Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout75D - GP AMEND H20 QUALITY REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ~ ~ CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 19, 2004 TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-04 TO AMEND VARIOUS S:e:CTtONS OF TH:e: G:e:N:e:RAL PLAN TO ADDR:e:SS WATER QUALITY "PRm='f2A2 CITY MANAGER CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: APPROVED 0 As Recommended 0 As Amended 0 Ordinance on 1" Reading 0 Ordinance on 2nd Reading 0 Implementing Resolution 0 Set Public Hearing For CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Approve and adopt the Negative Declaration, Environmental Review No. 2004-143. 2. Adopt a resolution approving General Plan Amendment No. 2004-04. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION On June 28, 2004, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve and adopt the Negative Declaration, Environmental Review No. 2004-143 and adopt a resolution approving General Plan Amendment No. 2004-04 by a vote of 7:0 to amend various sections of the General Plan to address water quality protection (Exhibit A) . DISCtJSSION On June 28, 2004, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to amend and update various sections of the City's General Plan to address water quality protection as required by Federal and State agencies. The overall goal of these requirements are to protect incoming water for beneficial uses such as municipal and domestic water supply, agriculture, recreation, and aquatic biological habitats. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Commission recommended approval due to the benefits is would provide to the community. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. ~f~~~ng Executive Director Planning & Building PG:rb pg\reports\gpa04-04.CC Agency 75D.1 REQUEST FOR Planning Commission Action ~ ~ PLANNING COMMISSION SECRETARY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: JUNE 28, 2004 TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-04 TO AMEND VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE GENERAL PLAN TO ADDRESS WATER QUALITY PROTECTION APPROVED 0 As Recommended 0 As Amended 0 Set Public Hearing For DENIED 0 Applicant's Request 0 Staff Recommendation CONTINUED TO Prepared by Pedro Guillén ~ f2ftct" ~~~ Planning Manager RECOMMENDED ACTION Recommend that the City Council: 1. Approve and adopt No. 2004-143. the Negative Declaration, Environmental Review 2. Adopt a resolution approving General Plan Amendment No. 2004-04. DISCUSSION Background As authorized by the Federal Clean Water Act, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program controls water pollution by regulating point sources that discharge pollutants into waters of the United States. The Clean Water Act requires NPDES permits for storm water discharge from municipal storm water systems. Additionally, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region, requires areawide NPDES permits for municipal storm water runoff. These permits contain limits on what can be discharged, monitoring and reporting requirements, and other provisions to ensure that discharges do not degrade water quality. In order to more effectively carry out the NPDES requirements, the principal permittee is the County of Orange and the incorporated cities are co-permittees. The permittees have jurisdiction and maintenance responsibility for an estimated 400 miles of storm drain systems within Orange County. The ultimate goal of this storm water management program is to protect incoming water for beneficial uses such as municipal and domestic water supply, agriculture, recreation, and aquatic biological habitats. EXHIBIT A 75D-2 General Plan Amendment June 28, 2004 Page 2 No. 2004-04 Project Description The Santa Ana Region permit requires the City of Santa Ana to minimize short and long-term runoff water impacts from new development and significant redevelopment to the greatest extent possible. The permit requires that the City's General plan be updated to reflect current watershed and storm water quality management policies. A review of the land development policies in the General Plan was performed in response to this requirement. The review evaluated the goals and policies of the following Elements: Public Safety; Conservation; Open Space, Parks and Recreation; Land Use; Circulation; Public Facilities; and Seismic Safety. Several obj ecti ves were considered in the update such as, but not limited to, maintenance of sensitive waters such as wetlands, major new development or significant redevelopment, proposed future infrastructure projects, appropriate measures for the reduction of storm water pollutants, and the establishment of development guidelines for areas susceptible to erosion. Attached are the new and amended policies of the General Plan Elements that address the concerns pertaining to NPDES compliance (Exhibit I). After carefully reviewing the Circulation, Public Facilities, and Seismic Safety Elements, it was determined that no changes were required to these elements. CEQA Compliance In accordance with the California Declaration Environmental Review No. project (Exhibit 2). Environmental Quality Act, Negative 2004-143 has been prepared for this ~~~ Pedro Guillén Assistant Planner I ~ ~a Senior Planner PG:JM pg\reports\gpa04-04.pC 75D-3 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS FOR NPDES Public Safety Element (page 19) Proposed Objective buffer zones and vegetation from the 3.0: Preserve wetlands, riparian corridors, establish reasonable limits on the clearing project site. and of Proposed Implementation Program: Limit disturbance of natural water bodies and drainage systems to conserve natural areas; protect slopes and channels; and minimize impacts from storm water and urban runoff on the biological integrity of natural drainage systems and water bodies. Conservation Element (page 22-23) Existing Policy & proposed addition: Encourage water conservation through design and facilities features of new developments through the use of water quality wetlands, biofiltration swales, watershed-scale retrofits, etc where such measures are likely to be effective and technically and economically feasible. Proposed policy: Establish development guidelines for areas particularly susceptible to erosion and sediment loss. Proposed policy: Provide for appropriate permanent measures to reduce storm water pollutant loads in storm water from the development site. Proposed policy: Minimize changes in hydrology and pollutant loading; require incorporation of control, including structural and non-structural and Best Management Practices to mitigate the projected increases in pollutant loads and flows. Proposed policy: Ensure that post-development runoff rates and velocities from a site have no significant adverse impact on downstream erosion and stream habitat. Proposed (Implementation) program addition: Maintain regional watershed and storm water management principles. compliance with Open Space, Parks and Recreation Element (page 25) Proposed Objective 4.0: Encourage the use of water quality wetlands, biofiltration swales, watershed-scale retrofits, etc. in existing and new open space, parks and recreation facilities where such measures are likely to be effective and technically and economically feasible. EXHIBIT 1 15D~kt Land Use Element Proposed Policy 5.12 (page 15): Provide appropriate permanent measures to reduce storm water pollutant loads in storm water from a development site. Proposed Implementation Action 5.5 (page 25): Ensure that post-development hydrology and storm water runoff rates and velocities from a site have no significant adverse impact on downstream erosion and stream habitat. Proposed Implementation Action 5.6 (page 26): Minimize the quantity of storm water directed to impermeable surfaces or system of conveyances (including roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, man-~~~ channels or storm drains) and maximize the percentage of permeable surfaces to allow more percolation of storm water into ground. Proposed Implementation Action 5.7 (page quality wetlands, biofiltration swales, where such measures are likely to be economically feasible. 