75D - PH - 2525 N MAIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

9.9.2 Groundwater Supplies Threshold: Would the Project 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? Finding: Less than significant impact. (DEIR, p. 2-7; Initial Study, p. 41.) Facts in Support of Finding: The Project would not deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or lowering of the local groundwater table level. The Project site does not currently provide for groundwater recharge. Moreover, the Project will not result in a substantial increase in impervious surfaces, and thus groundwater recharge would not be affected. Furthermore, groundwater within the Project region is managed by the Orange County Water District (OCWD). To ensure the Basin is not overdrawn, OCWD monitors water levels and recharges the Basin with local and imported water. Continued management of the groundwater basin by OCWD will ensure that substantial depletion of groundwater supplies would not occur. (Initial Study, p. 41.) For the foregoing reasons and the reasons discussed in the DEIR and the Initial Study, impacts associated with this issue would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. (Initial Study, p. 41.) This conclusion also applies, for the same reasons, to the Modified Project. 9.9.3 Drainage Pattern Threshold: Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? Finding: Less than significant impact. (DEK p. 2-7; Initial Study, p. 41.) Facts in Support of Finding: The Project site does not include a stream, river, creek, or other water body, and will not alter the course of any such body of water in a manner that would result in erosion or siltation. The closest body of water is the Santiago Creek, which is located approximately 130 feet to the north of the site within Santiago Park; Santiago Park would not be disturbed by the Project. Moreover, the Project would not substantially alter the drainage pattern onsite. The Project would cap the existing drain to the creek and provide infiltration basins in the northern portion of the Project area. The remainder of the site would have the same type of onsite drainage that currently exists. The Project thus would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern on the site or in the area. Moreover, as to construction activities that would involve excavation and grading of soils, Section 18-156 of the City of Santa Ana Municipal Code states that all significant redevelopment within the City, such as the Project, shall be undertaken in accordance with the DAMP, which requires construction sites implement control practices that address erosion and sedimentation. Additionally, the Statewide NPDES Permit for General Construction Activity requires implementation of a SWPP that is required to be consistent with the DAMP and implement erosion control and sediment control BMPs to reduce or eliminate erosion during construction. Adherence to a City approved SWPPP, which would be verified prior to the issuance of a demolition or grading permit, would ensure that potential erosion associated with construction activities would be minimized. (Initial Study, pp. 41-42.) Resolution No. Page 39 of 76 Certification of the Magnolia at the Park EIR