacts would occur 31 A-49 Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance XIII. Public Services Fire Protection: Less than Significant Impact The City of Santa Ana Fire Department will provide fire protection and emergency services to the project site. The City maintains ten fire stations throughout the City. The stations are situated where no location in the City is outside of an approximate 1.5 radius of a fire station. Additionally, the City maintains a Mutual Aid Agreement for fire protection services with the neighboring Cities of Fountain Valley, Garden Grove, Tustin, Irvine and Costa Mesa. According to the City of Santa Ana Insurance Service Organization, the City has a low fire risk rating. According to the Santa Ana Fire Department, implementation of the proposed project would not increase the demand for fire protection services over current levels of demand within the project area and that under existing levels of manpower and equipment the Fire Department would be able to provide an adequate level of service. Police Protection: Less than Significant Impact The Santa Ana Police Department would provide police protection services for the proposed project. Implementation of the proposed project would not significantly increase the demand for police protection services. The Police Department has under existing levels of manpower and equipment; they would have the ability to provide adequate police protection services for the proposed project. Through the City's development review process, the Police Department has reviewed the proposed project for adequate police protection facilities and services. Compliance with Police Department's requirements would reduce potential police protection impacts to a level considered less than significant. Schools, Parks and Other facilities: No Impact The proposed project involves the construction of church buildings. Implementation of the proposed project would not generate demand for additional school services above the current conditions, No adverse impacts to schools or other public services would occur. Additionally, the implementation of the proposed project would not increase demands for existing recreation facilities or generate the demand for additional recreation 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. No Impact The proposed project is the construction of additional buildings on a church campus. Implementation of the proposed project would not generate additional demands on existing recreation facilities or require the construction of new recreation facilities. No adverse impacts to recreation services and facilities would occur. The church will be constructing a new multi-use gymnasium that may be available for use by the surrounding community. 31 A-50 Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance XV. Transportation/Traffic A. Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system? B. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Less than Significant Impact The City's Public Works Agency, Traffic and Transportation Engineering Section have reviewed this project for its potential traffic impacts. Based on their review, the implementation of the proposed project would not significantly increase the number of vehicle trips in the project area. Based on a review of trip generation factors, the proposed expansion project will generate a total of 280 daily vehicle trips entering and exiting the site on Saturday. The SEYO practice activities are once every 2 hours for 6 sessions starting at 8AM and ending at 6PM. Participants are expected to be around 48 participants per session. Further, funeral and wedding ceremonies are expected every 2 to 3 months and attendants are expected to be a maximum of 250 to 300 attendees (150 cars). Traffic congestion is more likely to occur if a combination of SEYO practices, a wedding and/or a funeral service all take place on the same Saturday. As a result, implementation of the proposed project is not expected to change the level of service at any roadway segment or intersection within the project area. To further reduce potential traffic impacts, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented as part of the proposed project: TR-1 The Applicant shall restripe the median on Fairview Street per city approved plans to relieve traffic congestions and prevent left turn conflicts. The applicant shall provide the requested striping subject to the City of Santa Ana Public Works Agency staff review and approval. TR-2 The Applicant shall provide a parking attendant during multi-event conditions and/or special events to assist in circulating traffic in and out of the impacted driveways. 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 There are no public or private airports in the City of Santa Ana; however, John Wayne International Airport is located one-mile southwest of city limits. The proposed project is not located within atwo-mile radius of any airport or airstrips and does not include any structures of substantial height which might interfere with an existing airspace or flight pattern. The maximum height of the proposed building is 31 feet. No impact would occur. 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 Implementation of the proposed project would not require any roadway or intersection improvements that would pose safety hazards to pedestrians or motorist in the project area. E. Result in inadequate emergency access 31 A-51 Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance No Impact As part of the City's development review process, the proposed project was reviewed by the Police Department and the Fire Department to ensure adequate emergency access. No adverse emergency access impacts would be associated with the proposed project. F. Result in inadequate parking capacity No Impact The project's parking requirement, based on the City of Santa Ana parking code is 200 parking stalls. The project would provide 305 parking stalls; therefore the project complies with the City's parking requirement. No adverse parking impacts would be associated with the proposed project. G. Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation No Impact The proposed project would not be in conflict with any City policies regarding alternative modes of transportation. Nor would implementation of the proposed project displace any existing modes of public transportation provided within the project area. XVI. Utilities and Service Systems A. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? B. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? C. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? D. Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources or are new or expanded entitlements needed? E. Result in the determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the providers existing commitments. No Impact The Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) is responsible for collecting, treating, and disposing of the wastewater generated by 2.5 million people living in a 470 square-mile area of central and northwest Orange County. The wastewater generated in the project area is transported to, and treated at, OCSD's Reclamation Plant No. 1, in the City of Fountain Valley. This plant has a design capacity of 180 million gallons per day (mgd). If Plant No. 1 is operating at capacity, sewage is diverted to Treatment Plant No. 2 in Huntington Beach. As such, OCSD regulates wastewater treatment for the City of Santa Ana. The proposed project would be required to provide sewer connection fees with the city and the OCSD. The proposed project will not cause any violation of those standards set forth by the OCSD. The City of Santa Ana and OCSD would provide wastewater service to the proposed project. The project area is currently improved with wastewater sewer facilities. Implementation of the project would not 31 A-52 Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance increase wastewater demands in the project area over the last approved use on the site. The wastewater demands of the project would be accounted for in the City's Urban Water Management Plan. Additionally, implementation of the project would not increase the amount of surface water runoff currently generated from the project site. The project would not require the construction of new drainage facilities. The City of Santa Ana Water Department would provide domestic water service for the proposed project. Implementation of the proposed project would not increase water demand within the project area over the last approved use on the site. Because this site had a previous commercial use developed, the water demands for a commercial use are accounted for in the City's Urban Water Management Plan. F. Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? G. Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Less Than Significant Impact The City of Santa Ana would provide solid waste collection services to the project site. Solid waste is transported to the Environmental Service transfer station in Irvine, and then taken to the Bowerman Landfill. The Bowerman Landfill is permitted to accept 8,500 tons per day and is anticipated to close in year 2024. The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939) mandates all cities and counties in California to divert fifty percent of solid waste generated from landfill disposal. As part of the General Plan, the City of Santa Ana has prepared a Source Reduction and Recycling Element, which describe how the City complies with the mandates of AB 939. In order to comply with the requirements of AB 939, the City has implemented several waste reduction programs including green waste programs, source reduction programs, and recycling programs. The proposed project would not significantly increase the demand for solid waste disposal. Compliance with the City's recycling program would reduce long-term solid waste disposal service impacts to a level considered less than significant. XVII. Mandatory Findings of Significance A. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Less-Than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The proposed project site is currently developed with an existing church and ancillary buildings. The site has been heavily disturbed in the past through construction of the church. Implementation of the proposed project would not substantially reduce habitat of fish or wildlife species in that there are no fish, wildlife populations or cultural resources known to exist on the project site. Although the possibility exists for archaeological resources, paleontological resources, or human remains to be uncovered during excavation and grading activities, the project includes mitigation measures as part of implementation that would reduce any potential impacts associated with the discovery of any unexpected cultural resources 31 A-53 Responses to Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance that may still remain. As a result, impacts related to this threshold would be less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures other than those already identified are required. B. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? Less-Than-Significant Impact The proposed project would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to cumulative impacts. Those threshold areas where the proposed project would have aless-than-significant impact are specific to the specific project site conditions and the type of use proposed; these impacts do not combine with impacts from other projects to cause a cumulative effect. C. Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Construction and operation of the proposed project would not involve any activities that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Mitigation measures have been identified to reduce potential impacts to the environment and human beings to a level considered less than significant. No additional mitigation measures beyond those identified are required. XVIII. References City of Santa Ana Updated General Plan Land Use Element February 1998. City of Santa Ana Updated General Plan Land Use Element Environmental Impact, January, 1998, City of Santa Ana Zoning Ordinance, December 1998 City of Santa Ana Urban Design Element, July 6, 1998 City Santa Ana Local Register of Historic Structures Flood Insurance Rate Map Community Panel No. 0602320144H City of Santa Ana Development Review Committee, September/October 2008 California Environmental Quality Act Statues and Guidelines, January 1999 Site Visit by Vince Fregoso, Principal Planner, February and June 2009 Integrated Waste Management Solid Waste Generation Rate City of Santa Ana 2000 Urban Water Management Plan XX.PREPARERS Vince Fregoso, City of Santa Ana, Planning Planner Shahir Gobran, City of Santa Ana, Senior Transportation Analyst 31 A-54 Mitigation Monitori W/NTERSBURG PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH EXPANSION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW NO. 2008-180 Compliance MITIGATION MEASURE AGENCY APPROVAL Prior to issuance of Gradin Permit and durin cons truction MM AQ-1 As required by South Coast Air Quality Management District Public Works (SCAQMD) Rule 403-Fugitive Dust, all construction activities that are capable of generating fugitive dust are required to implement dust control measures during each phase of project development to reduce the amount of particulate matter entrained in the ambient air. These measures include the following: Application of soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas Quick