My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
75E - PH 2525 MAIN ST
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2019
>
02/05/2019
>
75E - PH 2525 MAIN ST
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/1/2019 4:04:49 PM
Creation date
2/1/2019 3:58:07 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Agency
Planning & Building
Item #
75E
Date
2/5/2019
Destruction Year
2024
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
378
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
EXHIBIT A <br />Facts in Support of Finding: The Project would not deplete groundwater supplies or interfere <br />substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or <br />lowering of the local groundwater table level. The Project site does not currently provide for groundwater <br />recharge. Moreover, the Project will not result in a substantial increase in impervious surfaces, and thus <br />groundwater recharge would not be affected. Furthermore, groundwater within the Project region is <br />managed by the Orange County Water District (OCWD). To ensure the Basin is not overdrawn, OCWD <br />monitors water levels and recharges the Basin with local and imported water. Continued management of <br />the groundwater basin by OCWD will ensure that substantial depletion of groundwater supplies would <br />not occur. (Initial Study, p. 41.) <br />For the foregoing reasons and the reasons discussed in the DEIR and the Initial Study, impacts associated <br />with this issue would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. (Initial Study, p. 41.) <br />9.9.3 Drainage Pattern <br />Threshold: Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, <br />including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in <br />substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? <br />Finding: Less than significant impact. (DEIR, p. 2-7; Initial Study, p. 41.) <br />Facts in Support of Finding: The Project site does not include a stream, river, creek, or other water body, <br />and will not alter the course of any such body of water in a manner that would result in erosion or siltation. <br />The closest body of water is the Santiago Creek, which is located approximately 130 feet to the north of <br />the site within Santiago Park; Santiago Park would not be disturbed by the Project. Moreover, the Project <br />would not substantially alter the drainage pattern onsite. The Project would cap the existing drain to the <br />creek and provide infiltration basins in the northern portion of the Project area. The remainder of the site <br />would have the same type of onsite drainage that currently exists. The Project thus would not substantially <br />alter the existing drainage pattern on the site or in the area. <br />Moreover, as to construction activities that would involve excavation and grading of soils, Section 18-156 <br />of the City of Santa Ana Municipal Code states that all significant redevelopment within the City, such as <br />the Project, shall be undertaken in accordance with the DAMP, which requires construction sites <br />implement control practices that address erosion and sedimentation. Additionally, the Statewide NPDES <br />Permit for General Construction Activity requires implementation of a SWPP that is required to be <br />consistent with the DAMP and implement erosion control and sediment control BMPs to reduce or <br />eliminate erosion during construction. Adherence to a City approved SWPPP, which would be verified <br />prior to the issuance of a demolition or grading permit, would ensure that potential erosion associated with <br />construction activities would be minimized. (Initial Study, pp. 41-42.) <br />For the foregoing reasons and the reasons discussed in the DEIR and the Initial Study, impacts associated <br />with this issue would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. (Initial Study, pp. 41-42.) <br />9.9.4 Flooding <br />Threshold: Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, <br />including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or <br />amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or off-site? <br />Resolution No. _ <br />Certification of the Magnolia at the Park EIR <br />75E-72 <br />Page 34 of 71 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.