Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout97-017 - Adopting a Mitigations Monitoring Program for the Project06]. RESOLUTION NO. 97-017 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA CERTIFYING A FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE DISCOVERY SCIENCE CENTER PROJECT, MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS WITH REGARD TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT, AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE PROJECT. GAS: 4/10/97 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after duly noticed public hearing on March 24, 1997, recommended that the City Council approve the remodeling and expansion of the project located at 2522 North Main Street, near the intersection of Main Street and the I-5 Freeway, (the "Discovery Science Center Project"); and WHEREAS, an environmental impact report (consisting of a document entitled "Discovery Science Center Draft E.I.R., city of Santa Ana, SCH #96101055," dated December 23, 1996, and a second document entitled "Discovery Science Center Final E.I.R., City of Santa Ana, SCH #96101055, dated March 20, 1997) (the "E.I.R.") has been prepared for the Discovery Science Center Project; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act and the State CEQA Guidelines require that, prior to any approval of the Project, the City Council must make certain certifications and findings; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: 1. The City council hereby certifies that the E.I.R. has been completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, and that the E.I.R. has been presented to the city Council, and that the City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the E.I.R. prior to approving the Discovery Science Center Project. 2. The findings and statements set forth in that certain "Statement of Compliance with California Environmental Quality Act, Findings of Fact, and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Discovery Science Center Project," set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto, and that certain "Mitigation/Monitoring Program," set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto, are incorporated herein by reference as though fully set forth. The city Council hereby adopts and approves said findings, statements, and program. 062 ADOPTED this ATTEST: 21st CO[~CILMEMBERS: Pulido Aye Richardson Aye Espinoza Aye Franklin Aye Lutz Aye McGuigan Ave Moreno Aye day of April , 1997. Attorne~_~.o~ _h..W. Fl~;tc-her CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY & PUBLICATION State of California County of Orange I, JANICE C. GUY, Clerk of the Council, do hereby certify the attached Resolution 9'~-- O / ~ to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on Date: / / ' 2 063 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS OF FACTS, AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DISCOVERY SCIENCE CENTER, EIR No. 96-01 Prepared for: City of Santa Ana Planning Division 206 West Fourth Street Santa Ana, California 92702 Prepared by: Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. 2151 Michelson Drive, Suite 236 Irvinc, California 92612 (714) 260-1080 April 14, 1997 064 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction ............................................................ 1 II. Description of the Approved Project ........................................ 1 Ill. Alternatives to the Proposed Project ........................................ 2 IV. Findings of Fact ......................................................... 3 V. Effects Determined to Be Mitigable to a less than Significant Level .............. 4 VI. Significant Environmental Effects Which Cannot Be Avoided If the ............ 13 Project Is Developed VII. Mitigation Measures for Impacts Considered to Be Less than Significant ........ 16 VIll. Alternatives to the Proposed Project ....................................... 17 IX. Statement of Overriding Considerations .................................... 20 '065 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS OF FACTS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DISCOVERY SCIENCE CENTER, EIR No. 96-01 I. INTROI)UCTION The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines (Guidelines) provide that: "No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been completed and which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding." (CEQA Guidelines Section 15091) The EIR for the development of the Discovery Science Center (Center) identified significant effects which may occur as a result of the proposed development. In accordance with the Guidelines, the City of Santa Ana (City) hereby adopts the findings in this report as part of the approval of the development of the Center (Project). The City has prepared an EIR for the proposed Project in accordance with CEQA and the requirements of the State Guidelines. As mandated by legislation in the State of California, the EIR was subject to review and approval by the City of Santa Aha City Council (City Council). At a public meeting held on April 21, 1997, the EIR was certified by the City Council as adequate, in compliance with the provisions of CEQA. In adopting this Statement of Findings and Facts, the City Council approves the Project. The City has developed a Mitigation Monitoring Program to monitor and report the implementation of the mitigation measures identified for the Project as part of the environmental review process. Ii. DESCRIPTION OF THE APPROVED PROJECT The primary purpose of the proposed project is to develop a hands-on learning facility to spark children's natural curiosity and to facilitate an interest in the sciences. The Center would serve as a resource for primary and secondary schools by offering educational tools unavailable in local schools. The interactive exhibitry would encourage visitors to search for answers, to think, and to explore. The proposed project master plan is located at 2522 North Main Street and includes a 99,205 square foot (si) Discovery Science Center to be developed in two phases. The center master plan would include exhibit space, food service, a science store, classrooms, a multipurpose room, a largedbrmat theater, a multi-level parking strncture and a cube structure that would feature an internal platform Dixcove~T Science Center EI R April I0, 199/ 066 with science exhibitry. Phase I of the proposed project would be developed on a 3.5-acm site and would provide parking and a bus passenger drop-off area. Phase I involves enlarging the existing two-story 40,000 sf building to 59,205 sr. This phase includes complete interior and exterior building rehabilitation and construction of a cube structure. The Phase Il construction process would add additional exhibit areas, a 350-seat large format theater, expansion of dining and store areas, and the construction of a multi-level parking structure on the vacant site northwest of the creek. Ill. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT A broad range of alternatives were considered including those considered by the applicant and the City. The alternatives to the proposed project included, (A) the No Project Alternative, (B) development of Phase I only, (C) development of Phase I at the present location with development of Phase II at another site, (D) development of both phases at other sites in Santa Ana, and (E) development of the Project at other sites outside of Santa Ana. Alternatives C, D, and E were eliminated from further evaluation as infeasible due to the following ratiouale: Alternative C: Construction and Operation of Phase I with Phase I1 Operations at Satellite Locations. This alternative would include construction and operation of Phase I at the present location with construction and operation of Phase II at other site(s) - satellite site(s) would be used for the theater and expanded exhibits. The proposed project, which would be developed in two phases, is intended to function as one integrated facility. If portions of the facility were to be located in other areas, the objective of having one facility to serve Orange County as a learning center would be greatly diminished. The development that would result from both phases combined would consist of 95,000 square feet, which is not considered to be a large facility for this type of use. If the facility were separated by location, the amount of science education that school-age children would be able to see in one location would be lessened and the benefit to the community would be lessened. This alternative would decrease the attractiveness of the site for school uses and would potentially reduce revenues for tbe center. It might also increase impacts to air quality and traffic through the necessity for travel between the two locations. Alternative D: Other Sites in the City of Santa Ana. Several other sites within the City of Santa Ana underwent preliminary evaluation to determine whether or not they were feasible for development of the Discovery Science Center. Only one site, which is located adjacent to the Bowers Museum, was found to hold a potential for development. However, for that site to be feasible, the Redevelopment Agency would have to acquire the funding necessary for site condemnation and acquisition. Because the agency is unable to do that, the site is no longer considered feasible. 