replacement of ground cover in disturbed areas Watering of exposed surfaces three times daily Covering all stock piles with tarp Sweep streets adjacent to the project site at the end of the day if visible soil material is carried over to adjacent roads Cover or have water applied to the exposed surface of all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials prior to leaving the site to prevent dust from impacting the surrounding areas Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto paved roads to wash off trucks and any equipment leaving the site each trip. MM AQ-2 All clearing and earthwork activities shall cease during period Public Works of high winds (winds greater than 25 mph averaged over one hour) or during Stage 1 or Stage 2 smog episodes. MM AQ-3 During grading, the construction disturbance area shall be Public Works kept as small as possible. MM AQ-4 Prior to issuance of any grading permit, wind barriers shall be Public Works installed along the perimeter of the site and/or around areas being graded. MM AQ-5 During construction, operators of any gas or diesel fueled Public Works equipment, including vehicles, shall be encouraged to turn off equipment if not in use or left idle for more than five minutes. Equipment engines shall be maintained in good condition and in proper tune according to manufacturer's specifications. MM AQ-6 The applicant shall require by contract specifications that the Planning architectural coating (paint and primer) products used would Division have aloes-VOC rating. Contract specifications shall be included in the proposed project construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the City prior to issuance of a buildin ermit. 31 A-55 Mitigation Monitoring Plan For CEQA Compliance MM CR-1 In the event that archaeological/paleontological resources are unearthed during project subsurface activities, all earth- disturbing work within a 100-meter radius shall be temporarily suspended or redirected until an Orange County certified archeologist has been provided the opportunity to assess the significance of the find and implement appropriate measures to protect or scientifically remove the find. Construction personnel shall be informed that unauthorized collection of cultural resources is prohibited. If the resource is determined to be significant, the archaeologist or paleontologist, as appropriate, shall prepare a research design for recovery of the resources in consultation with the State Office of Historic Preservation that satisfies the requirements of Section 21083.2 of CEQA. The archaeologist or paleontologist shall complete a report of the excavations and findings and shall submit the report to the City of Santa Ana and to the South Central Coastal Information Center at the California State University at Fullerton. After the find has been appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. MM CR-2 If human remains are unearthed, in accordance with State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 the applicant shall require from the construction contractor that no further disturbance will occur until the County coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) of the findings within 24 hours. The NAHC will then contact the most likely descendant of the deceased Native American, who will serve as consultant on how to proceed with the remains. MM NOI-1 The applicant shall require by contract specifications that the following construction best management practices (BMPs) be implemented by contractors to reduce construction noise levels: Notification shall be mailed to owners and occupants of all developed land uses immediately bordering or directly across the street from the project site area providing a schedule for major construction activities that will occur through the duration of the construction period. In addition, the notification will include the identification and contact number for a community liaison and designated construction manager that would be available on site to monitor construction activities. The construction manager will be located at the on-site construction office during construction hours for the duration of all construction activities. Contract information for the community liaison and Planning and Building Planning and Building Planning and Building 31 A-56 Mitigation Monitoring Plan For CEQA Compliance construction manager will be located at the construction office, City Hall, and the police department. Ensure that construction equipment is properly muffled according to industry standards. Place noise-generating construction equipment and locate construction staging areas away from the adjacent residential uses. Implement noise attenuation measures to the extent feasible, which may include, but are not limited to, noise barriers or noise blankets. MM NOI-2 The applicant shall require by contract specifications that Planning and construction staging areas, along with the operation of Building earthmoving equipment within the project site, are located as far away from vibration- and noise-sensitive sites as possible. Contract specifications shall be included in the proposed project construction documents, which shall be reviewed and approved by the City. MM NOI-3 The applicant shall require by contract specification that Planning and construction activities generating the loudest noise levels Building (e.g. site grading) shall not occur prior to 9:00 A.M. or after 5:00 P.nn. Monday through Friday. Further, such activities shall be prohibited on Saturdays, Sundays and federal holidays. MM NOI-4 The applicant shall require by contract specifications that no Planning and delivery of materials or maintenance of equipment shall occur Building at the project site after 6:00 P.nn. on weekdays and Saturdays, before 7:00 a.nn. on weekdays and Saturdays, and at no time on Sundays. Prior to the issuance of the Buildin Permit MM AQ-6 The Applicant shall require by contract specifications that the Building architectural coating (paint and primer) products used would Division have a low-VOC rating. Contract specifications shall be included in the proposed project construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the City prior to issuance of a building permit. TR-i The Applicant shall restripe the median on Fairview Street per Public Works city approved plans to relieve traffic congestions and prevent left turn conflicts. The applicant shall provide the requested striping subject to the City of Santa Ana Public Works Agency staff review and approval. TR-2 The Applicant shall provide a parking attendant during multi- Planning and event conditions and/or special events to assist in circulating Building traffic in and out of the impacted driveways. 