26): Encourage the use of water watershed-scale retrofits, etc. effective and technically and Page 2 of 2 75D-5 MAYOR Miguel A. Pulido MAYOR PRO TEM Brett E. Franklin COUNCILMEMBERS Claudia C. Alvarez Lisa B isl Alberta D. Christy Mike Garcia Jose Solorio ~ ~ CITY OF SANTA ANA CITY MANAGER David N. Ream CITY ATTORNEY Joseph W. Fletcher CLERK OF THE COUNCIL Patricia E. Healy PLANNING & BUILDING AGENCY 20 Civic Center Plaza (M.20) P.O. BOX 1988 . Santa Ana. California 92702 www.santa-ana.org NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION This is to inform the general public that the City of Santa Ana proposes to adopt a Negative Declaration for the following project: Project Title: General Plan Amendment 2004-04 Project Description: The proposed project involves amendments to variòus sections of the General Plan to establish goals, objectives and policies to provide for the conservation and management of watersheds and to minimize adverse water quality impacts in the City of Santa Ana. Project Location: Citywide Project Number: ER 2004-14 Public Review Period: June 18,2004 to July 7,2004 Hearing Date: July 28, 2004 Hearing Location: City of Santa Ana Council Chambers 22 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92702 The 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, Califomia. Please submit any comments on the Negative Declaration to the City on or before July 7, 2004. Please direct your comments to Dan Bott: Environmental Coordinator, City of Santa Ana, P.O. Box 1988, M-20, Santa Ana, CA, 92702. If you have any questions or would like any additional information, please contact Pedro Guillen at (714) 667-2700. RHCB\lnotice\er EXHIBIT 2 7~~6 CS.606-2 MAYOR Miguel A. Pulido MAYOR PROTEM Brett E. Franklin COUNCILMEMBERS audia' C. Alvarez sa Bisl Alberta D. Christy Mike Garcia Jose Solorio ~ ~ CITY OF SANTA ANA CITY MANAGER David N. Ream CITY ATTORNEY Joseph W. Fletcher CLERK OF THE COUNCIL Patricia E. Healy PLANNING & BUILDING AGENCY 20 Civic Center Plaza (M-20) P.O. BOX 1988 . Santa Ana, California 92702 www.santa-ana.org Pursuant to the Procedures of the City of Santa Ana for implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Environmental Evaluator has completed an Initial Study for the project described below: Project Number: ER 2004-14 Applicant: City of Santa Ana, 20 Civic Center plaza, Santa Ana, CA Project Location I Address: Citywide Project Title I Description: General Plan Amendment 2004-04/ The proposed project involves amendments to various sections of the General Plan to establish goals, objectives and policies to provide for the conservation and management of watersheds and to minimize adverse water quality impacts in the City of Santa Ana. And does hereby find: That the proposed project cannot, or will not, have a significant effect on the environment. Negative Declaration status is therefore granted for this project. No mitigation measures are required for the proposed project. Signature: ~~ Environmental Coordinator Daœ ~7~ This determination is not final until adopted by the decision-making body or administrative official, and a Notice of Determination is filed. 7gfj~~1 C$.606-Z INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION ER-2004-14 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2004-04 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project involves amendments to various sections of the General Plan to establish goals, objectives and policies to provide for the conservation and management of watersheds and to minimize adverse water quality impacts in the City of Santa Ana. SETTING The Federal Clean Water Act requires National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits for storm water discharge from municipal storm and sewer systems. Uncontrolled discharges from storm and sewer systems are considered significant contributors to adverse water quality impacts to receiving waters. The purpose of the NPDES permit program is to control water pollution by regulating point sources that discharge pollutants into waters. The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region, which includes the County of Orange, the Orange County Flood Control District and the majority of the incorporated cities in Orange County, including Santa Ana, requires area wide NPDES permits for municipal storm water runoff. The permit contains limits on what can be discharged, monitoring and reporting requirements and other provisions to ensure that discharges do not result in adverse water quality impacts and associated public health risks. The principal permittee of the NPDES Permit is the County of Orange and the incorporated cities are co-permittees. The permittees have jurisdiction and maintenance responsibility for an estimated 400 miles of storm drain systems within Orange County. The ultimate goal of this storm water management program is to protect the beneficial uses of the receiving waters, such as municipal and domestic water supply, agriculture, recreation waters and preservations of biological habitats and endangered species. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Santa Ana Region Permit requires the City of Santa Ana to minimize short and long-term water quality impacts on receiving waters to the greatest extent possible. The Countywide NPDES permit requires that the City's General Plan be reviewed and updated as necessary to ensure the incorporation of watershed management policies storm water quality management policies and practices. In response to this requirement a series of goals, 1 15DO~8 objectives and policies have been proposed in the Public Safety Element, Conservation Element, Open Space Element, Parks and Recreation Element, Land Use Element, Circulation Element, Public Facilities Element, and Seismic Safety Element. Exhibit 1 reflects the existing, new and amended policies to the General Plan Elements that address the concerns identified by the Santa Ana Region permit for NPDES compliance. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS The following is an environmental analysis on the proposed General Plan Amendments based on the City of Santa Ana's CEQA Environmental Checklist. The analysis incorporates by reference information from the City of Santa Ana General Plan Land Use Element EIR. For each environmental issue, the analysis identifies the level of impact that would be anticipated to occur from approval of the proposed General Plan Amendments. Future development projects proposed under the amended General plan Amendments would be subject to City reviews to determine potential impacts to the environment as well as consistency with the amended General Plan Elements. 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? c. Substantially degrade the existing visual quality of the site and its surroundings? character or D. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? No Impact The City of Santa Ana Urban Design Element and Scenic Corridors Element identifies and provides policies for the conservation of aesthetic resources in the City of Santa Ana. Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not result in adverse impacts to any scenic vista or other aesthetic resources in the City, in that the proposed amendments would establish policies that provide for the conservation of aesthetic resources, such as natural drainages, wetlands and riparian corridors. Additionally, approval of the proposed project not 2 t~[j~~ result in the development of any structures or involve any activities that would disturb existing aesthetic resources, introduce substantial amounts of light and glare, substantially degrade the visual character of the City or be in conflict with policies in the Urban Design Element and Scenic Corridors Element. II. AGRICULTURE A. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Statewide Importance to non-agriculture use? Farmland of B. Conflict with existing Williamson Contract? zoning for agriculture use or a 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 California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, the City of Santa Ana contains a limited amount of Unique Farmlands, Prime Farmlands or Farmlands of Statewide Importance. However, there are no existing Williamson Contracts in the City. A significant impact to agriculture resources would occur when a project or activity results in the loss of sensitive farmlands. Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not involve any activities that would cause or facilitate the loss of any agricultural resources. Therefore, approval of the proposed amendments would not result in significant impacts to agriculture resources. III. AIR QUALITY A. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of applicable Air Quality Attainment Plan or Congestion Management Plan? No Impact The City of Santa Ana is included within the South Coast Air Quality Management District 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 the primary planning document to monitor if air quality standards and objectives are 3 7!)tj~~O being achieved in the South Coast Air Basin. The air quality objectives in the AQMP are based upon growth projections provided in regional planning programs and local general plans. A project could be in conflict with the AQMP if it results in population and growth impacts beyond those projected in regional planning programs and/or local general plans. Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not impact the population and traffic growth projections established in the City's General Plan and therefore would not be in conflict with the regional growth projections and air quality objectives established in the South Coast Air Quality Management Plan. D. Expose Sensitive concentrations? receptors to substantial pollutant B. Violate any stationary source contribute to an existing violation? air quality or proposed standard or air quali ty No Impact As mentioned previously, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) regulates air quality in the South Coast Air Basin. Pollutants for which ambient standards have been set are referred to as criteria pollutants. Criteria pollutants include: Ozone, Carbon Monoxide, Nitrogen Dioxide, Sulfur Dioxide and Particulate Matter. The South Coast Air Basin is currently a non-attainment area for Carbon Monoxide, Ozone, Particulate Matter and Nitrogen Dioxide. The SCAQMD considers an air quality impact to be significant if it exceeds the thresholds identified below. EMISSION THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Project Construction Tons/ Operations Pollutant Pounds/Day Quarter Pounds/Day Carbon Monoxide 550 24.75 550 Reactive Organic Compounds 75 2.5 55 Nitrogen Oxides 100 2.5 55 Particulate Matter 150 6.75 150 4 7511~~fH Additionally, approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not directly result in any long-term air quality impacts in that the approval of the proposed amendments would not generate additional mobile source or stationary source long-term emissions in the City that would exceed the threshold for criteria pollutants established by the South Coast Management District. Additionally, the proposed general plan element amendments would not involve in any construction activities that would emit short-term construction related emissions. Therefore, approval of the proposed amendments would not result in significant long-term or short-term air quality impacts. 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? No Impact Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not be in conflict with the City's General Plan growth projections and the local growth forecasts for the Orange County sub region and the regional emissions budget developed by the Southern California Association of Governments for the 1999 Air Quality Management Plan. The Southern California Association of Governments has determined that the air pollution impacts of any project or activity that conforms to local growth forecasts would be consistent with this forecast and the regional air quality impacts would be adequately mitigated by the Air Quality Management Plan to a level considered less than significant. Therefore, approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not result in significant cumulative air quality impacts. E. Create objectionable odors of people? affecting a substantial number No Impact Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not create any objectionable odors, in that the approval of the proposed amendments would not directly result in any activities that would emit objectionable odors. 5 7 ßl)7:142 IV. A. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 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? B. 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? C. Adversely impact federally protected wetlands either individually or in combination with the known or probable impacts of other activities through direct removal, filling hydrological interruption, or other means? D. Conflict wi th any local policies or ordinances biological resources, such as tree preservation ordinance? protecting policy or No Impact The City of Santa Ana is a predominately built out and is highly urbanized City. According to the California Department Fish and Game Natural Diversity Data Base, there is a very limited amount of biological resources in Santa Ana. Biological resources are limited to portions of Santiago Creek and Centennial Park. A potentially significant impact to biological resources would occur when a project or activity disturbs or displaces sensitive biological resources. The proposed general plan amendments would establish goals, objectives and policies that provide for the conservation of biological resources and limits disturbances to natural water bodies and drainage systems. Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not directly result in any adverse impacts to biological resources in that approval of the proposed amendments would not facilitate the development of any land uses in any sensitive habitats or involve any activities that would disturb or displace any sensitive biological resources. 6 tSt)f':13 V. CULTURAL RESOURCES A. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? B. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? c. Directly or indirectly disturb or destroy a unique paleontogical resource or site? D. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of for.mal cemeteries. No Impac t According to the National Register of Historical Resources, the City of Santa Ana Local Register of Historical Resources and the City of Santa Ana General Plan Land Use Element EIR, Santa Ana contains a high number of known cultural resources. Additionally, according to the General Plan Land Use Element EIR, Santa Ana also has a high probability for the discovery of unknown cultural resources. A potentially significant impact to cultural resources can occur when a project or activity modifies, disturbs or displaces sensitive cultural resources. Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not result in impacts to any known or unknown cultural resources, in that the approval of the proposed amendments would not facilitate the development of any land uses or involve any activities that would disturb or displace known or unknown cultural resources. Therefore, approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not result in significant impacts to cultural resources. VI. GEOLOGY/SOILS A-I. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? No Impact According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR there are no active earthquake faults, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Zones or landslides within the City. Therefore, approval of the 7 7StJ~14 proposed general plan element amendments would not increase the risks for ground rupture impacts or landslide impacts. A-2. Strong Seismic Ground shaking? A-3. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? No Impact The City of Santa Ana 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 City. The Newport/rnglewood Fault located approximately 7 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. Along the Newport/rnglewood Fault an earthquake on the magnitude of 6.9 could potentially occur. A seismic event of this scale could result in significant damage to the City. Additionally, according to the General Plan Land Use Element ErR, the potential for liquefaction hazards in the City ranges from very low to very high. However, the seismic risks in Santa Ana are not considered significantly different from other areas in the southern California region. Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not increase the risk for seismic shaking impacts or liquefaction impacts, in that the proposed amendments would not involve the construction of new structures that would increase the risk for seismic shaking impacts or seismically induced liquefaction impacts. A-4. Landslides No Impact According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element ErR there are no landslides within the City. Therefore, approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not increase the risks for landslide impacts. B. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? No Impact Approval increase impacts, of the proposed general plan amendments would not the potential for soil erosion or sedimentation in that approval of the proposed amendments would not 8 150~S involve any construction activities that would disturb or uncover existing soils. 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, there are no known unique geologic features in the City. Therefore, approval of the proposed amendments would not result in the loss of any unique geologic features. D. E. In 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? Where sewers are not available for the disposal wastewater is the soil capable of supporting the use septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems? of of No Impact According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, Santa Ana contains a wide variety of soil types and associated geotecnical constraints. Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not involve the development of land uses or involve the construction of any structures that would be subject to geotechnical constraints. Approval of the project would not involve the use of alternative wastewater disposal that would be subject to geotechnical constraints. VII. HAZARDS/HAZARDOUS MATERIALS A. B. 9 Create a significant environment through the of hazardous materials? hazard to the routine transport, public use or or the disposal Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous hazardous materials, substance or waste within mile of an existing or proposed school? or acutely one-quarter 7gfj~16 C. Be 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 general plan element amendments would not directly result in the creation of any significant hazards to the public, in that the approval of the proposed amendments would not involve any activities that would involve the handling, regulation, storage or transportation of hazardous materials. D. For a project located within an airport land use plan or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles where a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact The City of Santa Ana is located approximately one mile northwest of John Wayne Airport and is included in the Planning Area of the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport. According to the Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport, there are no accident potential zones in Santa Ana. However, portions of the City are in the Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) Notification Area. Development proj ects proposed in the FAA Notification Area are required to coordinate with the Airport Land Use Commission. The proposed general plan amendments would not involve any activities within a FAA Notification Area that would require coordination with the Airport Land Use Commission and would not result in safety hazards to people residing in or working in the City. VIII. HYDROLOGY/WATER QUALITY A. E. Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? I. Result in an increase in pollutant discharges to receiving waters? 10 t5Do~f7 N. Tributary to an already impaired water body, as the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list. If so, result in an increase in any pollutant of which already impaired? listed on can it the body is R. Cause or contribute to an exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses? Less Than Significant Impact The City of Santa Ana is included within four watersheds; San Diego Creek, Santa Ana River, Talbert and Westminster. Each of these watershed areas are under the jurisdiction of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board and subject to the objectives, water quality standards and Best Management Practice requirements established in the Santa Ana River Basin Plan and Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan. The City of Santa Ana does not contain any impaired water bodies, as defined by Section 303 of the Clean Water Act. However, the City does contain several drainage facilities convey surface water runoff into bodies of water that are classified as impaired. that The proposed general plan amendments would establish goals, objectives and policies to provide for the conservation and protection of watersheds and to minimize water quality impacts in the City. Additionally, approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not result in any adverse water quality impacts, in that the approval of the proposed amendments would not result in any activities that would generate pollutants that would adversely impact water quality. 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. Q. Have a potentially significant adverse impact on groundwater quality? No Impact The City of Santa Ana receives 66% of its water from underground water supplies. The underground water basin in the City ranges from -50-feet to +40-feet above sea level. Presently, the City 11 7 5tJ~.}11t pumps underground water from water wells pump ground water remaining seven water wells City's distribution system. 21 water wells. Fourteen of the into small surface reservoirs. The pump underground water into the Approval of the proposed general plan amendments would not impact underground supplies, in that the proposed amendments would not involve any activities that would encroach into the underground water basin, impact the quality of underground water supplies or prevent the recharge of underground water supplies. C. 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? D. Create or contribute runoff water which, would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stor.m water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted run-off? L. Result in increased impervious surfaces and associated runoff? M. Create a significant adverse environmental impact to drainage patterns due to changes in runoff flow rates or volumes. No Impac t The City of Santa Ana has a Master Plan of Drainage to guide the construction of drainage facilities in the City. The existing drainage facilities in the City include a series of underground storm drain systems, open storm drain systems, catch basins and natural drainages. A significant drainage impact can occur when existing rates of surface water runoff are increased and existing drainage facilities are unable to accommodate the additional rates of runoff. Existing rates of surface water runoff can increase through the introduction of additional amounts of impervious surfaces, or through changes to existing drainage patterns. Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not increase existing rates of surface water in the City, in that the proposed amendments would not introduce additional amounts of impervious surfaces into the City or result in changes to existing drainage patterns. Therefore, the approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not result in significant drainage impacts. 12 7l)t):1t) F. Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as mapped federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate or other flood hazard delineation map? on a Map G. Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as mapped federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate or other flood hazard delineation map? on a Map H. Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? 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 flood hazards in the City are depicted on Flood Insurance Rate Maps. The Flood Rate Insurance Maps indicate that portions of the City are within IOO-year flood hazard areas. Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not facilitate development within 10O-year flood hazard areas or increase flood hazards in the City. J. Result in significant alteration of receiving water quality during or following construction. K. Could the proposed project result in increased erosion downstream? No 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. The proposed general plan amendments would establish policies to minimize erosion and sedimentation impacts. Additionally, approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not result in erosion impacts, in that the proposed amendments would not involve any construction activities that would disturb or uncover soils to facilitate erosion impacts. 13 7~tj~~fi o. Tributary to other environmentally sensitive areas? If so, can it exacerbate already existing sensitive conditions? P. Have a potentially significant environmental impact or surface water quality to either marine, fresh or wetland waters? S. Impact aquatic, wetland or riparian habitat? Less Than Significant Impact According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, there are no sensitive marine waters, fresh waters or wetlands in the City. However, the City does contain several drainage systems that convey drainage flows to sensitive marine resources. Pollutants conveyed through these drainage systems could adversely impact sensitive marine resources. Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not result in any activities that would discharge pollutants into sensitive downstream marine resources. The proposed general plan amendments would establish goals, objectives and policies to provide for the conversation and protection of watersheds and to minimize water quality impacts in the City, including water quality impacts to downstream marine resources. Additionally, approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not result in any adverse water quality impacts, in that the approval of the proposed amendments would not result in any activities that would generate pollutants that would adversely impact water quality. IX. LAND USE/PLANNING A. Physically divide an established community? No Impact The proposed general plan element any activities or the development physically divide any community. amendments would not result in of any land uses that would 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 14 75ð~~~1 The proposed general plan amendments have been established to comply to with the County's NPDES permit requirements to review and update the general plan to ensure the incorporation of policies that provide for the conservation and protection of watersheds and to minimize adverse water quality impacts. The proposed general plan amendments would not be in conflict with any regional and local planning programs and policies. Conflict with any natural cOIlUllunity No Impact C. applicable habitat conservation plan or plan? According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, there are no habitat conservation plans or natural community plans in Santa Ana. Therefore, approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not impact any conservation plans or natural community plans. X. MINERAL RESOURCES A. 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 General Plan Land Use Element EIR, there are no locally important mineral resource sites in Santa Ana. Therefore, approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not impact any locally important mineral resources. XI. NOISE A. Exposure of persons excess of standards noise ordinance, or to or generation of noise levels in established in local general plan or applicable standards of other agencies. c. A substantial per.manent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. E. For a project located within an airport where such a plan has not been adopted, a public airport or public use airport, land use plan or within two miles of would the project 15 7 5'D1Z2~ expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact The proposed general plan amendment would not result in any activities that would increase long-term noise levels in the City. Nor would the proposed general plan amendments facilitate development within areas impacted by aircraft noise. Approval and implementation of the proposed project would not expose people residing in or working in the City to excessive noise levels. D. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without project. B. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? No Impact Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not result in any short-term construction noise impacts or groundborne vibration impacts, in that the approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not involve any activities that would emit short-term noise or vibration impacts. XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING A. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly through extension of roads or other infrastructure. No Impact Direct growth inducing impacts are generally associated with aspects of a project that could remove obstacles to population growth or other growth such as a major expansion of a wastewater treatment plant or upgrading of regional master plan infrastructure and facilities that would facilitate new development. Indirect or secondary growth inducing impacts consists of growth inducted in the region by the demand for additional housing as a result of employment generation, and demand for goods and services associated with population 16 15¡j'::~3 increases caused by, or attracted to, an area as a result of new development. Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not induce substantial growth in the City, in that the proposed amendments would not involve the construction of any new infrastructure systems or expansion of existing infrastructure systems that would facilitate growth, or involve the development of any land uses that would create additional demands for new housing and public services. Additionally, the proposed general plan element amendments would not remove any obstacles that would result in increased growth in the City. 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? No Impact Based on population estimates from the California Department of Finance, there were 347,237 residents in the City of Santa Ana in 2003. Presently, the City has a total of 74, 912 dwelling units with an average household size of 4.65 persons. The Orange County 2004 projections forecast that by 2005, Santa Ana would have a population of 350,625 and a total of 75,671 dwelling units. By 2010 the City's populations is projected to increase to 359,823 with a total of 76,342 dwelling units. Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not establish any policies that would displace existing housing or prohibit the future development of housing in the City. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES Fire Protection, Police Protection: No Impact The City of Santa Ana provides fire protection and police protection services for residents of the City. A significant impact to fire protection and police protection services would occur when a project or activity increases the demand for services beyond the ability of the fire department or the police department to provide an adequate level of service or involve the construction of new facilities that could result in significant impacts to the environment. Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not result in the 17 7 58.l2~1 development of any land uses or result in any activities that would increase the demand for fire protection and police protection services, over the current level of demand in the City. Therefore, no significant impacts would occur to fire department and police department services. Schools: No Impact Educational services for Santa Ana residents are provided by the Santa Ana Unified School District, Garden Grove Unified School District, Tustin Unified School District, Orange Unified School District and the Rancho Santiago Community College District. A significant impact to school services would occur when a project or activity increase the demand for school services beyond the ability of existing school facilities to provide an adequate level of service and requires the construction of new school facilities that could result in significant impacts to the environment. Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not result in the development of any land uses or result in any activities that would increase the demand for school facilities, over the current level of demand in the City. Therefore, no significant impacts would occur to the school facilities in the City. Parks, Other Public Facilities: No Impact The City of Santa Ana presently operates 35 facilities within its parks and recreation network, along with several public school grounds. The park and recreation facilities within the City of Santa Ana include 342.5 acres of parklands, which is equivalent to approximately one acre per 1,000 residents. According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, the City's current goal for parkland is 2.0 acres per 1,000 residents. Based on the Cities current parkland goal and existing parkland to population ratio, additional parkland is needed to meet the park needs of the community. A significant impact to park services would occur when a project or activity substantially increases the demand for additional park facilities. Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not result in the development of any land uses or result in any activities that would increase the demand for park facilities or services, over the current level of demand in the City. Therefore, no significant impacts would occur to park facilities in the City. 18 ~Ö~5 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 As mentioned above, additional parkland would be needed in Santa Ana to meet current and future park and recreation needs of the community. Without additional parkland and recreational facilities provided, residents would continue to use existing recreational facilities in the City. A significant impact to recreational facilities would occur when a project or activity increases the demand for additional recreational facilities beyond the ability of the City to provide adequate recreational facilities or require the construction of new recreation facilities that could potentially impact the environment. Approval of the proposed general plan amendments would not result in the development of any land uses or result in any activities that would increase the demand for recreation facilities or services, over the current level of demand in the City. Therefore, no significant impacts would occur to recreational facilities in the City. 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? No Impact The City of Santa Ana circulation system consists of a series of local streets, arterials and major regional highways. A significant impact to the circulation system would occur when the traffic generated from a project reduces the level of 19 15"~~~ service of a roadway or intersection to a level considered not acceptable. Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not result in the generation of additional amounts of traffic onto the City's circulation system, therefore approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not reduce the level of service of any roadway or intersection in the City. D. Substantially increase hazards to a design feature E. Result in inadequate emergency access G. Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation No Impact Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not involve any activities that would increase hazards to motorists, or provide constraints for adequate emergency access or establish any policies that would be in conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation. F. Result in inadequate parking capacity No Impact Approval of the proposed general plan amendments would not result in the development of any land uses or result in any activities that would increase the demand for parking in the City. Therefore, approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not result in adverse parking impacts. C. Result in a change in either an increase in location that results air traffic patterns, including traffic levels or a change in in substantial safety risks? No Impact Approval of the proposed general plan result in the development of any land activities that would impact existing increase safety risks. amendments would not uses or result in any air traffic patterns or 20 'M1~~7 XVI. UTILITIES 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? A. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? 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 deteDmination 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 City of Santa Ana provides water service and wastewater service in Santa Ana. Additionally, the Orange County Sanitation District operates several trunk lines in the City. Wastewater generated from the City is treated at Orange County Sanitation District Reclamation Plant No.1 in the City of Fountain Valley. The existing and future water and wastewater demands and supplies for Santa Ana are provided in the City's Urban Water Management Plan. The projected water and wastewater demands are based on build out of land uses in the General Plan. A potentially significant impact to water and wastewater service would occur when a development project or an activity increases the demand for water service and wastewater service beyond the water and wastewater projections in a City's Urban Water Management Plan or when a project or activity requires the development of new water and wastewater distribution and treatment facilities and potentially significant impacts to the environment could occur. Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not result in the development of land uses or result in activities that would increase demand for water and wastewater beyond the water and wastewater projections established in the City's Urban Water Management Plan or require the construction of new distribution system or treatment facilities. 21 15~~8 B. 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? No Impact Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not increase existing rates of surface water runoff or change existing drainage patterns that would require the construction of new drainage facilities. F. Is the project served permitted capacity to disposal needs? by a landfill with sufficient accommodate the project's solid waste G. Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? No Impact The City of Santa Ana through a private company provides solid waste collection service in the City. Solid waste is transported to transfer stations before ultimately being disposed of at 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 that all cities and counties in California divert fifty percent of solid waste generated from landfill disposal. To comply with AB 939, the City of Santa Ana has prepared a Source Reduction and Recycling Element that describes various waste reduction and recycling programs to reduce the City's demand for solid waste disposal in landfills. Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not result in the development of any land uses or result in activities that would increase the demand of solid waste disposal. Nor would the proposed amendments be in conflict with the solid waste reduction programs in the City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element. 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 22 15D~29 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. No Impact The proposed general plan element amendments would establish goals, objectives and policies to provide for the conservation of watersheds and associated natural resources and to adverse minimize water quality impacts in the City. Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not result in the development of land uses or result in activities that would adversely impact sensitive wildlife and plant species or sensitive cultural resources. B. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? No Impact Approval of the proposed general plan element amendments would not result in any individually limited adverse impacts to the environment and therefore would not result in any cumulative impacts to the environment as well. c. Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly? No Impact The proposed general plan element amendments would establish goals, objectives and policies to provide for the conservation of watersheds and associated natural resources and to minimize water quality impacts in the City. Approval of the proposed amendments would not result in substantial adverse effects to human beings. XVIII DETERMINATION Based upon the evidence in light of the whole record documented in the above environmental evaluation and cited references, I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment and a Negative Declaration has been prepared. 23 P7~t1~30 XVIV REFERENCES City of Santa Ana General Plan, September 1982 Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan Land Use Element, August 1997 City of Santa Ana Zoning Ordinance, December 1998 South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook, 1993 California Environmental Quality Act Statues and Guidelines, January 1999 Airport Environs Land Use Plan for Orange County, December 2002 California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, 1996 California Department Fish and Game Natural Diversity Data Base, 1998 City of Santa Ana Local Register of Historical Properties, 2004 City of Santa Ana Urban Water Management Plan, 2000 Flood Rate Insurance Maps City of Santa Ana Santa Ana River Basin Plan Orange County Drainage Management Plan XX. PREPARERS Dan Bott, City of Santa Ana Environmental Coordinator 24 iStj~~1 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS FOR NPDES Amendment recommendations are noted in italic below: Public Safety Element (page 19) Existing Objective: Effectively manage risks earthquakes, floods, fires and hazardous materials. associated with Proposed Objective: zones and establish the project site". UPreserve wetlands, riparian corridors, and buffer reasonable limits on the clearing of vegetation from Proposed Implementation Policy: uLimi t disturbance of natural water bodies and drainage systems to conserve natural areas; protect slopes and channels; and minimize impacts from storm water and urban runoff on the biological integrity of natural drainage systems and water bodies". Existing Implementation Program that policy: Cooperate in the completion River channel and Santiago Creek. relates to proposed objective and of improvements to the Santa Ana Conservation Element (page 22-23) Existing Goal: resources. Preserve, maintain and properly use natural and cultural Existing Objective: Integrate natural and cultural resources protection measures into land use and development activities. Existing Policy & proposed addition: Encourage water conservation through design and facilities features of new developments...add: through U the use of water quality wetlands, biofiltration swales, watershed- scale retrofits, etc, where such measures are likely to be effective and technically and economically feasible". Proposed policy: uEstablish development guidelines for areas particularly susceptible to erosion and sediment loss". Proposed policy: uProvide for appropriate permanent measures to reduce storm water pollutant loads in storm water from the development si te". Proposed policy: "Minimize changes in hydrology and pollutant loading; require incorporation of control, including structural and non-structural and Best Management Practices to mi tigate the projected increases in pollutant loads and flows". EXHIBIT 1 15D~~2 Proposed Policy 5.14: "Minimize the quantity of storm water directed to impermeable surfaces and MS4 conveyance or system of conveyances {including roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch basins, urbs, gutters, di tches, man-mad channels or storm drains} and maximize the percentage of permeable surfaces to allow more percolation of storm water into ground". Proposed Policy 5.15: "Encourage the use of wa ter quali ty wetlands, biofiltration swales, watershed-scale retrofits, etc. where such measures are likely to be effective and technically and economically feasible". Existing Implementation action that relates to proposed policies: Protect sensitive land uses through environmental assessment and project review. 'Ï"SO'!33 Proposed policy: veloci ties from a erosion and stream "Ensure that post-development runoff site have no significant adverse impact on habi tat". rates and downstream Existing (Implementation) Programs that relate to proposed policies above: (1) Incorporate water conservation standards into the zoning ordinance and building permit process. (2) Require preservation of natural and cultural resources as a condition of building permit approvals. (3) Participate in greenbelt and channel improvement plans for the Santa Ana River and Santiago Creek, which aim to preserve natural vegetation. Proposed (Implementation) program addition: "Maintain regional watershed and storm water management principles". compliance wi th Open Space, Parks and Recreation Element (page 25) Existing Goal: Utilize open spaces as a means of reinforcing goals set forth for conservation of natural resources. Proposed Objective: "Encourage the use of water quality wetlands, biofiltration swales, watershed-scale retrofits, etc" in existing and new open space, parks and recreation facili ties "where such measures are likely to be effective and technically and economically feasible". Existing & proposed addition to Implementation Policy: Encourage development of reservoirs, flood control channel and other public lands for recreational uses..Add: "and implement opportuni ties for natural resource conservation". Existing Implementation Program that relates to proposed objective and policy change: Promote adoption of reservoir; flood channel and other public open space improvement plans, which provide for multiple uses of such resources. Land Use Element Existing Goal 5.0: Ensure that the impacts of development are mitigated. Proposed Policy 5.12: "Provide appropria te permanent measures to reduce storm water pollutant loads in storm water from a development si te". Proposed Policy 5.13: "Ensure that post-development" hydrology and storm water "runoff rates and velocities from a site have no significant adverse impact on downstream erosion and stream habi tat". 7'5"-OS~ "fA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance PLANNING DIVISION I. Project Title: General Plan Amendment 2004-04 II. Project Numbers: ER 2004-14 III. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Santa Ana Planning Division P.O. Box 1988 (M-20) Santa Ana, CA 92702 IV. V. Environmental Coordinator and Phone Number: Dan Bott (714) 667-2719 Project Location: Citywide Environmental Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation, I find that: A.X The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. B.D 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. 0 The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. D.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. 0 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. 0 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 ~_oo_._- ASUBSEQUE::"~:':OO prep'~ Signatu~y\ "12 ...ù...--- Date Printed ~-. -.12151 \ dblEnv Form CEOA Chkl5t 750°:35 Page 1 of 1 onfA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: I. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impacf' answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impacf' 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 Impacf' answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 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. "Potentially Significant Impacf' is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impacf' entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. IV. "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impacf' to a "Less than Significant Impacf'. The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues & Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact I. Aesthetics - Would the project: A. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 0 0 ~ B. Damage scenic resources, including but not limited 0 0 0 Jlí 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? 0 0 0 D. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views 0 0 ~ in the area? 0 dblEnv Fonn CEQA Chklst Page 1 of 12 ATTACHMENT B 7ii~S6 onfA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact II. Agricultural Resources - In detennining 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 fannland. Would the project: A. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Fannland 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. ) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ç( þ( A III. Air Quality - Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following detenninations. Would the project: 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? A. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of applicable Air Quality Attainment Plan or Congestion Management Plan? 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 exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? D. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? dblEnv Form CEOA Chklst ATTACHMENT B 75t)L'37 0 D D D 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ft( ~ Page 2 of 12 ~~fA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources E. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? IV. Biological Resources - Would the project: A. 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? B. 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? C. Adversely impact federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh. vemal 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? D. Conflict with any local policies protecting biological resources, preservation policy or ordinance? or ordinances such as tree V. Cultural Resources - Would the project: A. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? B. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resource pursuant to define Section 15064.5? C. Directly or indirectly disturb or destroy a unique paleontogical resource or site? dblEnv Fonn CEQA Chklst A IT ACHMENT B 7~~~8 Potentially Significant Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Less Than Significant Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No Impact # ~ ~ Ji1 ~ ~ ft( 9t Page 3 of 12 Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources 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 an known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent 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. Landslides? 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. Where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater, is the soil capable of supporting the use of septic tanks or altemative wastewater disposal systems? db\Env Form CEOA Chklst ATTACHMENT B 1SD~39 Potentially Significant Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Less Than Significant Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No Impact ~ 0 ~ Jð( ~ ~ % ;r ~ JÌ{ Page 4 of 12 "fA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Infonnatlon Sources 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. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substance or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? c. Be 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? D. For a 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? 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)? dblEnv Form CECA Chklst ATTACHMENT B 1'50".1:40 Potentially Significant Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated 0 0 0 0 0 0 Less Than Significant Impact 0 0 0 0 J¥ 0 No Impact % ~ ttt ftf 0 ~ Page 5 of 12 Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources C. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off- site? D. 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? E. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 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? H. 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? I. Result in an increase in pollutant discharges to receiving waters? Consider water quality parameters such as temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity and other typical storm water pollutants (e.g. heavy metals, pathogens, petroleum derivatives, synthetic organics, sediment, nutrients, oxygen-demanding substances, and trash) J. Result in significant alteration of receiving water quality during or following construction? K. Could the proposed project result in increased erosion downstream? L. Result in increased impervious surfaces and associated increased runoff? dblEnv Fonn CEOA Chklst ATTACHMENT B rSÐ'L41 Potentially Significant Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 Less Than Significant Impact 0 0 ft( 0 D 0 ~ 0 0 0 No Impact ~ ,Ø( 0 ß( ~ ~ 0 Ji þ;( ~ Page 6 of 12 ""fA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance M. Create a significant adverse environmental impact to drainage pattems due to changes in runoff flow rates or volumes? N. Tributary to an already impaired water body, as listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list: If so, can it result in an increase in any pollutant of which the water body is already impaired? o. Tributary to other environmentally sensitive areas? If so, can it exacerbate already existing sensitive conditions? P. Have a potentially significant environmental impact on surface water quality to either marine, fresh, or wetland waters? Q. Have a potentially significant adverse impact on groundwater quality? R. Cause or contribute to an exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses? s. Impact aquatic, wetland, or riparian habitat? IX. Land Use and Planning- Would the project: A. Physically divide an established community? B. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? C. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? X. Mineral Resources - Would the project: A. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? ISSUGS & Supporting Information SourcGs dblEnv Form CECA Chklst ATTACHMENT B ~61)J;42 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 Potentially Significant Impact D 0 0 D D D 0 D 0 0 0 Potentially Significant Unless 0 ~ ß( )?( 0 x A 0 ~ 0 0 Less Than Significant Impact ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 ]¿( D A ~ No Impact Page 7 of 12 "fA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance 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 groundbome vibration or groundbome 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? 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 necessitating the construction of housing elsewhere? of people. replaceme~t Issues & Supporting Information Sources dblEnv Form CEQA Chklsl ATTACHMENT B 7'5D~43 D D D D 0 0 D 0 Potentially Significant Impact Mitigation Incorporated D 0 0 D D D D D Potentially Significant Unless D 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 Less Than Significant Impact ~ )f ,cl( A Þ\ ø )( t{ No Impact Page 8 of 12 "fA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance 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: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? XIV. Recreation A. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? B. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XV. Transportation I Traffic A. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (Le. result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ration on roads, or congestion at intersections?) Issues & Supporting Information Sources dblEnv Form CEOA Chklst ATTACHMENT B ¥6Ð'-'44 0 0 D 0 D 0 0 0 0 Potentially Significant Impact Mitigation Incorporated 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Potentially Significant Unless D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D Less Than Significant Impact D )( Æ{ )( M ~ pq: tr A: No Impact Page 9 of 12 Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance 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 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)? 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 provider's existing commitments? Issues & Supporting Information Sources dblEnv Form CEQA Chklst ATTACHMENT B 76Ðf.'145 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Potentially Significant Impact MItigation Incorporated 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Potentially Significant Unless 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Less Than Significant Impact ~ )q þ( % )( J5( þ( )( ~ 7.( ~ No Impact Page 10 of 12 ""fA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance F. Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's sold waste disposal needs? G. Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? XVII. Mandatory Findings of Significance A. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? 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? db\Env Form CEOA Chldst ATTACHMENT B '~6 Mitigation Incorporated 0 ~ 0 0 0 þ( 0 0 0 JX{ 0 0 0 j( D D D ~ D D Page 11 of 12 KO - 7/13/04 RESOLUTION NO. 2004-057 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-04, AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA PUBLIC SAFETY; CONSERVATION; OPEN SPACE, PARKS AND RECREATION; AND LAND USE ELEMENTS OF THE GENERAL PLAN BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. General Plan Amendment No. 2003-04 has been filed to amend various sections of the City of Santa Ana Public Safety; Conservation; Open Space, Parks and Recreation; and Land Use Elements of the General Plan to ensure watershed and storm water quality and quantity management for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System citywide. 1. The Santa Ana Region permit requires the City of Santa Ana to minimize short and long-term runoff water impacts from new development and significant redevelopment to the greatest extent possible. The Santa Ana Region permit requires that the City's General Plan be updated to reflect current watershed and storm water quality management policies. 2. B. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana held a duly noticed public hearing on June 28, 2004, on General Plan Amendment No. 2004- 04, and recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution approving General Plan Amendment No. 2004-04. C. General Plan Amendment No. 2004-04 came before the City Council of the City of Santa Ana for a duly noticed public hearing on July 19, 2004. These amendments to the City of Santa Ana Public Safety; Conservation; Open Space, Parks and Recreation; and Land Use Elements of the General Plan are consistent with the balance of the General Plan, and the various elements thereof. D. Section 2. The City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the initial study and the negative declaration prepared with respect to this 75D-47 Resolution No. 2004-xx Page 1 of 3 Project. The City Council has, as a result of its consideration and the evidence presented at the hearings on this matter, determined that, as required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the State CEQA Guidelines, a Negative Declaration adequately addresses the expected environmental impacts of this Project. On the basis of this review, the City Council finds that there is no evidence from which it can be fairly argued that the Project will have a significant adverse effect on the environment. The City Council hereby certifies and approves Negative Declaration No. 2004-143 and directs that the Notice of Determination be prepared and filed with the County Clerk of the County of Orange in the manner required by law. Pursuant to Title XIV, California Code of Regulations ("CCRU) § 735.5(c)(1), the City Council has determined that, after considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have the potential for any adverse effect on wildlife resources or the ecological habitat upon which wildlife resources depend. The proposed project exists in an urban environment characterized by paved concrete, roadways, surrounding buildings and human activity. Therefore, pursuant to Fish and Game Code § 711.2 and Title XIV, CCR § 753.5(a)(3), the payment of Fish and Game Department filing fees is not required in 'conjunction with this project. " Section 3. Based upon the evidence submitted at the above said hearing which includes but not is not limited to: the Staff report and exhibits attached thereto; and the public testimony; all of which are incorporated herein by this reference, the City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. The City Council hereby, approves and adopts General Plan Amendment No. 2004-04 to amend various sections of the City of Santa Ana Public Safety; Conservation; Open Space, Parks and Recreation; and Land Use Elements. The amended language of these elements is attached hereto as Exhibit "Au and incorporated by this reference as though fully set forth herein. The City of Santa Ana Public Safety; Conservation; Open Space, Parks and Recreation; and Land Use Elements shall be amended to incorporate the amended language and shall be made regularly available by the City's Planning and Building Agency. Section 4. This Resolution shall take effect immediately after its adoption by the City Council, and the Clerk of the Council shall attest to and certify the vote adopting this Resolution. B. C. ADOPTED this - day of ,2004. Miguel A. Pulido Mayor 75D-48 Resolution No. 2004-xx Page 2 of 3 APPROVED AS TO FORM: Kylee O. Otto Deputy City Attorney AYES: Councilmembers NOES: Council members ABSTAIN: Council members NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, PATRICIA E. HEALY, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2004-057 to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on Date: Clerk of the Council City of Santa Ana 75D-49 Resolution No. 2004-xx Page 3 of 3 AMENDMENTS TO PUBLIC SAFETY; CONSERVATION; OPEN SPACE, PARKS AND RECREATION; AND LAND USE ELEMENTS Public Safety Element (page 19) Objective 3.0: Preserve wetlands, riparian corridors, and buffer zones and establish reasonable limits on the clearing of vegetation from the project site. Implementation Program: Limit disturbance of natural water bodies and drainage systems to conserve natural areas; protect slopes and channels; and minimize impacts from storm water and urban runoff on the biological integrity of natural drainage systems and water bodies. Conservation Element (page 22-23) Policy: Encourage water conservation through design and facilities features of new developments through the use of water quality wetlands, biofiltration swales, watershed- scale retrofits, etc where such measures are likely to be effective and technically and economically feasible. Policy: Establish development guidelines for areas particularly susceptible to erosion and sediment loss. Policy: Provide for appropriate permanent measures to reduce storm water pollutant loads in storm water from the development site. Policy: Minimize changes in hydrology and pollutant loading; require incorporation of control, including structural and non-structural and Best Management Practices to mitigate the projected increases in pollutant loads and flows. Policy: Ensure that post-development runoff rates and velocities from a site have no significant adverse impact on downstream erosion and stream habitat. Program: Maintain compliance with regional watershed and storm water management principles. Open Space, Parks and Recreation Element (page 25) Objective 4.0: Encourage the use of water quality wetlands, biofiltration swales, watershed-scale retrofits, etc. in existing and new open space, parks and recreation facilities where such measures are likely to be effective and technically and economically feasible. ~~~4Ð Land Use Element Policy 5.12 (page 15): Provide appropriate permanent measures to reduce storm water pollutant loads in storm water from a development site. Action (Policy) 5.5 (page 25): Ensure that post-development hydrology and storm water runoff rates and velocities from a site have no significant adverse impact on downstream erosion and stream habitat. Action (Policy) 5.6 (page 26): Minimize the quantity of storm water directed to impermeable surfaces or system of conveyances (including roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, man-made channels or storm drains) and maximize the percentage of permeable surfaces to allow more percolation of storm water into ground. Action (Policy) 5.7 (page 26): Encourage the use of water quality wetlands, biofiltration swales, watershed-scale retrofits, etc. where such measures are likely to be effective and technically and economically feasible. ~Þ:~1 75D-52