067 Alternative E: Other Sites Outside the City of Santa Ana. The City of Santa Ana's central location within Orange Coanty was considered by the applicant to be a primary siting factor. One of the objectives of the proposed project is to provide a facility that would serve Orange County's residents and be centrally located among Orange County's 27 school districts. The center is envisioned as meeting a need of the area's school-age children by contributing to their scientific learning. Other sites outside oftbe City of Santa Ana, in adjacent cities, could be siting possibilities if development in Santa Ana does not proceed. Although no specific sites outside the City of Santa Ana were identified by the applicant, there is a potential that other sites may exist. However, it may be difficult to find an affordable location that has both the combined public visibility of the proposed site and its central location within Orange County. Furthermore, it would be difficult to find a suitable building that could be rehabilitated. The two alternatives considered feasible for further evaluation included (1) the No-Project alternative; and (2) construction and operation of Phase I Only. AIternative A: No Project Alternative. There would be no construction of the Discovery Science Center under the No-Project alternative. The parcel containing the vacant Barkers Brothers building would remain in its present dilapidated condition. The degraded appearance of both of the sites would remain unchanged. Alternative B: Phase l Only. Construction and operation of Phase I without Phase II would not allow the Center to be expanded beyond Phase I; therefore, there would be no expanded exhibit space, no theater, and no additional parking. IV. FINDINGS OF FACT The City Council has reviewed the Final EIR for the proposed Project and has considered the public record on the Project. The public record for the Project is composed of the following elements: · Notice of Preparation, October 15, 1996. · City of Santa Ana Planning Commission public hearing held on January 27, 1997. · Draft Discovery Science Center EIR and Technical Appendices (City of Santa Ana, December 1996). · Final Discovery Science Center EIR and Response to Comments received on the Draft EIR (City of Santa Ana, March 1997). · Mitigation Monitoring Plan (City of Santa Ana, March 1997). · Record of the City of Santa Ana Planning Commission public hearing held on March 24, Discovery Science Center EIR April I0, 1997 City t~ Santa ,4ha 3 Sltttement of Findings and [''acts 068 1997. Record of the City of Santa Ana City Council public hearing held on April 21, 1997. There are three possible findings under CEQA with respect to the significant effects of a project: Finding 1: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR. Finding 2: Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility or jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. Finding 3: Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the EIR. At~er reviewing the Final EIR and the public record on the Plan, the City of Santa Ana hereby makes the findings in Sections V, VI, and VII, regarding the significant effects of the proposed Discovery Science Center, pursuant to Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines. EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE MITIGABLE TO A LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL GEOLOGY Significant Effect The proposed Project may be exposed to potential ground subsidence. Finding Finding 1: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of the Findine According to the City General Plan (The Arroyo Group, 1982), and Midtown District Specific Plan Program EIR (Morita and Katagi 1996), subsidence does not appear to be a problem in the area. However, a field evaluation has not been conducted for the soils on site. The potential impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level through the implementation of the following mitigation measure: Discovery Science Center EIR April 10, 1997 CiO, of Santa Ann 4 State.lent of Findings and Facts 06 @ The site shall be evaluated by a geotechnical engineer and all structures shall be subject to specific structural review and approval by a structural engineer prior to construction. Measures identified to safeguard against damage fi.om subsidence shall be incorporated into the project design. The existing vacant Barker Brothers building shall be upgraded in its seismic design to conform to current building codes. Significant Effect Construction activities associated with the proposed Project would result in increased wind and water erosion. Finding Finding 1: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of the Finding The construction-related wind and water erosion impacts would be decreased to a less than significant level through the implementation of the following mitigation measures: Typical dust-suppression methods, such as watering, shall be practiced during grading activities to minimize fugitive dust. These include: ao To minimize dust generated by construction operations, the applicant shall apply water or dust suppressants to exposed earth surface during clearing, grading, earthmoving and other site preparation work. Water shall be applied twice daily and dust suppression materials should be applied as needed. To minimize dust from construction vehicles, wheel washers shall be placed at the project entrance at Main Street and vehicle wheels shall be hosed down prior to exiting on Main Street. Street sweeping of roads adjacent to the project site shall be done weekly by the contractor during site grading to reduce fugitive dust from traffic. The contractor shall plant all disturbed areas after the completion of site preparation activities. Significant Effect Due to the underlain deep deposits of alluvium beneath the subject site, the proposed Project may potentially be subjected to strong ground movements related to seismic activity of nearby faults, Discovery Science Cenler EIR /Ipril 10, 1997 City of 32mta Ana 5 Statement of Findings and Facts 07O depending on the magnitude of the event. Finding Finding 1: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Findings Any potential impacts associated with groundshaking will be mitigated to a less than significant level through implementation of the following mitigation measure: All structures shall be designed in accordance with the current Uniform Building Code and the seismic design parameters of the Structural Engineers Association of California and to meet the requirements of the City. Significant Effect The proposed Project site may potentially be subjected to impacts resulting from liquefaction. Finding Finding !: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of the Findino The proposed Project area is identified in the City's General Plan as having low potential for liquelhction, ttowever, no geotechnical evaluations have been conducted for the subject site, it is not possible to determine the potential for, or extent of liquefaction in the area. Potential impacts will be reduced to a less than significant level through implementation of the following mitigation measure: The site shall be evaluated by a geotechnical engineer and all structures should be subject to specific structural review for potential damage from liquefaction. Measures identified to safeguard against damage shall be incorporated into project design. }V.d TER RESOURCES Significant Effect The development of the multMevel parking structure in Phase II will be developed on a parcel that is in the 100-year floodplain of Santiago Creek, as designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Developments in the 100-year floodplain have the potential to Discovery Science Ce,tcr EIR Jpril I0. 1997 City of .