31 A-57 bk:7/8/09 RESOLUTION NO. 2009-10 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2009-11 AS CONDITIONED TO ALLOW EXPANSION OF A CHURCH USE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2000 NORTH FAIRVIEW STREET BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. Applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to expand an existing church use located at 2000 North Fairview Street. The church currently does not have a conditional use permit because it has not altered it use or operations since being annexed into the City of Santa Ana. B. Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-11, came before the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana for a duly noticed public hearing on July 13, 2009. C. Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-11 has been filed with the City of Santa Ana seeking to allow the expansion of a church that is a legal nonconforming use because it was in existence when it was annexed into the City. Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-638 authorizes the Planning Commission to grant a conditional use permit upon making certain findings. Will the proposed use provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood or community? The Wintersburg Presbyterian Church currently provides services that contribute to the well being of the surrounding community. The proposed expansion will allow the church the ability to provide additional religious and recreational services that will continue to benefit the community. As access to the site is from Fairview Street, a major arterial street, no neighborhood traffic impacts will be generated. 2009-10 Page 1 of 5 31 A-58 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 church and church expansion will not negatively impact residents or workers in the area since the church and related programs operate exclusively on a site that is surrounded by walls and fences. Further, the 305 parking spaces to be provided on the site will satisfy the parking requirements for all church operations and will not result in any impacts on the adjacent properties. iii. Will the proposed use adversely affect the present economic stability or future economic development of properties surrounding the area? The church expansion project will not adversely affect the economic viability of the area. The expansion project will result in a positive addition to the surrounding area and will complement and improve the economic viability of the area. iv. Will the proposed use comply with the regulations and conditions specified in Chapter 41 for such use? The Wintersburg Presbyterian Church will be in compliance with all applicable provisions of Chapter 41 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code and all other provisions that regulate church uses. v. Will the proposed use adversely affect the General Plan or any specific plan of the City? The proposed church use is consistent with the General Plan's Land Use Element policies to encourage the development of nonprofit facilities and services as well as promote uses that provide a positive contribution to neighborhood character and identity. D. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, a mitigated negative declaration and mitigated monitoring program has been prepared for this project. The Mitigation Negative Declaration has been circulated for a 20-day public review period, which ran from June 18, 2009 through July 8, 2009. The report identifies potential environmental impacts and identifies mitigation measures that reduce the impacts to less than significant levels. 2009-10 Page 2 of 5 31 A-59 The report identified no parking and traffic related impacts resulting from the church expansion. Section 2. The Planning Commission after conducting the public hearing hereby approves for the property located at 2000 North Fairview Street: 1. Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2008-180 is hereby approved and certified for this Project. 2. Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-11, as conditioned in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein, to permit the subject property to expand its church use and make it conforming These decisions are based upon the evidence submitted at the above said hearing, which includes but is not limited to: the Request for Planning Commission Action dated July 13, 2009 and exhibits attached thereto; and the public testimony, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference. ADOPTED this 13th day of July, 2009 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: Alderete, Betancourt, Gartner, Leo, Mill, Yrarrazaval (6) NOES: Commissioners: None (0) ABSENT: Commissioners: Turner (1) ABSTENTIONS: Commissioners: None (0) Christopher Leo Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joseph W. Fletcher, City Attorney By: Benjamin Kaufman Chief Assistant City Attorney 2009-10 Page 3 of 5 31 A-60 CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, Martha Ramirez, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2009-10 to be the original resolution adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana on July 13, 2009. Date: Planning Commission Secretary City of Santa Ana 2009-10 Page 4 of 5 31 A-61 Conditions for Approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-11 Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-11 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 rip or 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. All proposed improvements must conform to the Site Plan Review approval of DP No. 2008-61 and the staff report exhibits. 2. Any amendment to this conditional use permit must be submitted to the Planning Division for review. At that time, staff will determine if administrative relief is available or the conditional use permit must be amended. 3. The use at this location is limited to a church and related activities. No thrift shop or full-time school may occur on the premises. 4. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, replace all dead and missing landscaping per an approved landscape plan. 5. Use of the facilities is restricted to the Operation Schedule Plan. Any amendment to this operations plan must be submitted to the Planning Division for further review. Based on this review, if it is determined that the project results in a higher parking demand, the project will need to be submitted to the Planning Commission for further action. B. Police Department The existing parking lot must conform with the provision of the Building Security Ordinance (Chapter 8, Article II, Division 3) of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, which requires the existing project lighting be upgraded to current code standards. Light standards cannot be located in required landscape planters. EXHIBIT A 2009-10 Page 5 of 5 31 A-62