¥anta .4ha 6 Stateme,t qf Findings altd Facts increase flooding and exposure of people and property 1[o water-related hazards. Finding Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of the Finding The potential hazards associated with development in the 100-year flood plain will be reduced to a less than significant level through the following mitigation measure: The project shall be designed according to applicable City of Santa Arm and FEMA requirements and guidelines to ensure that the parking structure, vehicular bridge, and related components will not impede or otherwise alter storm flows. Significant Effect Both short-term construction impacts and long-term operation impacts from site runoff may adversely affect water quality in Santiago Creek. Finding Finding 1; Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Sup_nort of the Finding Construction and operation of the proposed Project would require the applicant to apply for, obtain, and comply with permits that will reduce the potential impacts to less than significant levels through the following mitigation measures: Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit to the City a water quality management plan that identifies the specific best management practices (BMP's) that will be implemented to control pollutants in site runoff. The project applicant shall apply for an obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater permit for construction and comply with the County Municipal Stormwater NPDES permit by preparing a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP). 072 .4IR QUALITY Significant Effect Construction of the proposed Project would result in temporary emissions of reactive organic compounds (ROG), carbon monoxide (CO), and sulfur oxides (Sox), which would not exceed threshold levels for significance. Estimated construction emission levels of particulate matter (PM,0) would exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD) threshold level of 150 ppd of PMm. Finding Finding 1: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of the Findine Temporary increase in construction-related emissions associated with PM,0 (not exhaust) will be reduced by at least 50%, resulting in emissions of PM~0 equal to 92.8 ppd, through implementation of the following mitigation measures that will reduce this impact to a less than significant level: To minimize dust generated by construction operations, the applicant shall apply water or dust suppressants to exposed earth surface during clearing, grading, earthmoving and other site preparation work. Water shall be applied twice daily and dust suppression materials should be applied as needed. To minimize dust from construction vehicles, wheel washers shall be placed at the project entrance at Main Street and vehicle wheels shall be hosed down prior to exiting on Main Street. Street sweeping of roads adjacent to the project site shall be done weekly by the contractor during site grading to reduce fugitive dust from traffic. The contractor shall plant all disturbed areas after the completion of site preparation activities. TRANSPOR Tel TION AND C1R CULA TION Significant Effect Potential traffic safety impacts associated with site access and circulation may result at the project entrance on Main Street. Finding l)iscoveO, Science (?enter EIR /lpril It), 1997 City qf SYmta ~4na 8 S'tatement of Findings and Facts 073 Finding 1: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the Significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of the Findings Traffic signal warrant analyses were performed that take into consideration aspects of safety in relation to turning movements. Although under Phase I conditions driveway fails to satisfy the Minimum Vehicular warrant, it does narrowly satisfy the Interruption of Continuous Traffic warrant. Upon, completion of Phase Il, the intersection satisfies the Interruption of Continuous Traffic warrant and meets the 80% criteria for Minimum Vehicular warrant. The following mitigation measures will reduce the potential impacts to levels that are less than significant. For Phase l, a stop sign and raised pavement markers shall be installed at the project entrance allowing right-turn out and left-turn in access. For Phase II, the applicant shall install a traffic signal at the intersection of thc project driveway and Main Street and re-stripe the project entrance to one lane in and two lanes out. Significant Effect There is a lack of adequate bus parking onsite, which may result in the intrusion of bus parking into surrounding properties and neighborhoods. Findings Finding 1: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of the Finding The site is currently deficient in bus parking. Based on estimates of the number and composition of visitors to the project, five to six buses in Phase I, and 12-14 buses in Phase Il are anticipated to visit the site daily. Buses will need to load and unload passengers onsite, and park offsite. The following mitigation measures will reduce the potential impacts to less than significant levels: 1. The applicant shall construct onsite bus drop-offarea. During Phase 1 operation, the applicant shall secure arrangements for bus layover parking for buses at the Redevelopment Agency owned lot on the corner of Santiago and Santa Ana Boulevard. During Phase II operation, the applicant shall secure arrangements for bus layover parking for buses at the Redevelopment Agency owned lot on the corner of Santiago and Santa Ana I~otJlcvard. Discover), Science Center EIR ..lpril I0. 1997 Cit~, e/'s~,.~ .~,,c, 9 Statement ~?f Findings and Facts 074 If an alternative offsite lot for bus parking is necessary, the location of the lot must be mutually agreeable to the applicant and the Redevelopment Agency. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a bus parking management plan. The applicant shall develop a parking plan in coordination with their expected large group visits, which the center schedules in a managed reservation basis. Group arrival/departures in buses shall be programmed to avoid on-site circulation problems. /L4ZARDS Significant Effect The facility may use and store small quantities of chemicals for teaching purposes. There is a remote potential that fire, explosion or release of ha?ardous chemicals could occur. Finding Finding 1: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR. Fgcto in Support of the Finding The potential risk of ba~'ard will be reduced to a less than significant level through implementation of the following mitigation measure: All haTardous materials shall be strictly controlled and stored according to requirements of the City of Santa Aha Fire Department. Quantities shall be limited and used for teaching purposes only. NOISE Significant Effect Adjacent properties may be exposed to significant, but intermittent, construction-related noise from construction equipment and activities. Areas within 740 feet of the site may experience episodes exceeding 70 dBA, and areas within 1,900 feet may experience episodes exceeding 60 dBA. Finding Finding 1: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final E1R. Discm,ery Science Center EIR Jpril 10, 1997 CiO' of Sama .411a 1 0 Statement of Findings and Facts O75 Facts in Support of the Finding Episodes of high noise levels associated with construction activities will not be continuous throughout the day and will be reduced to a less than significant level through the following mitigation measures: The applicant shall comply with the requirement of the City's noise ordinance and refrain from conducting exterior construction activity between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays and Saturdays or any time on Sunday or Federal Holidays. All equipment shall have sound-control devices no less effective than those provided on the original equipment. No equipment shall have unmuffied exhaust. As directed by the City, the contractor shall implement appropriate additional noise mitigation measures including, but not limited to, changing the location of stationary construction equipment, shutting off idling equipment, rescheduling construction activity, notifying adjacent residents in advance of construction work, or installing acoustic barriers around stationary construction noise sources. PUBLIC SER VICES Significant Effect The project may be impacted by criminal activity that occurs within Santiago Creek. Finding I: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final E1R. Facts in Support of the Finding Santiago Creek is often used as an access corridor for criminal activity and high transient populations and theft rotes are associated with the Santiago Creek area. If access between the Creek and the parking areas is unobstructed, there would be a very high potential for thefts and other criminal activity to take place. The following mitigation measure will reduce this potential safety impacts to a less than significant level: Should the Police Department determine that due to security concerns, fencing between the bike trail and the parking lot on the 3.5-acre site is necessary, the appropriate fencing shall be installed. Discovery Scie.ce Center EIR April I0, 1997 ('it3, ~!f .¥..ta Aha 1 ] Statement qf b3ndings and Facts 076 U TIL ITIES AND SER VICE S YS TEMS Significant Effect There are currently no electrical cables servicing the site as previously existing overhead cables were removed an not replaced. The provisions for underground cables to the site would require excavation, potentially disrupting traffic and circulation in the project vicinity resulting in temporary significant impacts. Finding Finding 1: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Suppor~ of the Finding The following mitigation measure will reduce potential traffic impacts resulting from placement of electrical cables to a less than significant level: Any installation of new electrical cable that would disrupt traffic shall occur during off-peak hours or at night. CULTURAL RESOURCES Significant Effect As the project site has not been excavated, future grading and construction activities could disrupt cultural resources if present on the site. Finding Finding 1: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final E1R. Facts in Support of the Finding The proximity of Santiago Creek contributes to the likelihood of discovering cultural resources. It appears no significant cultural resoumes would be affected by the construction of the proposed Project since none were reported in previous surveys. However, the potential always exists that resources could be encountered in areas not previously excavated. Should this situation occur, there would be the potential for a significant impact. The following mitigation measure will reduce this potential impact to a less than significant level: 1. If cultural resources are uncovered during construction, work must be stopped and a qualified l)iscovery Science Center EIR April I0, 1997 ('itl, of Sonta ~4na 12 Statement of Findings and Facts 077 archaeologist shall have to assess the significance of the resource and determine what, if any, measures would be necessary to mitigate impacts to the resource. VI. SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF THE PROJECT IS DEVELOPED Significant Effect TRANSPOR T.4 TION/CIRCULA TION Occasional special events may result in the potential for offsite impacts to adjacent properties as overflow parking could occur at Santiago Park and at Main Place Shopping Center. Finding Finding 3: Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the EIR. Facts in Sunnort of the Findin~ No feasible mitigation is available for offsite overflow parking and the impact remains potentially significant and unavoidable. Significant Effect Under cumulative project conditions, the intersections of Main Street and Edgewood Road, and Main Street and Santa Clara Avenue are projected to operate at a level of service (LOS) E. Finding Finding 3: Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the EIR. Fact~ in Support of the Findine Based upon cumulative development anticipated for the north Main Street area, these two intersections will operate at an unacceptable level of service which cannot be mitigated. NOISE Significant Effect During construction of the proposed project, the use of pile drivers used in Phase I1 for bridge and/or l)iscovet), Science ('c, ntcr EIR April I0, 1997 078 parking structure construction will result in loud, continuous noise and vibrations. Pile drivers tend to be more irritating to the public than other construction equipment. Finding Finding 3: Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the EIR. Facts in Support of the Finding While some mitigation is possible through the use of vibratory pile drivers, their feasibility of use for the project is unknown. A temporary, significant and unavoidable impact would result from the use of pile drivers during construction of Phase II. Significant Effect During operation of the proposed Project, visitors within the open framework cube structure would be exposed to existing traffic noise above the 65 dB standard due to its proximity to the 1-5 Freeway. The proposed Project would not contribute additional increases in noise levels, however, vocal communication in the outdoor exhibit area will likely he difficult with maximum sound levels in the average range of 75 to 80 dB. Finding Finding 3: Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the EIR. Facts in Support of the Finding No feasible mitigation is available to reduce noise levels. Visitors would be exposed to existing high noise levels. Significant Effect Visitors will be exposed to existing noise levels of about 81 dB-CNEL in the parking areas due to its proximity to the Freeway. communication difficult. Findings Finding 1: Finding 3; The high noise levels in the parking lot would make vocal Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR. Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation 079 measures or project alternatives identified in the EIR. Facts in Support of the Findings Due to the configuration of the existing overhead ramp which reflects sound from its bottom surface, the effectiveness ora soundwall would be reduced, and it is unlikely it would provide the I0 dB of noise reduction needed to reduce traffic noise to below 65 dB-CNEL. The following mitigation measures will reduce this impact, but not below a less than significant level: The applicant, in coordination with the City and Caltrans, shall construct a sound wall between the parking lot and the Santa Ana Freeway. The wall shall be high enough to block the line of sight between the average height of the high stack exhaust of a heavy truck and average ear height. The soundwall shall be constructed with a material with a density of at least 4 pounds per square foot, preferably concrete or concrete block. Even with the soundwall, the impact would remain significant and unavoidable. AIR QUALITY Significant Effect The development of the Discovery Science Center will contribute to cumulative emissions of ozone precursors in Orange County, and possibly the entire South Coast Air Basin. Finding Finding 3: Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the EIR. Facts in Support of the Findine Ozone is a regional pollutant, and the expected growth in this area, even without the proposed project, would result in a significant increase in ozone precursor emissions. Significant Effect The intersections of Main Street and Edgewood Road, and Main Street and Santa Clara Avenue are projected to operate at a level of service (LOS) E under cumulative project conditions. LOS E is an unacceptable level of service, and a significant unavoidable adverse impact would result. Finding' Finding 3: Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the EIR. Discoveo' Science Center EIR April I0, 199/ City of Santa A.a 15 Statement of Findings and Facts O8O Facts in Support of the Finding Based upon cumulative development anticipated for the north Main Street area, these two intersections will operate at an unacceptable level of service which cannot be mitigated. VII. MITIGATION MEASURES FOR IMPACTS CONSIDERED TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT This section describes mitigation measures for those effects of the proposed Project which are considered to be less than significant and that, therefore, are not required under CEQA. However, these measures improve the Project and are acceptable under CEQA. Findings are not required for the effects determined to be less than significant. The impact categories determined to be less than significant and the mitigation measures incorporated in the Project are described below. WA TER QUALITY Adherence to regulatory compliance requirements would ensure that no sho~t- or long-term impacts to water quality occur. The following mitigation measure will help facilitate improvements of water quality: The project applicant shall comply with the Statewide NPDES Construction Permit by preparing a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), and the County-wide Municipal NPDES permit by preparing a separate Water Quality Management Plant (WQMP). Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit to the City the SWPPP and WQMP which will both identify the specific BMPs that will be implemented to control pollutants in site runoff. TR,4NSPOR T,4 TION/CIR CULA TION The proximity of the regional bike trail along Santiago Creek to the proposed project would make bicycling a reasonable alternative travel mode for visitors to the Center. This would be particularly tree on weekends when families fi.om neighboring residential areas might choose to visit the Center by bicycle. The following mitigation will help facilitate the use of the bicycle trail as an alternate mode of transportation: 1. The applicant shall provide bicycle lockers onsite and access to the bike trail. Both vehicular and bus traffic added to existing plus entitled projects would result in acceptable levels of service C or better for area intersections. At buildout, the project would generate 86 a.m. peak hour trips and 446 p.m. peak hour trips. The following mitigation measures will assist with providiug fi~tt, rc area-wide traffic improvements: 081 1. The applicant shall pay City of Santa Ana TSIA fees. AIR QUALITY Implementation of Phase 1 and Phase II operation would result in emission of less than significant levels. The following mitigation will further alleviate congestion and emissions: 1. To reduce vehicular congestion and emissions, the applicant shall investigate the feasibility of operating a shuttle in conjunction with Main Place that would service the two destinations. UTILITIES AND SER VICE SYSTEMS Water demands from the project would not exceed the existing capacity allocated by the City and County. The following conservation measures would be required as conditions of project approval: The City will require utilization of the following conservation techniques: Water conserving features including plumbing fixtures, ultra low-flush toilets, and dish washers shall be installed. Irrigation features shall include drought-tolerant plants grouped according to water requirements and efficient automatic sprinkler systems timed to minimize nm-off and evaporation. Currently there exists a waterline in Amett Drive which will be abandoned as part of the project. The following mitigation shall be implemented: Prior to utility release, the Public Works Agency shall fund the abandonment of the water line in Amett Drive. VIII. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT CEQA Guidelines Section 15126 (d) requires a discussion of reasonable alternatives to the proposed Project. The EIR evaluated two alternatives in addition to the proposed Project. It should be noted that other alternatives were not considered or evaluated due to their inconsistency with the objectives of the Project or were deemed infeasible as discussed in Section III. NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE Findiag Discovery Science Center EIR April 10, 1997 CiO, of Santa Aha I 7 Statement of Findings attd Facts 082 Finding 3: Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the EIR. Facts in Support of the Finding As compared to the proposed project, there would be no significant unavoidable adverse impacts with the No Project Alternative as the site would remain undeveloped. While the No Project alternative would be less impacting than the proposed project, this alternative would not contribute the benefit of the proposed project, which would provide educational and recreational opportunities for the children and adults of Orange County. With no site redevelopment, the community would not have secondary benefits of this project encouraging the development of other museum and cultural facilities which would benefit the community and the County. Unlike the proposed project, there would be no enhanced benefit to the adjacent Santiago Creek and park areas with the No- Project alternative. In addition, the present security and vagrancy problems in the area would remain. PHASE I ONLY ALTERNATIVE Finding Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the EIR. Facts in Support of Findine If construction and operation of Phase I was to occur without Phase II, there would be no expansion of the science center, including no expanded exhibit space, no theater, and no parking structure built on the site north of Santiago Creek. The Phase I only alternative would reduce some impacts compared to the proposed project, but many others would remain. If Phase II was not built, construction of the multi-level parking structure would not be unnecessary. No foundation work or offsite soil removal associated with the structure would occur. As site acreage would be reduced, so would the scope of potential impacts related to subsidence, soil erosion, expansive soils, groundshaking, or liquefaction on the Phase II parcel. However, seismic impacts for this alternative would remain similar to those identified for Phase I. Geologic and earth resources impacts associated with seismic activity are expected to be similar for this alternative with the exception of the theater and the Phase Il parcel for the parking structure. With Phase I Only, there would be less building square footage and mom paved parking areas on the 3.5-acre parcel. The proposed parking structure would not be constructed on the 1.95- acre parcel, which is currently located in the 100-year floodplain, and the area would retain its present condition as a relatively flat, unpaved surface. The Phase I alternative project would still drain runoffinto Santiago Creek via drainage piping. Since the project portion north of the creek would remain undeveloped and unpaved, less runoffwould be contributed to the creek. However, potential impacts to water quality from either particulate matter or accumulated sediment washing into Santiago Creek would be the same as those for ~l~e proposed prc~iect. Even with less absolute runoff occurring to Di~'coveo' Science Center EIR ,4pri110, 1997 083 Santiago Creek, the potential for significant impacts to water quality still exists. Similar to the proposed project, construction emissions for Phase I Only have the potential to exceed PM~0 levels and result in a temporary significant impact. With Phase I Only, no traffic signal would be required at the project driveway on Main Street. This would result in greater site access and circulation impacts than the full buildout of proposed project due to greater restricted turning movements than with a signal. Bus parking would still be provided offsite for this alternative. Offsite parking impacts would be similar to the proposed project as overflow automobile parking from special events may still occur at adjacent commercial properties. Long-term parking impacts would be greater as no parking structure would be constructed with this alternative. Noise impacts would be less than the proposed project as the potential use of pile drivers for Phase II bridge and parking structure construction would not occur. Construction activities for Phase I would still, however, have the potential to result in temporary significant, but intermittent, noise impacts. Similar to the proposed project, potentially significant operational-noise impacts associated with Phase I project operations remain with this alternative, as the cube structure would still be subject to high noise due to its location near the freeway and its open-structure design. Patrons observing the displays in the cube would be subjected to noise levels from the I-5 freeway which exceed noise criteria standards. Additionally, the proposed parking area currently exceeds noise thresholds as the lot is located adjacent to the I-5 and construction ora soundwall would still be required for this alternative. Due to the configuration of the existing overhead ramp which reflects sound from its bottom surface, the effectiveness of a soundwall would be reduced, and it is unlikely it would provide the 10 dB of noise reduction needed to reduce traffic noise to below 65 dB-CNEL; this impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Impacts related to the use of small quantities of ba?ardous materials for teaching purposes are similar to the proposed project. However, impacts related to the jet fuel line would be less than the proposed project because no relocation would be necessary to accommodate the parking structure. Site security impacts resulting from the lack of visibility to the parking area would be the same for the Phase I parking lot, but would be eliminated for the parking structure proposed in Phase II. As Santiago Creek is often used as an access corridor for criminal activity and high transient populations, theft rates are associated with the Santiago Creek area and a potential exists for thefts and other criminal activity to take place. Fencing will be provided at a later date, if it is determined necessary for site security. Electricity impacts for this alternative would be the same as for the proposed Project. The provisions for underground cables to the site would require excavation, potentially disrupting traffic and circulation in the project vicinity resulting in temporary significant impacts. Potential impacts to cultural resources would be less than the proposed project as the 1.95-acre remnant parcel will remain undisturbed. Recreational impacts may be less than the proposed project because there may be less conflict on the bike trail between the pedestrians and bicyclists if Phase Il is not constructed as there would be tess patrons using the science center. Discovery Science Center EIR April I0, 1997 ('in' qf Santa Am~ ] 9 5tatelnent of Findings and Facts 084 Most importantly, this alternative would not fully attain the City of Santa Ana's and the applicant's objectives with respect to the proposed project. This alternative does not allow for the provision of the large-format theater, which is an important feature of the proposed science center. Thus, while the impacts of the Phase I Only Alternative are not substantially reduced by developing of the Phase 1 Only Alternative, the objectives of the proposed project will not be fully attained. IX. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS The City has made a reasonable and good faith effort to mitigate potential impacts resulting from the implementation of the Discovery Science Center. Changes and alterations to the proposed development have been adopted which will substantially lessen or avoid significant environmental impacts as identified in the Draft EIR. Additionally, the City Council has adopted a Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Discovery Science Center which outlines how the mitigation measures adopted as part of the proposed project will be implemented, monitored, and evaluated. The benefits of the proposed project have been balanced against and outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts in the Draft EIR. The City makes the following Statement of Overriding Considerations. The following adverse impacts of the project and of cumulative development in the Santa Ana area are considered significant and unavoidable based on the Draft EIR, Final EIR, Mitigation Monitoring Program, and the findings discussed previously: Special event activity could exceed Phase I onsite parking demand and overflow parking could occur at Santiago Park or MainPlace Shopping Center. The parking area would be located immediately adjacent to the I-5 freeway and patrons would be exposed to existing sound levels which exceed the standard of 65 dB-CNEL. The cube structure would be subject to high noise due to its location proximate to the freeway and its open-structure design. Facility users would be subjected to noise levels which exceed noise criteria standards. Noise from pile driving for the Phase II bridge and/or multi-level parking structure may affect nearby businesses and residents for short periods during construction. Cumulatively, intersections of Main Street and Edgewood Road, and Main Street and Santa Clara Avenue, are projected to operate at a level of service (LOS) E. The cumulative ozone precursor emissions associated with the project and other projects in the air basin are expected to be significant. The City Council, acting pursuant to Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines, finds that the economic, social, and other benefits of the prqiect outweigh the nnavoidable environmental impacts identified in Iht Ell>,, including those impacts resulting t¥om a failure of a public agency to 085 implement a mitigation measure within its responsibility and jurisdiction. In making this finding, the City Council has balanced the benefits of the proposed project against its unavoidable environmental impacts and has indicated its willingness to accept those risks. In part, the project will provide the following benefits: The Discovery Science Center will be a high-quality destination attraction, serving as a resource for primary and secondary schools by offering educational tools unavailable in local schools. The Center will also introduce recreational and educational opportunities not previously available to the greater Santa Ana area. Redevelopment of the currently degraded site will encourage other redevelopment projects in the City of Santa Ana Redevelopment Project Area, while improving the overall condifon in the immediate vicinity. The Discovery Science Center will further strengthen the dynamic appeal of the City which will attract both residents and visitors from the surrounding area. Residents may partake in the ongoing activities which will be oriented towards children and families. This will promote a sense of community within the City, leading to an improved quality of life. The Discovery Science Center will be a distinctive element in the existing landscape of the City. Because of its uniqueness, both architecturally and through its interactive nature, the museum on its own accord will attract people to Santa Aha. As the Center also physically extends the existing museum district at its southern end, it is expected that opportunities for the development of other museums, art galleries and cultural activities in the area will increase. Patrons who are visiting the museum may choose to shop or eat in the area thus providing business for local shops and restaurants. Operation of the Discovery Science Cemer will result in the employment of 239 jobs and $5.25 million in annual payroll. Bike trail safety will increase as a result of the installation of parking lot lighting which will spill over onto the adjacent bike path. The project will result in annual sales tax revenues, at buildout, of approximately $1 million, of which $785,000 will go to the State of California, and $230,000 to the City (Sources: Economic Impact Study for the Discovery Science Center, August 1993). In summary, the Discovery Science Center provides a beneficial mix of educational and recreational uses which outweigh the unavoidable environmental impacts. l)iscovetT Science Center EIR ,.Ipri110, 1997 086 CITY OF SANTA ANA MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR 96-1) FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DISCOVERY SCIENCE CENTER, SANTA ANA Prepared for: City of Santa Ana Planning Division 206 West Fourth Street, 4th Floor Santa Ana, California 92702 Prepared by: Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. 2151 Michelson Drive, Suite 236 lrvine, California 92612 (714) 260-1080 March 1997 EXHIBtT J~'-~ 087 INTRODUCTION The State of California Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 requires that a Lead or Responsible Agency adopt a mitigation monitoring or reporting program when approving or carrying out a project where an environmental document, either an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or a Mitigated Negative Declaration, has identified measures to reduce potential adverse environmental impacts to levels that are less than significant. The City of Santa Ana (City) is the Lead Agency for the Discovery Science Center project, and therefore, is responsible for implementation of the Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP). An EIR has been prepared for this project which addresses the potential environmental impacts and, where appropriate, recommends measures to mitigate these impacts. As such preparation ora MMP is required to ensure that adopted mitigation measures are successfully implemented. This document lists each mitigation measure and describes the methods for implementation and verification, as well as the responsible parties involved. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant proposes to develop the 5.4-acre site with a 95,000 square foot (sf) Discovery Science Center (Center) consisting of exhibit space and food service, a science store, classrooms, a multi-purpose room, a 350-seat large format theater, and a multi-level parking structure. Phase I includes the rehabilitation of the existing 40,000 sf building and the addition of 15,000 sr. This phase will provide parking for 165 cars and a bus/passenger drop-off area, with bus parking to be located off-site. A cube-shaped structure (70 feet on a side) will also be constructed in this phase and will be located on the south side of the building to serve as the icon for the Center. Phase I will accommodate approximately 250,000 patrons annually. Phase II will include an additional 30,000 sf of exhibit area; 1,200 sf of expanded dining area; 1,000 sfof store area; and a 350-seat large-screen theater. A multi-level parking structure will be constructed on an adjacent parcel across Santiago Creek that will be accessible from a new vehicular bridge and an existing footbridge/bike path. At build-out the entire site will have over 500 parking spaces. Phase II expects approximately 750,000 visitors annually. MONITORING AND REPORTING PROCEDURES The MMP for the development of the Discovery Science Center will be in place throughout all phases of the project including design, construction, and operation. The City shall be responsible for implementation of and compliance with the provisions contained within the MMP. The City may delegate monitoring activities to staff, consultants, or contractors. The City will also ensure that monitoring is documented through periodic reports and that violations are promptly corrected. The designated environmental monitor will track and document mitigation efforts, noting any problems that may arise and taking appropriate action to rectify them. Adherence to mitigation requirements shall be documented on the compliance verification form. The primary City personnel responsible for verifying compliance with the mitigation measures are listed below. The Environmental Coordinator, Planning Division, Planning and 088 Building Agency will have the primary role of coordinating the compliance verifications of these parties. These parties, or designated assignees, have the authority and responsibility for ensuring that the mitigation measures are properly implemented. Planning and Building Agency Plannin~ Division Planning Manager Senior Planner Environmental Coordinator Case Planner Landscape Associate Public Works Agency Development En_eineering Division Engineering Services Manager Enterprise Coordinator Community Development Agency Administrative Services Manager Recreation and Community Services Agency Operations Manager Fire Department Fire Prevention Division Fire Marshal Police Department Community Services Section Community Services Specialist Building Division Inspection Services Manager Senior Plan Check Engineer Water Resources Division Water Resources Manager Field Operations Division Captain 089 MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN IMPLEMENTATION In the following MMP, each mitigation measure included in the EIR is listed by resource area. Implementation of most mitigation measures in this plan is the responsibility of the Discovery Science Center, with oversight and verification by the City. Certain inspections arid reports require preparation by qualified individuals, and these are specified as needed. The timing and method of verification are provided within this plan, along with the parties responsible for implementation and monitoring of the mitigation measure to determine whether the measure has been satisfactorily implemented. Satisfactory implementation of a mitigation measure is to be indicated through the use of the compliance verification form, which must be signed by the responsible party(s) upon completion. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN FOR THE EIR FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DISCOVERY SCIENCE CENTER IN THE CITY OF SANTA ANA Mitigation Measures Timing of Implementation/ Method of Verification Verifieation Responsible Parties GEOLOGY 1, Thc site shall be evalua~l by a gnotechnical cngineer and all Prior to appwval of building permits; Buildingpinnchcck Senior Plan Check Engineer, Building Division; structures shall be subject to tevinw and approval by a ~'u~ural during construction phase Engineering Services Manager, Development engineer prior to construction. Measures to safeguard against Engineering Division damage riom subsidence shall be incorpomed into project design. Thc existing onsi~e smictu~ shall be upgraded in its seismic d~ign to conform lo current building codes. 2. Typical dust-suppressinn methods, such as watering durin On-going during g~giing and Field inspection during grading and Environmental Coordinator, Planning Division; grading activities lo minimize fugitive dust, shall be practiced, construction consLructinn Inspection Scrvicns Supervisor, Building Bivision; Project Contractor 3. All sUuctorcs shall be designed in accordance with thc curreet Prior to approval of building permits; Building plan check, field inspection Senior Plan Check Engineer, Inspection Services Uniform Building Code, the seismic design parameters of the during cons~rocfion phesc Manager, Building Division Structural Engineers Azsouiafion of Califonfia and City requirements. 4. Thc site shall be evalua~d by a geotechnical anglneer and all Prior to approval of building permits; Building plan check Senior Plan Check Engineer, Building Division; s~ruetures should be subjuet to specific slructural review for during construction phs.se Engineering Service~ Manager, Developrocnt potential damagn from liquefaction. Mgasures identified to Engineering Division safeguard against damage shall be incotperaled into project design. WATER RESOURCES 1. Thc project shall be designed according to applicable City of Prior to approval of building permits Building plan check Senior Plan Check Engineer, Building Division Santa Aha and FEMA requirements and guidelines to ensu~ that the pmtdnE stmctmc, vchicolar loridgc, and rala~d components will not impede or otherwise altor siorm flows. 2. Thc project app[inant shall comply with lhe Smtewide NPDES Prior to issuance of grading permits Surface drainage and grading plan check Regional Water Quality Control Board; Engineering Construction Permit by preparing a Stormwater Pollution Services Manager, DcvetopmentEngiuecring Division; Prevention Plan (SWPPP), and~c Countywide Municipal NPDES Water Resources Manager, Water Resources Division; permit by prcpming a sepanUe Water Quality Management ProjectAppllcant (WQMP). Prior to the issuance of a building permit, thc applicant shall submit to the City thc SWPPP and WQMP which will both identify the specific BMPs that will be implcnted to control pollutants in site runoff. 4 Mitigation Measures Timing of Implementation/ Method of Verification Verification Responsible Parties AIR QUALITY 1. To minimize dust generated by coeslmction operations, the Condition of grading pemfit (note on P~iodic field inspection during grading Environmmtai Coordinator, Planning Division; applicant shall apply watm' or dust suppr~ta to espoced ce~ g~ading plan) and oonstmction Inspection Services Manager, Building Division; Project surface during clca~lg, grading, e. ardanoving and Otbet Site Contractor prcpa,"ation work. Water shill be applied twice daily and dust supprc~inn materials should be applied as needed, 2. To minimize dust from consu~ction vehicles, wheel washers Condition of gx~ding permit (note on Grading plan check; periodic field Environmental Coordinator, Planning Division Shall be placed ut thc project anu'ance at Main Street nd vehicle grading plan) inspanfions during g~'acling opet~ions Inspection Sorvices Supervisor, Building Division; wheals shall be hosed dorm prior to exiting onto Main SU~et. Project Contractor ]. Street sweeping on roads adjacent to the project site shall bc During g~miing and const~ction Periodic field inspection during grading Environmental Coordinator, Planning Division done weekly by thc ~ootractor dm'lng site grading to reduce fugitive open~tinns and consu~crioo Inspection Services Supervisor, Building Division; dust from traffic. Project Contractor 4, Thc contractor shall plant MI d~urbed ~ ~ the Folinwingsiteprcpasat~nact~vitiesand Grading, architectural, and landscaping Environmental Coordinator, Landscape Associstc and cemplctinnofsit~prepa~-afionactivifias, prior to issum~ce of Certificate of pin check; periodic field inspection Case Planner, Planning Division; Inspection Scrvicc~ Occupancy following grading operations Supervisor, Building Division; Project Contractor 5. To reduce vehicular congestion and emissions, thc applicant Prior to issuance of Certificate of Interviews with rcsponsibin pa~tias Environmental Coordinator, Case Planner, Planning shall investigate thc fcnsibility of ope~adng a shu~e in conjunction Occupancy Division; Project Applicant; Main Place representative with Main Place that would set, ice thc two desfinadmu. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION ~ Phase I: 1. Attheproj¢ctcnUance, astopsigfland~pevcmantmaskers Prior to issuance of Certificate of Finallnapccrion Environmental Coordinator, Case Planner, Plnrming shall bc installed, allowing Fight-turn Oct nnd left-tam th ancess. Occupancy for Phase I Division; Engineming Services Manager, Development Engincering Division; Project Applicant 2. Tbeapplicantshallprovidcbicyclcinckcrsonsitenndaceessto Prior to issuance of C..eflJficate of Finall~pection Environmental Coordinator, Case Planner, Pisnning the bike t~aiL (~cy for Phaso I Division; Engthccfing Services Manager, Devcinpmant Engineering Division; Psojcct Applicant 3. TheapplicantshallconstFantonaltebusdropoffarce. Prior to issuance of Certificate of FinalInspection Environmental Coordinator, Case Planner, Planning Occupancy for phose I Division; Engineering Services Manager, Development Engineering Division; Project Applicant Phase Ih 4. TAc applicant shall pay City of Santa AAA TSIA fees. [ Prior to issuance of building permits [ Writxcn verification of canceled checks £ngincering Services Manager, Development I Engineering Division; Public Works ^gcncy 5 Mitigation Measures Timing of Implementation/ Method of Verification Verification Responsible Parties $. ThcapplicantthallinatallaUafficsigonlatthcintcvicofionof Prior to issuance of Certificate of Finallnspection Engineering Services Manager, Development thc project driveway and Main Strut, and ruslripe the pmjcot Occupancy for Phone H Engineering Division; City Council; Project Applicant entrance to one lane in and two inne-s out. 6, During Phase I operation' the applicant shall secu~ Condiilonofappwval, prinrto issuance WriRen agreement belwean project Engim:oring Services Manager, D~v¢inpment arrang~rmmts for bus layover parking for buses at tho of C~rilfic. ale of Occupancy; on-going applic.~t and tho Redevelopment Agency Engineering Division; City Council; Project Applicant; Redevelopment Agency ovngd lot on the cOmer of S~tingo and dusing life of project to be pwvid~d in the Development Redevelopment Division Santa Ann Boui~verd. Ag~em~nt 7. During Phase B operation, the applicant shall secu~ Condifianofapproval, pfiorto issuance wrinan agreement between project Engineering Services Manager, Development arrangements for bus layover parking for buses at the of C.~-rfificete of Occupancy; on-going applicant and the Regional Transpooation Engineering Division; City Council; Project Applicant; Redevelopment Agency owned lot on tho COmer of Santiago and during life of pwjeat C. eater to be provided in the Development Redevoinpraent Division Sanu~ Aha Boulevard. Agreement g. If an altemaive offaltc lot for bus paddng is nan~sory in Pbaan Prior to issuance of a building permit; Management plan shall be submitted to thc Engineering Services Manager, Development IL thc incmion of thc int must be mataliy ag~ceebin to the applicant ongoing during life of project Planning Division and Public Works Engineering Division, Public Works Agency; Case and Re~vclopment Agency. Agoncy for approval prior to issuance of Planner, Planning Division; Project Applicant any permits 9. Prior so the issuance of a building permit, thc applicant shall Prior to issuance of a Cenificute of Managcatem plan shall be submitted to thc Enginccriag Services Manager, Development mbmit a bus parking management plan. Tbe applicam shall Occupany; on-going during life of Planning Division and Public Works Engineering Division, Public Works Agency; Case develop a parking plan in coordination with their expec~d large project Agency for approval prior to issuance of I Planner, Planning Division; Project Applicant group visits, which thc Center sclmiules in a managed ~anct~ation any permits basis. Group anival/dcpanu~s in busns shall be programmed to avoid on-si~ circulation problems. NOISE 1. Thc applicant shall comply with thc requirements of the City's Prior to issuance of grading permit (ontc Field inspection, COmplaints from nearby Environmental Coordinator, Planning Division; noise ordinance and refrain from cOnducting extoior conslmction on grading plans); during grading and reaidants Inspection Services Ivlanager, Building Division activity between thc hon~ of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays construction activities and Saturdays or any time on Sunday or Fedcmi Holidays. 2. All cquipmcot shall have round-control davic~s no less effective Prior to issuance of grading permit (no~c Grading plan cbeck, written verification Inspection Servican Manager, Building Division; Project than thnsc provided on thc original cquipmcut. No equipment shall on grading plans), during cons~ucrion provided by thc project applicant, field ConUac~$r have an unmufficd exhaust, inspections 3. As directed by the City, the contractor shall implement Prior to issuance of building permit, Building plan check; field inspection Envimnmcntal Coordinator, Case Planner, Planning appropriate additional onisc mitigation measures including, but not during COns*auction Division; Inspection Serviccs Manager, Building limited to, changing thc location of stationary construction Division; Project Contractor equipment, shutting off idling equipment, ruscbeduling construction activity, notifying adjacent rnsldants in advance of cousw~ction work, or installing acoustic barrlcrs around stationary consffuction noise sourcgs. Mitigation Measure~ 4. 'mc applicant, in coordination with the City and Caimans, shall constsuct a sound wall hetwenn thc parking lot and Santa Aaa f~woy. The wall shall he high enough to block the line of sight between the average height of the high stack exhaust cfa heavy U~ck and average ear heighL 'me sound wall shall be constructed with a material with a density of at It~L~t 4 pounds per sf, preferably concrete or concrete block. Timing of Implementation/ Verification Plan dleck, prior to isso~co of building pennR (note on plato) and CeftL~cate of Occup~cy issuance Method of Verification Building plan check; final inspection Responsible Parties Environmental Coordinator, Case Planner, Planning Division; Inspection Services Manager, Building Division; Caluans Project Manager; Project Contractor PUBLIC SERVICES Plan check review, field inspection I. Should the Police IX-partmmt determin~ that due to security concerns fencing between the bike trail and the parking lot on th, 3.5-acre site is nccnssa~7, then appropriate fencing shall be installed. UTILITIF. S Plan check; prior to issuance of Cerflfieag of Occupan~ Case Planner, Planning Division; Community Services Specialist, Police D~:partmem; Operations Manager, Recreation and Community Services Agency; Project Applicant 1. Any installation of new alcctriosl cable th~ would disrupt traffic shall occur during off-penk hours or at night. Prior to issuance of appropriate permits or approvals Plan check; field ivspections Senior Plan Check Engineer, Building Division; Police Department; Public Works Agency; Project Applicant; Southern California Edison 2. Prior to utility release, thc Public Works Agency shall fund the Prior to utility rele, us~ and issuance of Plan check; final inspection Eaginetdag Services Manager, l~vclopment abandonment of the water llne in Amen Drive. C~Rificate of Occupancy Engineering Division, Public Works Agency 3. 'me City will require utilization of the following water Building plan check (note on plans); Plan check, final inspection Senior Plan Check Engineer, Building Division; Water conservation techniques: prior to CctriBna~ of Occupan~y; and Resources Manager, Public Works Agency; Project - Water conserving featur~ including plumbing fcxtures, ultsa-low throughout the life of the projant Applicant flush toilets, and dish washers shall be installed. - Irrigation features shall include drought-tolerant plants grouped according to water r~quirements and efficient, time to minimize run-off and evaporation. HAZARDS Duringoperafionoftheproj¢ct Fire Marshal, Fire Prevention Division; Communil Services Specialist, Police Department 1. All hazardous materials shall b~ strictly conUollcd and stored according to requirements of the City of Santa Ana Fire Department. Uses shall be restricted to k:aching purposes only. Iln.~ction CULTURAL RESOURCES ~fr~urce~ar~unc~v~redduringconsu~cti~n~w~rkmusthalt~Duringgradingandsitepreparati~n~Peri~dicinspe~ti~nduringgradingand Environmental Coordinator, Planning Division; and a qualified archaeologist most assess thc significance of the activities in the construction phase of construction, and monitoring by project Inspection Services Manager, Building Division; Project resource, and what, if any, measures are necessary to mitigatelithe project contractor applicant and/or contractor; qualified archaeologist as 7 c~ 094 DISCOVERY SCIENCE CENTER MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM COMPLIANCE VERIFICATION FORM Impact Issue (Earth, Water, Traffic, etc.): Location: Onsite Offsite Mitigation Measure #:__ Administrative Project Phase: Design Construction Operation Description of Activity/Method of Implementation: Disposition: Mitigation measure for the above-noted project phase implemented. No further action is required. Mitigation measure for the above-noted project phase is not fully implemented. Further action required. (Please explain below) The mitigation measure for thc above-noted project phase is not in compliance. Further action required. (Please explain below) Comments/Revisions: Completed by: Name: Title: Date: Approved by: Naffrle: Title: Date: