Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
31B - CUP - 1901 NORTH FAIRVIEW ST
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: SEPTEMBER 4, 2012 TITLE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2012 -17 AND VARIANCE NO. 2012 -06 TO ALLOW THE ACADEMY CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL AT 1901 NORTH FAIRVIEW STREET - ORANGEWOOD CHILDRENS FOUNDATION, APPLICANT CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDED ACTION CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: P---tiV ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 1s` Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2nd Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For_ CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER Receive and file the staff report approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2012 -17 as conditioned and Variance No. 2012 -06 as conditioned. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION On August 13, 2012, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2011 -74; Conditional Use Permit No. 2012 -17 as conditioned; Variance No. 2012 -06 (a) as conditioned to allow a reduction in required parking for the high school; Variance No. 2012 -06 (b) as conditioned to exceed the allowable building height; and Variance No. 2012 -06 (c) as conditioned to exceed the allowable fence height by a vote of 6:0 (Turner absent) to allow The Academy Charter High School located at 1901 North Fairview Street in the Professional (P) zoning district. The Planning Commission made no changes to the recommended conditions of approval outlined in the attached staff report (Exhibit A). FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. J M. Trevino Executive Director Planning & Building Agency VF:rb vflreports\CUP12 -17 & VA12 -06 The Academy 1901 Fairview.cc Exhibit: A. Planning Commission Staff Report 31 B -1 ' I REQUEST FOR Planning Commission Action PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: AUGUST 13, 2012 TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING — FILED BY ORANGEWOOD CHILDRENS FOUNDATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2012-17 AND VARIANCE NO. 2012-06 TO ALLOW THE ACADEMY CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL AT 1901 NORTH FAIRVIEW STREET Prepared by _Vince Fregoso Executive Director RECOMMENDED ACTION PLANNING COMMISSION SECRETARY APPROVED ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Set Public Hearing For DENIED ❑ Applicant's Request ❑ Staff Recommendation CONTINUED TO 1jr-- t_-t - Planning Manager 1. Approve and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2011 -74. 2. Adopt a resolution approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2012 -17 as conditioned. 3. Adopt a resolution approving Variance No. 2012 -06 (a) as conditioned to allow a reduction in required parking for the high school. 4. Adopt a resolution approving Variance No. 2012 -06 (b) as conditioned to exceed the allowable building height. 5. Adopt a resolution approving Variance No. 2012 -06 (c) as conditioned to exceed the allowable fence height. DISCUSSION Request of the Applicant Chris Simonsen, representing Orangewood Children's Foundation, is requesting approval of a conditional use permit and variance to allow the construction of The Academy Charter High School at 1901 North Fairview Street. Specifically, the applicant is requesting approval per Santa Ana Municipal Code (SAMC) Section 41- 313.5(c), which requires a conditional use permit for a school use in the Professional (P) zoning district, a variance from Section 41 -1401 of the SAMC to allow a reduction in required parking for a high school, a variance from Section 41 -314 of the SAMC to exceed the maximum building height of 35 feet, and a variance from Section 41 -322 to allow a wall to exceed the maximum allowable height. EXHIBIT A CUP No. 2012 -17 & VA No. 2012 -06 August 13, 2012 Page 2 Proiect Location and Site Description The subject property consists of a 7.2 -acre, rectangular shaped site that is located on North Fairview Street just north of Seventeenth Street. Two parcels are currently found on the site; however, a lot merger will be recorded to combine the lots into a single parcel. The site is currently vacant but was previously occupied by a one -story hospital facility and a three -story medical building. The present site is surrounded by medical office and related uses to the north, multi- family residential to the south, single - family residential to the east, and single - family and church uses to the west (Exhibits 1 and 2). Project Description The applicant is proposing to construct a new high school on a vacant parcel of land. The school, to be known as The Academy Charter High School, will consist of eight buildings totaling approximately 160,000 square feet. Four of the buildings will be educational related, including a two and three -story academic building, a performing arts building, a physical education building and an administrative building. An additional three buildings will be utilized for family -style student residences capable of housing 80 youths, with the last building consisting of a residential commons building. The Academy will serve both the foster youth and educationally at -risk students residing in Orange County in grades 9 through 12. In its first year of operation in September 2013, the school will serve approximately 80 students in grade 9. Each subsequent year, it will add an additional 80 9th graders until the school reaches a Phase 1 enrollment of 320 students. The future Phase 2 would add an additional 130 students in the future for a total school enrollment of 450 students. As mentioned above, the school will be constructed in two phases. The first phase will consist of the construction of a three -story classroom building, the two -story administration /library building, and the four residential buildings. All site improvements will also be made in the first phase, with temporary playfields and hard courts installed in the area of the future buildings. The second phase, with a timeline for construction yet to be determined, will consist of a two -story classroom building and the gymnasium. A total of 146 parking spaces are proposed for the project, while 277 spaces are required at final build out. The architectural style of the campus is considered to be California Contemporary as the buildings are characterized by the use or interlocking volumes of different colors and materials. Corrugated metal siding, smooth cement fiber board and an aluminum window system will be the primary exterior materials. Through the use of materials and design principles, the campus is tracking LEED certification with the intent to be LEED Silver Certified (Exhibits 3, 4, 5 and 6). CUP No. 2012 -17 & VA No. 2012 -06 August 13, 2012 Page 3 Project Backaround The project site was originally developed in 1964 with a one -story, 54,000 square foot hospital and a three -story, 13,000 square foot medical office building. In 2011, after a period of vacancy, the buildings were demolished to make way for the future high school use. Orangewood Children's Foundation was founded over 30 years ago for the purpose of developing a facility to shelter Orange County children who are victims of abuse, neglect and abandonment. In 1985, the Foundation completed the development of the Orangewood Children's Home in the city of Orange, which provides housing for minors, a preschool and K -12 school, medical and recreational facilities, and other related services. Through operation of these and other programs, the Foundation realized that only half of all teens in the foster care system are graduating from high school. Therefore, the Foundation is attempting to meet the educational needs of foster youth by constructing a new high school that will provide them with a high - quality education and a firm base of support. Through attendance at the school and in conjunction with the other programs run by Orangewood, the Foundation will provide foster teens and at -risk youth with solid foundation for life, instilling in them the skills and confidence needed to live healthy and productive lives. General Plan and Zoning Analysis The General Plan land use designation for the site is Professional and Administrative Office (PAO), which allows for a variety of office and office - related uses. Additionally, service activities and educational facilities that support office development are also consistent with the PAO designation. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan designation. The subject site is located in the Professional (P) zoning district. The Professional district is a zoning designation that allows professional, administrative and medical office uses, commercial uses that support office activities, hospitals and schools. The project is consistent with this zoning designation. Project Analysis The Orangewood Children's Foundation is proposing to open The Academy Charter High School on a vacant parcel of land. The subject site will be in compliance with the zoning regulations of the P district, with the exception of parking, building height and fence height (for which variances are proposed) and will be compatible with the general plan land use designation. Additionally, appropriate conditions of approval have been included for this project that will ensure it remains in compliance with various provisions of the Municipal Code and does not become an attractive nuisance or disrupt the surrounding residents. The Academy will provide a much needed educational facility to at -risk youths in the community. Further, The Academy will provide a safe and supportive environment, prepare students for productive lives motivating them to become engaged and 31 B -5 CUP No. 2012 -17 & VA No. 2012 -06 August 13, 2012 Page 4 successful in career pursuits, and will prepare students to become responsible contributors to society. Finally, The Academy Charter High School supports several General Plan goals, including goals that encourage uses that promote a balance of land uses that address basic community needs, support projects that improve the character and integrity of neighborhoods, and that ensure impacts of development are mitigated. Conditional Use Permit Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41 -313.5 (c) allows schools in the Professional (P) zone with a conditional use permit. Conditional Use Permits are governed by Section 41 -638 of the SAMC. Conditional use permits may be granted when it can be shown that the following can be established: • That the proposed use will provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood or community. • That the proposed use will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity. • That the proposed use will not adversely affect the present economic stability or future economic development of properties surrounding the area. • That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in Chapter 41 for such use. • That the proposed use will not adversely affect the General Plan of the city or any specific plan applicable to the area of the proposed use. If these findings can be made, then it is appropriate to grant the conditional use permit. Conversely, the inability to make these findings would result in a denial. Using this information staff has prepared the following analysis, which, in turn forms the basis for the recommendation contained in this report. In analyzing the conditional use permit request, staff believes that the following findings of fact warrant approval of the conditional use permit. • The project will provide a service or facility which will contribute to the community. The Academy Charter High School is designed to meet the educational needs of foster youth by providing these special young people with a high quality high school education and firm base of support. It will provide County teens and other educationally at -risk youth with a solid foundation for life, instilling in them the skills and confidence needed to live healthy and productive lives. • The Academy will not be detrimental to persons residing or working in the area as the project has been designed to address potential issues such as traffic, parking, noise and lighting. The school has been designed to be separated from the adjacent residential uses by a perimeter block wall, which will minimize the impacts to the persons residing nearby. Additionally, the campus design enables the site to be secured during off hours. 41: CUP No. 2012 -17 & VA No. 2012 -06 August 13, 2012 Page 5 The proposed use will not adversely affect the economic stability of the area but will instead identify the site as a viable site to conduct business. The site was previously occupied by medical and hospital uses that vacated the site and left the property in a state of disrepair. The Academy will help revitalize the area by providing a new high school campus on a vacant parcel of land. The reuse of the site, in conjunction with the improvements that will be made to the site, will enhance the economic viability of the area. • The use will be in compliance with all regulations and provisions of Chapter 41 (Zoning Code) of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, with the exception of parking, building height and fence height. An application for variances from these standards is being processed concurrently with the conditional use permit. The proposed use will not adversely affect the General Plan as the school is consistent with several goals of the General Plan. Goal 1 of the Land Use Element encourages uses that promote a balance of land uses that address basic community needs, Goal 3 supports projects that improve the character and integrity of neighborhoods, and Goal 5 ensures that the impacts of development are mitigated. Finally, the project complies with Goal 1 of the Educational Element to provide sufficient educational services and facilities to meet the City's needs. Variances The applicant is requesting three variances from the SAMC: Reduction in required parking, increase in the maximum building height, and an increase in the maximum fence height. Variance requests are governed by Section 41 -638 of the SAMC. Variance requests may be granted when it can be shown that the following can be established: • That there exists a special circumstance related to the property, such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings. • That the granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights. • That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public or surrounding property. • That the granting of the variance will not adversely affect the General Plan. If these findings can be made, then it is appropriate to grant the variance. Conversely, the inability to make these findings would result in a denial. Using this information, staff has prepared the following analysis, which forms the basis for the recommendation contained in this report. 31 B -7 CUP No. 2012 -17 & VA No. 2012 -06 August 13, 2012 Page 6 Variance No. 2012 -06 (a) - Parkina Variance The parking requirements for a high school would require a total of 277 parking spaces for this new facility, which is based on one space per 150 feet of classroom area, one space per 333 square feet of office area, one space per two beds (SAMC Sec. 41- 1401). As only 146 spaces are proposed for the school, a Parking Needs Assessment and Special Event Parking Management Plan was prepared by Linscott Law & Greenspan, a professional traffic engineering firm. The February 2012 study analyzed the parking demand of a blended high school, which included an academic and residential component. Further, it studied the parking characteristics of other area high schools in an attempt to calculate a more appropriate parking demand for the school. Based on field observations and studies of the neighboring schools, the study determined that a maximum of 146 parking spaces would be needed. The 146 parking spaces were derived by determining a more realistic parking demand of 126 spaces (0.22 spaces per student) for the academic function of the school. Additionally, to ensure there was a surplus of available parking, an additional 25 percent was added to the 0.22 ratio to provide a generation rate of 0.28 spaces per student. Based on this ratio, a total of 126 spaces were determined to be required for the educational component. The study also analyzed the needs for the residential component of the high school. Based on the City's parking standard, a total of 66 spaces would be required to accommodate the 80 students and approximately 16 houseparent's expected to reside on campus. The assessment noted that the city's parking requirement is typically applied to college campuses where all residents are licensed drivers and many have their own personal vehicles. Because the high school will serve foster youth that are less likely to have vehicles and may not be of driving age, the parking demand for the residential component is anticipated to be reduced. A rate of 2.5 spaces per residential unit, equaling 20 parking spaces, is proposed for the project (Exhibit 7). Based upon the findings of the study and a review of similar campuses, Linscott Law & Greenspan study concluded that the project, with 146 parking spaces, would be more than adequate for this use. The study concludes that additional parking be made available in the event a special event occurs on the premises. As a result, conditions of approval have been placed on the project that requires the school to secure a reciprocal parking agreement at a nearby parcel. Staff recommends approval of this variance based on the following facts and findings. • The project site has a special circumstance related to its size, shape and location. Due to the location and constraints of the site, which is surrounded by development, the project is unable to provide the code required parking. To determine an alternate parking demand for the school, a parking and special needs assessment was prepared by the traffic engineering firm of Linscott Law & Greenspan. The study concluded that a maximum parking demand of 146 would be required for the school, including all staff and residents. Applying the strict letter of the parking 31 B -8 CUP No. 2012 -17 & VA No. 2012 -06 August 13, 2012 Page 7 code would, in this particular case, deprive the subject property of attracting a use to the property that is otherwise allowed in the P zone and would deprive the subject property of privileges not otherwise at variance with the intent and purpose of the provisions of this chapter. The granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights. Compliance with the parking standards would prohibit the construction of a needed high school campus for at -risk youths on the premises. The strict application of the standards would result in the need to reduce classroom space for the campus, which would impact the ability of the Orangewood Foundation to provide sufficient learning facilities at this location. Therefore, the granting of the variance will preserve the property owners right to develop a vacant property with a use that is allowed in the zoning district. The new use will help to revitalize the area through the reuse of a vacant property, which will preserve the property owners right to upgrade, develop and lease their property. • The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public or surrounding properties as the building and site is proposed to comply with all applicable development standards except for the parking, building height and fence height requirements. The project has been designed to minimize impacts to the adjacent residential properties through site design and conditions of approval. Finally, the project will not adversely affect the General Plan. The Academy Charter High School is consistent with several goals of the General Plan. Goal 1 of the Land Use Element encourages uses that promote a balance of land uses that address basic community needs, Goal 3 supports projects that improve the character and integrity of neighborhoods, and Goal 5 ensures that the impacts of development are mitigated. Further, the project is in compliance with Goal 1 of the Educational Element, which encourages development that provides sufficient educational services and facilities to meet the City's needs. Variance No. 2012 -06 (b) - Building Height SAMC Section 41- 314(b) of the SAMC limits structures to 35 feet in height if located within 140 feet of residentially used property. As single- family residences are located approximately 80 from the three -story classroom building (Building G) and the Phase 2 gymnasium building (Building E), a variance is required. Given the scarcity of land in Santa Ana, the trend in construction is to limit the sprawl of developments and build more vertical structures. Therefore, to provide sufficient classroom space within a constrained site, the Foundation is proposing to build a three story, 47 -foot high classroom structure. Additionally, a 38 -foot high gymnasium is proposed for future development. To minimize the impacts to the residents along the south side of Building F, the use of windows has been minimized along this elevation. Further, gymnasiums are a standard function found on a high CUP No. 2012 -17 & VA No. 2012 -06 August 13, 2012 Page 8 school campus. These structures require higher ceilings due to the types of activities occurring within the structure. In order to allow the school to provide a gymnasium on the campus, an increase in the allowable height is required. Staff recommends approval of this variance based on the following facts and findings. The project site has a special circumstance related to its size, shape and location. Due to the site being surrounded by development, the applicant is unable to obtain additional land to build structures that are lower in height. And, it is unfeasible to construct a gymnasium facility with a lower ceiling due to the types of activities occurring in the structure, which require high ceiling. And, the granting of the height variance will allow the construction of a gymnasium use that is typically found on a high school campus. As a result, special circumstances exist that warrant a variance. The granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights. Compliance with the building height standard would prohibit the construction of a needed high school campus for at -risk youths on the premises. The strict application of the standards would result in a reduction in square footage for the campus, which would make the school unfeasible at this location. The granting of the variances will preserve the property owners right to develop a vacant property with a use that is allowed in the zoning district and revitalize the area through the reuse of a vacant property, which will preserve the property owners right to upgrade, develop and lease their property. • The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public or surrounding properties as the building and site is proposed to comply with all applicable development standards except for the parking, building height and fence height requirements. The project has been designed to minimize impacts to the adjacent residential properties through site design and conditions of approval. Finally, the project will not adversely affect the General Plan. The project is consistent with several goals of the General Plan, Goal 1 of the Land Use Element encourages uses that promote a balance of land uses that address basic community needs, Goal 3 supports projects that improve the character and integrity of neighborhoods, and Goal 5 ensures that the impacts of development are mitigated. Further, the project is consistent with Goal 1 of the Educational Element, which encourages development that provides sufficient educational services and facilities to meet the City's needs. Approval of the variance will allow the construction of a new high school that will serve the needs of at -risk youths in the community. Variance No. 2012 -06 (c) - Wall Height Section 41 -322 of the SAMC limits the height of perimeter walls to 42 inches in height if within 20 feet of a property line abutting a street. Currently, a six foot high wall is located along this property line as it serves to separate the site from the residential uses to the east. The construction of the high school CUP No. 2012 -17 & VA No. 2012 -06 August 13, 2012 Page 9 requires the site to be in compliance with all provisions of the zoning ordinance, including fence height. Since the rear property line fence is proposed to be maintained at its current height of six feet, a variance is required. The existing six foot high wall originally separated the parking lot for the hospital and medical office uses from the adjacent residential properties. The fence restricted access from the site into the neighborhood and reduced noise impacts from the parking lot. Maintaining the fence in its current condition will separate the two uses, will minimize noise impacts and maintain privacy for the residences, and will allow adequate security for the high school campus. Staff recommends approval of this variance based on the following facts and findings. • The project site has a special circumstance related to its size, shape and location. Due to the location of the site, which is surrounded by residential development, an existing six foot high wall currently exists around the project perimeter. This wall served to separate the former hospital and office uses from the surrounding residences. Due to the location of a street at the east (rear) of the property, the maximum allowable fence height is 42 inches. A variance from the fence height standard will allow the adjacent residences to maintain their privacy and minimize impacts such as light and noise by allowing the existing six foot high fence to remain. The granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights. Compliance with the fence height standard would prohibit the operation of a needed high school campus for at -risk youths on the premises and would subject the adjacent residential uses to potential impacts such as noise, light intrusion, parking intrusion and trespassing. Additionally, a reduced fence height could result in trespassing onto the high school campus. The granting of the variance will preserve the property owners right to develop a vacant property with a use that is allowed in the zoning district. • The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public or surrounding properties as the building and site has been designed to comply with all applicable development standards except for the parking, building height and fence height requirements. The project has been planned to minimize impacts to the adjacent residential properties through site design and conditions of approval. The project will not adversely affect the General Plan. The Academy Charter High School is consistent with several goals of the General Plan, Goal 1 of the Land Use Element encourages uses that promote a balance of land uses that address basic community needs, Goal supports projects that improve the character and integrity of neighborhoods, and Goal 5 ensures that the impacts of development are mitigated. In addition, the project is in compliance with Goal 1 of the Educational Element, which encourages development that provides sufficient educational services and facilities to meet the City's needs. 31 B -11 CUP No. 2012 -17 & VA No. 2012 -06 August 13, 2012 Page 10 Public Notification The project site is located within the Edna Park Neighborhood Association. Numerous outreach activities have been conducted by both staff and the applicant. In October 2011, the Foundation mailed informational letters to surrounding property owners describing their intent to develop a high school on the site. On November 21, 2011 the Foundation met with the Edna Park Association Board to review the project. Finally, a neighborhood meeting was held on March 7, 2012 to review and discuss the most recent school proposal. The project site itself was posted with a notice advertising this public hearing, a notice was published in the Orange County Reporter and mailed notices were sent to property owners within 500 feet of the project site, as well as concerned citizens listed on the Permanent Notification List. Also, staff contacted the representatives of Edna Park to notify them of the public hearing and to identify any concerns with the project. At the time of this printing, no correspondence had been received regarding the project. CEQA Analvsis As part of the City's permitting process, the proposed project is required to undergo an environmental review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In accordance with CEQA, the recommended actions have been reviewed through a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), Environmental Review No. 2011 -74. Section 15063 of the State CEQA Guidelines and Sections 15070 through 15075 of Article 6 guide the process for the preparation of a mitigated negative declaration (Exhibit 8). This MND, as required by CEQA, contains 1) a project description; 2) a description of the environmental setting, potential environmental impacts, mitigation measures for any significant effects, and consistency with plans and policies; and 3) names of preparers. The mitigation measures included in this IS /MND are designed to reduce or eliminate the potentially significant environmental impacts described herein. The scope of the MND evaluates the proposed project's effects on the following resource topics. • aesthetics, • agriculture and forestry resources, • air quality, • biological resources, • cultural resources, • geology /soils, • greenhouse gas emissions • hazards & hazardous materials, • hydrology /water quality, • land use /planning, CUP No. 2012 -17 & VA No. 2012 -06 August 13, 2012 Page 11 • mineral resources, • noise, • population /housing, • public services, • recreation, • transportation /traffic, utilities /service systems The City prepared a draft MND and posted the Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt an MND at the Orange County Clerk's office; the NOI was published in the Orange County Register on June 8, 2012. The City circulated the draft MND for a 30 -day public review between June 11, 2012 and July 12, 2012. The draft MND was available for public review at the Santa Ana City Hall, the City of Santa Ana Main Library, and on the City's website. This IS /MND is intended to provide a forum to air and address comments pertaining to the analysis contained in the draft IS /MND and to provide an opportunity for clarification, corrections, or minor revisions to the draft IS /MND as needed. Comments were received during the public review period. Pursuant to Section 15088 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City, as the lead agency for the project, has reviewed all comments received on the draft IS /MND. As a result of the environmental analysis, mitigation measures have been provided to address potential environmental impacts. A list of these mitigation measures are found within the attached Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Summary. Mitigation measures have been outlined to address potential impacts on air quality, biological resources, geology /soils /seismicity, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, transportation and circulation, and utilities and service systems (Exhibit 9). Conclusion Based on the analysis provided within this report, staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program (Environmental Review No. 2011 -74), Conditional Use Permit No. 2012 -17 as conditioned, Variance No. 2012 -06 (a) as conditioned, Variance No. 2012 -06 (b) as conditioned and Variance No. 2012 -06 (c) as conditioned. Vince Fregos , AICP Principal Planner VF:jm v(VeporWCUP12 -17 & VA12.08 The Academy 1901 Fairview.081312 pc CUP No. 2012 -17 & VA No. 2012 -06 August 13, 2012 Page 12 Attachments: Exhibit 1 — General Vicinity Map Exhibit 2 — Land Use Map Exhibit 3 — Site Plan Exhibit 4 — Floor Plan Exhibit 5 — Building Elevations Exhibit 6 — Landscape Plan Exhibit 7 — Parking Needs Assessment/Special Event parking Plan Exhibit S — Mitigated Negative Declaration Exhibit 9 — Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 31 B -14 MEMORY I GARDEN GROVE U. J LN. � Rf l n.R1 wN 1 Rl ry RI O o Rt v At R1V 11L _ e a 1 1 s RI i Rl f RI VRI R1 "1" 1 RI I+ RV RI RI RI Rt al I O t R1~ R1 R1 RI 1 R1 i VfrA (rt RI R1 O RR1 RI R1 R1 R! RI 1 1 RI Rl 1 / ,wu Rt ' R1 R1 i R! a� c5i a RI 1 Lu !r1,rRi a♦ t. Rl RI R1 Rl Rt ` RI R1. RI R1 L<L PAD - = 4,@ RI V �e O RI y R1 R1 '_ R1 Rt `RI CS R1 RI P Rl _ R1 hP� Ri R1 Ri RI j J Rt uaM / O ' R1 R1 AF / R1 RI f k Al AI 1 Rl E R1 O Rl D�} .. P 1 1 LOJ 1.1 •�� p '� _ T RI C2 J l _1 cl RI 1 IIAt.An ^D�� 11 a r n u. -f�- Al ci ° i cl Ci SEVENTEENTH ST. Al GENff LAWC1JLR RAL} OR COMMER ALFBDBJRAL RI SNMEFAMILYREROEMIAL -D PAMNGMCOIRCATION GG G0 OMEW ENFE3R IT? TNAFAWLYfMDENCf Dal OO1MME3Y]4=MMNN Mt UGFrrINDUSTFM Rt MULTIPEEU NSTYMULTIFIE C CCMMUNTEYOWMERIAL M2 FlEAVtINDUSIAAL FAMELYRESOENCE C1 -MD OOMM.CQfNEFQAIPubLK IM DISIRCT MO MICITAR(OFERATIONS R4 WEISBANAFAMENFS C7 CEJERNICC71SUAL O OPEN MACE FE FHDBNMLEMTE C3 CE3•tWEIUSNES5 P PFOPES90RAL GD WEI)FlCDELELC%'fieff C3-A COOPALEUSNEEE;AREISTMLLACE PCD RANNEDCTAt1f.MIYOMM MENT S? S'ECIFICFLAN CA RLANNED3-K ANG CENTER F1R0 F4ANNEDSMOBNEIALDBALORAE Nf cS ARt6iALWAMER AE. CUP 2012 -17NA 2012 -6 A THE ACADEMY CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL 1901 -19 NORTH FAIRVIEW STREET - - = 600FFEr l' =1000 FEET P L A N N I N G A N D B U I L D 1 N G A G E N C Y EXHIBIT 1 VICINITY MAP 31 B -15 5 N G L E E I L Y R S 1 E N C E S I N G L E E A M I L Y R E S I D E N j E T-T I CU P2012- 17NA2012 -6 THE ACADEMY CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL 11 1901 -19 NORTH FAIRVIEW STREET Sly P L A N N I N G A N D 8 U I L a I N G A G E N C Y LAND USE MAP EXHIBIT 2 oil f ■ Y � � i c ri� P/ ■l� , d er `Ir I All' ■ r �r� rk i�f tl • ly 'l+ j i } s. 1 e Pi l.a� x �t y s!� li y. £ /� ��� Ni ` i` y iNI E i 1,5ij 11td ..t �� I� _5 fill EXHIBIT 3 31 BMI °'2 CT7 i t C i s I {> !1` Js ;1 H r.++a r Yrrr -r e 1:c t r r r. t,t'r'cl �r Etfillflllllilllf ;,l33 1r sr r+r++r.rrr 1+: f t � I pis rovy \v Y, /btal tWl iooxos HdH a�larYNa i i' 1 AfIf0Y0Y 1H1 _ _- 1 1 i i f1 i J J - er `Ir I All' ■ r �r� rk i�f tl • ly 'l+ j i } s. 1 e Pi l.a� x �t y s!� li y. £ /� ��� Ni ` i` y iNI E i 1,5ij 11td ..t �� I� _5 fill EXHIBIT 3 31 BMI °'2 CT7 i t C i s I {> !1` Js ;1 H r.++a r Yrrr -r e 1:c t r r r. t,t'r'cl �r Etfillflllllilllf ;,l33 1r sr r+r++r.rrr 1+: f t � I i lilt ii i I I I I IF I I II V�:S r >•?lJ W,t16L641G11 r 100H9t HOIH Yit1YVH0 ". 1 11 �.1 AW30VDV341 .. - -- ..o1.. s i�C��9f��1� �� � � � fy�y g•� �i �i g1 � @� �;a i 4� b�t �if t� � �z C I'g�� � Eellll i � �� � s ! "�i. `�.fa 1# 1 �g � �1! i • k y� .. 1,1! Fy �i fli tffjg1) ayylpp�t {(Cr�lirq�94)IY �1 q `9e�i 11. el_ �z ` 1� �t� !y Y 9�l9�i:9fk ll�l{ i�; i �41N� i k E 7 i 1 �_i E. 2. !. 94 aliz ._ .: 7 LU [ cLo L C W C 11 ri z 1 i 1 a s it rl � i ul E {1� m i i m 'M m M m T L' B m m I I I I IF I I II V�:S r >•?lJ W,t16L641G11 r 100H9t HOIH Yit1YVH0 ". 1 11 �.1 AW30VDV341 .. - -- ..o1.. s i�C��9f��1� �� � � � fy�y g•� �i �i g1 � @� �;a i 4� b�t �if t� � �z C I'g�� � Eellll i � �� � s ! "�i. `�.fa 1# 1 �g � �1! i • k y� .. 1,1! Fy �i fli tffjg1) ayylpp�t {(Cr�lirq�94)IY �1 q `9e�i 11. el_ �z ` 1� �t� !y Y 9�l9�i:9fk ll�l{ i�; i �41N� i k E 7 i 1 �_i E. 2. !. 94 aliz ._ .: 7 LU [ cLo L C W C 11 ri z 1 i 1 a s it rl � i ■ %i 1 le. I I I I IF I I II V�:S r >•?lJ W,t16L641G11 r 100H9t HOIH Yit1YVH0 ". 1 11 �.1 AW30VDV341 .. - -- ..o1.. s i�C��9f��1� �� � � � fy�y g•� �i �i g1 � @� �;a i 4� b�t �if t� � �z C I'g�� � Eellll i � �� � s ! "�i. `�.fa 1# 1 �g � �1! i • k y� .. 1,1! Fy �i fli tffjg1) ayylpp�t {(Cr�lirq�94)IY �1 q `9e�i 11. el_ �z ` 1� �t� !y Y 9�l9�i:9fk ll�l{ i�; i �41N� i k E 7 i 1 �_i E. 2. !. 94 aliz ._ .: 7 LU [ cLo L C W C 11 ri z 1 i 1 a s it rl � i 3. c �ul A LN 161 ... . ............ O m E)l (a L 2 7-77-3 1 tr i is ED 71 J, rA -7FTll nTT6T Mr =4 1 =1 R4 fflT � 9 woNOS M01H W318VH3 A9130YOV341 cc Zi o EBa c �ul A LN 161 ... . ............ O m E)l (a L 2 7-77-3 1 tr i is ED 71 J, rA -7FTll nTT6T Mr =4 1 =1 R4 fflT � 9 woNOS M01H W318VH3 A9130YOV341 cc Zi o ri ii L400 (D I a O nN QED -no ml J111,1141M Mll AV130VDV 3141 'ED l_ LX 5 31 62228 Jill, IGOHOS HOM H31k"o . ........ . ' ,I �i� � #i E 00 0") 00 01. 01'5 ell? QQ 4Q QQ Bw24f 5 1.11, I oil m m 9 '100HOS Hof i. If cz of s (1, L.; U qq II T fo .1 m SISL'22 m rlq-vhj NO N xi NO N a� g$B4 Z €E 4a ai �91E i �5S'8 sF lM ©I 31 �� zt I +�• ^.S �3ut3 VLCµ 6l et tVil = - 'm 7oox3s4D14a31NV4D AV130WDY 341 C[ OI 5 �Wl: 1 r IN C l =' w i �7� 4 � h y °� r Il�b �J 7 1 El D V 1 1 i lM ©I 31 �� zt I +�• ^.S �3ut3 VLCµ 6l et tVil = - 'm 7oox3s4D14a31NV4D AV130WDY 341 C[ OI 5 �Wl: 1 r IN C l =' Re Q M L: 95 NX O Qa O 44 0 10 Al FOR ■ I MMI 0 on miss miss 0 INN 3 O III III ■EI ■ Elm O 100H3..... AAaQv3v3"1 cz 06 5 V'. III III ■EI ■ Elm i j- J,9 i Lal 7E NT M T N T 9 w 15 C-1 D1 m m 15 Irl P-) m M ■ w -100HOS H AYl"3GUW33lYMW2H'L ..................... Wi 4 Ob --jr, Emij 31 Wa25 of 4 � �/ i -- � \§!h � \ \ \ � �� ) If / §� | / | | § | §| |■ ■, 13 ED EO 9) T1 ff El 115 7-5 ,| �)| �| . § |§ �((� || f § §!}( \ � �k __n__� -- avow RHI oil 1 !ill;!!!! !Jil; . ---- -- --- — at 5 S. 1 N 100HOSHE1111 SHJ. cz at s 0 I 10! I 'I I 1 411 1 1 !ill;!!!! !Jil; . ---- -- --- — at 5 S. 1 N 100HOSHE1111 SHJ. cz at s 0 I 10! xi 1 411 1 00 i! 3 Ig 4 6 O jf��, 1 �i! PARKING NEEDS ASSESSMENT and SPECIAL EVENT PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN The Academy Charter High School Santa Ana, California Updated February 17, 2012 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The realistic "design level" parking requirements for the day -to -day operations of the proposed Academy Charter High School, at full enrollment, total a minimum provision of 146 on -site parking spaces, calculated using project- specific parking components and ratios as follows: The provision of 126 spaces to support the aggregate faculty, staff, student (at full enrolIment), and visitor parking needs for the day -to -day operation of the high school itself. This parking provision is based on a "blended" parking ratio of 0.28 spaces per student applied to the ultimate enrollment of 450 students. Application of this ratio does not distinguish between "commuter" and "resident" students, the latter totaling 80 (of the overall 450) to be housed in on- campus "Family Unit" facilities. Derivation of this project -speci (ic ratio has considered the City's own "code" parking requirements in combination with focused parking demand counts at Santa Ana area high schools. • A houseparent parking provision of 20 spaces, reflecting an aggregate ratio of 2.5 spaces per unit for each of the 8 proposed houseparent suites to be provided in support of the 80- student "Family Unit" housing component. To manage day -to -day parking operations, this study recommends a student vehicle registration ( "permit ") program that would essentially restrict on- campus student parking to Grade -12 students only, except that other licensed students of driving age may be granted a permit based on criteria that the Academy may establish. In total, the program should be structured such that no more than 80 student drivers commute to campus on a regular basis. This threshold represents approximately 70% of the estimated average Grade -12 enrollment of roughly 113 students (an enrollment of 450 /four class grades). Past experience suggests that not all students meeting the Grade -12 parking permit requirement will have access to a vehicle for commuting to campus, even if they are licensed. Thus a limitation to 80 regular student drivers is considered reasonable and consistent with the student population that may want or need to drive to campus, or may live in on -site student housing and also have a vehicle. The latter circumstance is expected to be extremely rare. N ;Zf i-2111? -; . 7}q imJcme, Saaiu AIA (C'" JMW) Lauri. S Fa"TAR}JNG NEEDS 2-17-H&C 317 Page 2 Additionally, this analysis has considered the overall parking needs for a menu of special events that may occur at the Academy campus on a recurring basis. These events have been defined by representatives of the Orangewood Children's Foundation, and due to their format and nature, would not occur simultaneously with regularly scheduled class sessions, but would occur during the "off hours" of weekday evenings and weekends. As such, otherwise unoccupied campus parking spaces would be allocated in support of these events, which include boys as well as girls basketball and volleyball games in the gymnasium, special programs in the "Black Box" performing arts /drama venue (to include the Fall and Spring Fundraisers, Annual Prom, and /or Spring Play), and other special events that could span multiple facilities of the Academy (Back to School Night, Open House, College Night, 81h Grade Info Night, and Graduation Ceremonies). Some of those events could require parking support that exceeds the formalized on -site supply of 146 spaces by up to approximately 130 spaces (with total parking needs on the order of 275 spaces). For those events needing parking support in excess of proposed on -site supply, this study recommends an Event Parking Management Plan that integrates available off - street parking spaces from other available nearby venues. Those spaces would be secured for as- needed use by the Academy by agreement between the Academy and that other venue. Under this plan, the scheduling of Academy special events would be strategic as to time of day and day of week so as to coincide with low parking demand levels on those other sites, thus integrating otherwise lightly used parking supply at one of those other venues into the overall parking capabilities for an Academy event. A logical partner in such a parking management plan would be Wintersburg Presbyterian Church, which has approximately 298 parking spaces (versus a potential Academy event shortfall of up to about 130 spaces), and is essentially diagonally opposite the Academy site at 2000 Fairview Street. The complimentary use patterns of these two sites could permit a reciprocal parking arrangement where each of these two sites could make use of parking spaces on the other during peak periods of parking demand. We understand that productive talks are underway between Church and School officials, and that the execution of a parking agreement is expected. Additionally, we understand that the City of Santa Ana is planning a traffic signal installation at the Fairview/Edna Drive intersection. The presence of a signal at that intersection could enhance the overall pedestrian connectivity between the east and west sides of Fairview Street, including those on -foot movements related to the management plan: 3206 21I L'a2 - T1. N-den-T. S-Ai -inn W tnfij,F.jWr Lcttn I f Faw,1F:uiK1KQ \rEnS ASSESS.%IL -W Rc61;ar 3- 1 ?d.''k 31B -31 Page 3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION (For the Purposes of Parldng Calculation) Key descriptors of the project that may be relevant to a parking needs assessment include the following: • A charter high school for grades 9 through 12 with ultimate enrollment of 450 students, and where enrollment priority will be given to foster youth. The foster youth component is expected to potentially suppress student parking needs from a "normal" condition due to the reduced likelihood of those students having access to a vehicle for regular commuting to school. The floor area at the high school includes 4,994 sf of administrative space and 29,413 sf of classroom area. On -site student housing in a "Family Unit" configuration for 80 of the 450 - student ultimate enrollment, leaving a "commuting" population of 370 students. Commuting by means of other than solo student drivers is expected to be common. Thus the dominant commuting means are expected to include walking or biking, drop -off by parent or guardian in concert with rideshare (carpooling) promotion, and public transit. • In conjunction with the "Family Unit" student housing provisions, a total of eight 2- bedroom suites will be provided for houseparents also living in that housing. • A parking supply of 146 spaces to support the overall daytime needs of the total campus at full enrollment. These spaces will also support after -hour events and programs at the campus. A refined site plan that provides for an on -site student drop off/pick up lane (totaling approximately 516 feet in length) near the east edge of the site. As part of a student drop off/pick management strategy, this lane would operate in the southbound direction as part of a clockwise operating pattern ( "loop ") during the student arrival and departure periods. The overall loop would extend from a right turn from Fairview Street near the northwest comer of the site, to an expected "forced" exiting right turn to Fairview near the southwest corner of the site. It is further noted that while this 520 -foot lane would be reserved for only drop off and pick up in advance of, during, and immediately following regular school hours, it could be converted to parallel curb parking outside of those hours, including during special events. Such an operational conversion would add approximately 23 parking spaces to the site's indicated K`3:Ki? 11.. N_`- ;lm.5t- identt', -Z.,ts :Ux Fa. 'PARKIN'4 NEEDS AAA SSMFNTRe6iun 3-17- 13J.+e Page 4 supply, increasing that functional supply to 169 spaces during non - school hours. PARKING CHARACTERISTICS FOR OTHER AREA HIGH SCHOOLS In parallel to a City "code" assessment, information on other area high schools was compiled from established sources, with that compilation supplemented by inventory and field count of parking provisions and actual daytime observation of peak parking needs. Information for three representative sites is as follows: School Faculty/ Staff Students Grades 9 -12) "Blended" Parking Ratio s !student Provided Observed Demand Orange County High School of the Arts Charter 52 935 0.28 0.21 1. Mater Dei High School (Private) 217 1 2,100 0.21 0.11 Segerstrom High School (Public) 88 1 0.22 In reviewing the above, it should be noted that the parking ratios represent a "blended" value that accounts for all on -site parking (to include faculty, staff, student and visitor) at the indicated sites. It will_be noted that the inventory includes what are believed to be representative charter, private and public high school sites. It will also be noted that the actual observed demand ratios were 0.22 spaces per student or less, versus a supply of as much as 0.28 spaces per student. REVIEW OF CITY OF SANTA ANA "CODE" OFF- STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS Extracting from Section 41 -1401 of the City's code, high schools require a minimum of: One space for each 150 sf of classroom floor area, plus one space for each 333 sf of office floor area. Attachment A of this document presents a code calculation for this site as prepared by City of Santa Ana staff. From that attachment, the classroom and office components of the proposed project plan would, in combination, require 211 spaces at the Academy before any consideration of the "Family Units" student housing and/or the supporting houseparent suites. On a "blended" basis, this 211 -space code requirement translates to approximately 0.47 spaces per student (211/450), or at least twice the actual field- studied demand \ •,i'(tl)- ?1111 =!. h. .\ciJ�•ny' '�lii \rn l <'Unf.Stnlii 1,_etms & F1\ei1PAHK: N(_, INLI iJ •1-\>I:U\ttiNt rkev.wr ?17 -P J,t 31 B -33 Page 5 values at other area high schools. From this, one might conclude that the results of a City code application are "heavy" when compared to actual observable parking needs. In other settings, LLG has observed that current teaching techniques appear to result in greater average square footage requirements per student than historically provided, so with student enrollment fixed, but with floor area growing, this could be one aspect driving the equivalent code requirement higher. Additionally, even after discounting the faculty /staff needs accounted for within this overall blended requirement of 0.47 (with faculty/staff needs included therein on the order of roughly 0.05 to 0.10 spaces per student depending on the faculty /staff- student ratio), it is highly unlikely that roughly 35% to 45% of Academy High School students will actually drive alone, then park at the campus, when the percent of students actually having a license, let alone access to a car, is expected to be less to much less. Looking to the student housing component, the City code (Section 41 -1327) requires one space per two beds, or one space per 80 sf of sleeping area, whichever is greater. Attachment A presents the code calculation (by City stafo according to each of these methodologies, which yield a code requirement of 48 spaces, and 45 spaces, respectively. LLG notes that the ratios input to these calculations are consistent with college dormitory parking needs, where essentially all student residents are licensed drivers, and about half of those college students bring a vehicle to campus. Given the high school orientation of this project, and the age - suppressed licensed driver considerations discussed above, it is unlikely that code - required dormitory parking needs, as an added element of overall campus need, will actually materialize. Instead, the parking recommendation of a blended campus parking ratio, to account for faculty, staff, total student (without distinction as to commuter or campus resident) and visitor need is a logical and convenient basis to determine the realistic number of parking spaces that will be needed at the Academy. The project does include eight 2- bedroom suites for houseparents within the "Family Units" student housing. Section 41 -1322 of the City's parking requirements speaks to multiple - family dwellings as the sum of three components, described as follows: A minimum requirement of one garage or carport space for each dwelling unit, plus additional off-street parking in an amount no less than one space for each bedroom, in an amount not less than the total number of bedrooms on the site, plus additive guest parking in an amount equal to 0.25% of the combination of the above two requirements. Taking these three components together, the raw code requirement for these houseparent suites, when treated as multiple - family dwellings, totals 3.75 spaces per S- •i2tr1311324? - The Audnly. $ ntn •ant ((nnfJmiJ. Lett:n S Face: P?.RK:KU NEEU5 1-t?-12 do Page 6 dwelling unit. This translates to 30 spaces (8 garage or carport, 16 additional resident spaces, and 6 guest spaces). Given the nature of these houseparent suites, and the expectation that no more than two drivers (and thus two vehicles) will be residents in each suite "household ", it is concluded that the realistic parking needs of these units is 2.5 spaces per unit, for a total of 20 spaces. This provision includes two resident spaces per suite, resulting in 16 resident spaces, (8 of which must be garage or carport spaces), plus 4 spaces for guests. ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS Weekday Daytime Parking Needs The above discussion interprets the applicability of a "raw" code calculation to each of the elements that will influence and thus determine the realistic day -to -day parking needs of the Academy. They include a "blended" ratio per student for the campus' academic needs, an additional conclusion that resident students with vehicles are accounted for withui this blended ratio and thus need no further consideration (particularly at the high school versus college level), and the further conclusion that the realistic need for houseparent suite parking is a ratio of 2.5 spaces per houseparent suite. Taken together, they represent the parking needs calculation methodology laid out in the Findings and Recommendation section of this assessment. Backing up to that "blended" ratio consideration, actual field study ratios topped out at 0.22 spaces per student and this ratio reflects the aggregate parking needs of all faculty, staff, commuter or resident student, and visitor campus parkers. It is customary to add a contingency factor to raw field study data when converting to a "design" ratio, with that contingency being on the order of 10 %. In this application, the peak field- studied ratio or 0.22 has been increased by 25 percent and rounded up to 0.28 spaces per student. That value is concluded to be a conservative basis to determine the on -going parking needs of the Academy. Additionally, LLG further recommends a student parking permit program as a management technique to assure sufficient student parking spaces for those students parking on campus, with the further objective to contain Academy parking within only on- campus parking facilities during regular school hours. Special Event Parking Needs It is recognized that schools have special events and programs of relatively limited frequency with parking needs that may exceed their day -to -day requirements. Vehicle occupancy ratios during those events often average from two to three persons (or more) per car, versus ratios much closer to one person per car for daytime faculty, staff, and student commuters. As such, the 126 space "design' need (at full Academy S'9'07�1113' =2 - riu \calcmr. S-1. Ina (C— N,wifl Lct --f• F- ci'PAIWIKG `.Ef D5 Mr5ESS %I Eur IF &t 31 B -35 Page 7 enrollment, but exclusive of the parking need for houseparent suites) and parking provision associated with those "normal" daytime requirements translate to a greater need for parking support for visitors during those special events and programs. The attached Table 1 is the result of an extensive collaboration with the Academy team to identify the type and expected attendance levels, and more specifically the "outside envelope" of parking needs in conjunction with each of these events. From the table, it can be seen that the parking needs "snapshot" includes a "venue based" calculation that considers the occupancy capacities of the two primary assembly areas of the Academy Master Plan at full site development. Those are the "Black Box" performing arts venue (with capacity for 200) as well as the Gymnasium proposed in Phase 2 of the project. When set in a bleacher configuration, the gymnasium would seat 500. With the bleachers folded away, the floor area available for public assembly would convert to an attendance capacity of 558 based on a permitted occupancy ratio of 15 square feet per person. Irrespective of venue capacities, the table goes on to estimate peak attendance populations in terms of attendees, which are converted to parking demand by use of an AVR as defined in the table, or participating student households where a needed parking ratio of 1 space per attending student household is applied. It should be noted that these parking ratios and conversion factors are concluded to be conservative in that they generally ignore the potential of arrival to the site by means of other than private vehicle, with those means potentially including on -foot, drop off /pick up, and/or public transportation. In the realm of home basketball or volleyball games, they also generally ignore the potential for van and bus transportation by visiting teams and fans. All in all, the focus of the table is to identify the range of peak parking needs of this menu of events, and isolate the maximum expected parking demand level as the basis for sizing potential off -site parking needs to be supported by an Event Parking Management Plan. Looking further to the table, other simultaneous parking needs to be considered in parallel to the actual event are also considered. These include the presence of faculty /staff as well as the background needs of parking for houseparents in the "Family Units ". Taken together, the array of parking demand projections in Table I indicate the following: Given an occupancy limit of 200 attendees, special events taking place on weekday evenings and /or on weekends wholly in the "Black Box" may require limited off -site parking support. The "design level" forecast parking demand of 153 spaces coincident with those events would be nearly accommodated by the site's permanent 146 -space supply, noting further that after -hours use of the drop off /pick up lane for parking purposes would $'3161 ,2111242. The ARj&m, S.,itI M4,3 S FacaPaItKIXG 14-GD5 \CSFCSXIC ITA «ifim 2.17 -1_&,c L •J Page 8 functionally add 23 spaces to the site supply, increasing that supply to 169 spaces. With the latter management technique, parking demand would balance entirely on site. A "full house" bleacher configuration in the gymnasium would require a supply of up to 220 spaces, thus requiring off -site support by 51 to 74 spaces. To the extent that any portion of the 40 basketball or volleyball home games do not produce "full house" crowds, the parking demand would be proportionately less. Working backwards, a maximum supply potential of 169 on -site spaces would balance with game attendance levels no greater than 370 persons. A "full house" gymnasium floor event increases the forecast "design level' event parking needs to 243 spaces, translating to an off-site need of 74 to 97 spaces. Ignoring the venue capacity calculations as summarized above, the range of parking needs associated with the menu of events as defined by the project sponsor tops out at 272 spaces. When contrast with a supply of 146 marked on -site spaces, this suggests an off -site need (via agreement) of at least 126 spaces, noting further that the managed on -site supply (due to event period conversion of the drop off/pick up lane) could grow by 23 spaces, thus reducing the on -site shortfall to 103 spaces. The Table I array and findings indicate that the needs for off-site parking during Academy events as described previously could range from essentially "zero' to a rounded value of 130 spaces. In circumstances such as these, and as noted previously, it is common to secure by agreement available off -site (and off-street) parking from other venues, Church sites are a logical candidate for these agreements because the "rhythm" of their parking demands can be complimentary to the schedule of events forecast at the Academy, particularly when Academy events are scheduled to respect the terms and parking availability periods of such an agreement. As noted previously, Wintersburg Presbyterian Church, which has approximately 298 parking spaces, is essentially diagonally opposite the Academy site at 2000 Fairview Street and a very viable candidate for such an agreement because of proximity, on- foot convenience versus the need for shuttle, and schedule/operational pattern. Other more distant church sites include Orange View Church of Christ (13211 Fairview St, Garden Grove, approximately 169 spaces) and Formosan Presbyterian Church (13072 Fairview St, Garden Grove, 78 spaces). This report recommends securing a parking agreement in support of Academy events as framed in Table I with Wintersburg Presbyterian Church. We understand that favorable discussions in support of a parking agreement between the Academy and Wintersburg Presbyterian Church are now underway. 72- 2- Tls Sams 4.atta &fa ,P.AL{tJNG NEEDS 2- 17- 11 k, 31 B -37 Q O O O a {L W E r rs asa r a d a += w z Q z c 0 C O aL. RV w a c O O E r Z c n — 3 � v v 'd^ ° , V b q V N O r pa 'o o tirs d C u q — �° ^) co v a e E n N C Yu � a o $ o 4 q O u c a a Q A e u ° v o. O n > n d c u N a...y'o t; n ro A oV r o n L a d a e m m 3 • Jill i I `o 0 E t q v V C s d w d N !� a d c e a V_ m 3 « `o � F n ? LL w b # u o v ro °o u 3 E w F O v v � A i G a n � V C � n � 3 m a rca r 'v V d a h W � W d as F�F 3 a 6 a ° o „rs _ « L U ` o u a 0> n � � 2 0.rs� b N � � _ U d i n C L E 8a o a n n F g o u d � fl a o o s m „ O o � Y � C. ` o ru c o N $ V m C � c ce o i u O = Qo o E C u % Al — ° L o ° $ ? M ^ o = D a > c m_ rs R r n n °a � E V y a c a W ` a L Eo V E N V S E M + d 7 d V % uwi ^ M O N N N N N N N r � y F NN 7 W N � 7 0� a-- Ea n n � bC � � Q p IYI N YI N �Oy ppp�p d z z z n qm _°yJ y 7yy^ 3 m �- `.fig z ¢ a 8 M x x x x a n it o ¢ a q V Z H e h N b m c � C o` R '.. E E z'r E z z z z z z z n ° v z z i z z ZW 7 n z ¢ z z Q Q Q Q Q zzzz z2 N O F C• `o G > G m U $ 4 V w o � Oi rs C O V w l7 o > c 0 C O aL. RV w a c O O E r Z c n — 3 � v v 'd^ ° , V b q V N O r pa 'o o tirs d C u q — �° ^) co v a e E n N C Yu � a o $ o 4 q O u c a a Q A e u ° v o. O n > n d c u N a...y'o t; n ro A oV r o n L a d a e m m 3 • Jill i I `o 0 E t q v V C s d w d N !� a d c e a V_ m 3 « `o � F n ? LL w b # u o v ro °o u 3 E w F O v v � A i G a n � V C � n � 3 m a rca r 'v V d a h W � W d as F�F 3 a 6 a ° o „rs _ « L U ` o u a 0> n � � 2 0.rs� b N � � _ U d i n C L E 8a o a n n F g o u d � fl a o o s m „ O o � Y � C. ` o ru c o N $ V m C � c ce o i u O = Qo o E C ATTACHMENT A The Academy Charter High School Parking Requirements Santa Ana Municipal Code Applicable Parking Rate per SAMC Dormitories: 1 space /2 beds OR 1 space per 80 s.f. sleeping area, whichever is greater Total of beds: 80 students+ 16 parents =96/2= OR 48 spaces Sleeping area: Students: 8'x4.5' /student =36 x 80 students =2,880 sd ft Parents: 8'x6' /parent room--48 x 16 rooms =760 sq ft. Total sleeping arca= 3,640 s.f. /80 s.f. 45 spaces High School: i space /150 s.f of classroom AND 1 space /333 of office Offices: Bldg E: 97'x47'= 4,559 sf Bldg C: 145 sf x3= 435 s.f Total offices: 4,994 sf/333= 15 spaces Classrooms: Bldg E: 1,800 sf+ 1,400= 3,200 s.f. Bldg 0: (723 +723 +715 +908 +1400) 2+ (812 +775 +775 +913 +1400) = 13,613 s.f. Bldg H: 2,400 x3 +1,800 x 3= 12,600 s.f. Total classroom: 29,413 s.f /150 s.f.= 196 spaces Total parking required for The Academy: 48 +15 +196= 259 spaces Source: City of Santa Ana Staff 7� THE ACADEMY CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL PROJECT DRAFT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PREPARED FOR: City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency 20 Civic Center Plaza, M -20 Santa Ana, CA 92701 Contact: Vince Fregoso PREPARED BY: ICF International 1 Ada, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92618 Contact: Chad Beckstrom 949/333 -6600 June 2012 EXHIBIT 8,;. 31 B -40 ICF International. 2012. The Academy Charter High School Project. Draft Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration. June, (ICF 00914.11.) Irvine, CA. Prepared for City of Santa Ana, CA. 31 B -41 Contents Chapter1 Introduction and Overview ......................................................... ............................1 -1 Overview.................................................................................................................. ............................1 -1 Authority.................................................................................................................. ............................1 -1 Scopeof the IS/ MND ........................................................................... ............................... ........1 -1 ImpactTerminology ................................................................................................ ............................1 -2 IS /MND Organization .............................................................................................. ............................1 -2 Chapter2 Project Description ..................................................................... ............................2 -1 ProjectOverview ..................................................................................................... ............................2 -1 ProjectLocation ....................................................................................................... ............................2 -1 ExistingSetting ........................................................................................................ ............................2 -1 Existing Site Conditions and Surrounding Land Uses ........................................ ............................2 -1 Existing General Plan and Zoning ..................................................................... ............................2 -2 ProjectBackground ................................................................................................. ............................2 -2 Proposed Project ............................................................................... ............................... ..2 -3 ................. Description of the Proposed Project ................................................................. ............................2 -3 Discretionary Approvals Required .................................................................... ............................2 -6 Chapter3 Environmental Checklist .............................................................. ............................3 -1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ........................................................... ............................3 -2 Determination......................................................................................................... ............................3 -2 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ..................................................................... ............................3 -3 1 Aesthetics ............................................................................................. ............................3 -4 II Agricultural Resources ........................................................................ ...........................3 -11 IIIAir Quality ........................................................................................... ...........................3 -13 IV Biological Resources ........................................................................... ...........................3 -30 V Cultural Resources .............................................................................. ...........................3 -33 VIGeology and Soli s ...................................... : .......................... . ......................................... 3 -36 VII Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................. ...........................3 -42 VIII Hazards and Hazardous Materials ...................................................... ...........................3 -49 IX Hydrology and Water Quality ................ ............................... .......3 -54 ... ............................... XLand Use and Planning ........................................................................ ...........................3 -61 XI Mineral Resources .............................................................................. ...........................3 -70 XIlNoise ................................................................................................... ...........................3 -71 Xlil Population and Housing ...................................................................... ...........................3 -82 XIVPublic Services ..................................................................................... ...........................3 -84 XVRecreation ........................................................................................... ...........................3 -88 XVITransportation/ Traffic ........................................................................ ...........................3 -90 XVII Utilities and Service Systems ......................................................... ..............................3 -102 The Academy Charter High School Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration - 1 , r A y June 2012 KF 00914.11 City of Santa Ana Contents XVIII Mandatory Findings of Significance ............................................... ..............................3 -110 Chapter4 References .................................................................................. ............................4 -1 Aesthetics................................................................................................................ ............................4 -1 Agriculture............................................................................................................... ............................4 -1 AirQuality ................................................................................................................ ............................4 -1 CulturalResources ................................................................................................... ............................4 -2 Geology.............................................. ............................... ..4 -3 .................................. ............................... GreenhouseGas Emissions ..................................................................................... ............................4 -3 Hazardsand Hazardous Materials ........................................................................... ............................4 -3 Hydrology and Water Quality ....... ............................... .........4 -4 ................................ ............................... Noise........................................................................................................................ ............................4 -5 PublicServices ......................................................................................................... ............................4 -5 Transportation/ Traffic ............................................................................................. ............................4.5 Utilitiesand Service Systems ................................................................................... ............................4 -5 Chapter5 List of Preparers .......................................................................... ............................5 -1 Cityof Santa Ana ..................................................................................................... ............................5 -1 ICFInternational ...................................................................................................... ............................5 -1 Fehr& Peers ............................................................................................................ ............................5 -1 FuscoeEngineering ................................................................................................. ............................5 -2 Appendix A Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Data and Calculations Appendix B Geotechnical Study Appendix C Traffic Impact Analysis Appendix D Sewer Capacity Analysis I ne Acacremy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration li ICF 00914.11 I:-] I City of Santa Ana Contents Tables Table 2 -1 Summary of Proposed Project ............................................................. ............................2 -3 Table 2 -2 Summary of Impervious Surfaces on the Project Site ......................... ............................2 -4 Table 2 -3 Construction Activities ......................................................................... ............................2 -6 Table 3 -1 Air Quality Data from Costa Mesa Station (ARB 30195) and Anaheim - Pampas Lane Station (ARB 30178) .................................................................. ...........................3 -15 Table 3 -2 Federal and State Ambient Air Quality Standards .............................. ...........................3 -17 Table 3 -3 Federal and State Attainment Status for Orange County Portion South Coast AirBasin .............................................................................................. ...........................3 -17 Table 3 -4 SCAQMD Emission Thresholds (pounds per day) ............................... ...........................3 -20 Table 3 -5 Estimate of Regional Construction Emissions (pounds per day) Before MitigationMeasures ........................................................................... ...........................3 -22 Table 3 -6 Estimate of Construction Emissions (pounds per day) After Implementation ofMitigation ....................................................................................... ...........................3 -23 Table 3 -7 Estimate of Regional Operational Emissions (pounds per day) .......... ...........................3 -24 Table 3 -8 Estimate of Localized Construction Emissions (pounds per day) ....... ...........................3 -26 Table 3 -9 Estimate of Construction Emissions (pounds per day) After Implementation ofMitigation ................................................................................... ............................... 3 -27 Table 3 -10 Estimate of Operation - Period Localized (Onsite) Emissions ............... ...........................3 -28 Table 3 -11 Estimate of Project - Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions .................... ...........................3 -46 Table 3 -12 Proposed Building Heights .................................................................. ...........................3 -62 Table 3 -13 Project Consistency with the Santa Ana General Plan ........................ ...........................3 -63 Table 3 -14 Existing Noise Volumes ....................................................................... ...........................3 -72 Table 3 -1S Typical Noise Levels from Construction Activities at 50 Feet ............. ...........................3 -74 Table 3 -16 Noise Levels from Construction Activities at Closest Sensitive Receivers .....................3 -74 Table 3 -17 Predicted Off Site Exterior Existing, Opening Year (2013), and Opening Year (2019) Traffic Noise Levels with and without the Project .................. ...........................3 -76 Table 3 -18 Exterior Modeled Noise Levels from Fairview Street on Project Facilities ....................3 -77 Table 3 -19 Typical Vibration Levels for Construction Equipment ........................ ...........................3 -79 The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration iii tCF 00914.11 City of Santa Ana Table 3 -20 Reaction of People and Damage to Buildings at Various Continuous Contents The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration iv ICF 00914.11 31 B -45 VibrationLevels................................................................................... ...........................3 -79 Table 3 -21 Project Traffic Generation Forecast .................................................... ...........................3 -92 Table 3 -22 Existing Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis ............................. ...........................3 -93 Table 3 -23 Existing Plus Project (Phases I and 11) — Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis............................................................................................... ...........................3 -95 Table 3 -24 Existing Plus Project (Phases I and 11) — Peak Hour Traffic Signal Warrant Results............................................................................................. ............................... 3 -96 I Table 3 -25 Neighborhood Daily Volume Change .................................................. ...........................3 -97 Table 3 -26 Neighborhood Peak Hour Volume Change ......................................... ...........................3 i -97 Table 3 -27 Project Parking Requirements per Parking Needs Assessment .......... ...........................3 -98 Table 3 -28 Historic and Projected Water Demand from the Project Site ....... ..............................3 i -104 Table 3 -29 City of Santa Ana Projected Water Supply and Demand (AFY) ..... ..............................3 -107 Table 3 -30 Existing Landfill Conditions ............................................................ ..............................3 -108 Table 3 -31 Estimated Solid Waste Generation ................................................ ..............................3 -109 Table 3 -32 Cumulative Projects List ................................................................. ..............................3 -111 I Table 3 -33 Cumulative Traffic Noise ................................................................ ..............................3 -115 Table 3 -34 Cumulative Projects Traffic Generation Forecast .......................... ..............................3 -120 Table 3 -35 Year 2013 Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis ............... ..3 -120 Table 3 -36 Year 2019 Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis ..................... ..............................3 -121 Table 3 -37 Year 2035 Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis ....... ............................... ......3 -122 The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration iv ICF 00914.11 31 B -45 City of Santa Ana Contents Figu res Follows Page Figure2 -1 Project Location Map ........................................................................... ............................2 -2 Figure 2 -2 Aerial of the Project Vicinity ................................................................ ............................2 -2 Figure 2 -3 Project Site Existing Conditions ........................................................... ............................2 -2 Figure 2 -4 Existing General Plan Land Use and Zoning Designations ................ ............................... 2 -2 Figure2 -5 Master Site Plan ................................................................................... ............................2 -4 Figure2 -6 Elevations ............................................................................................. ............................2 -4 Figure 3 -1 Onsite 1800 Panorama North to South from Near the Center of the Project Site....................................................................................................... ............................3 -6 Figure 3 -2 On -Site 180° Panorama North to South from Near the Center of the Project Site....................................................................................................... ............................3 -6 Figure3 -3 KOP Location Map ................................................................................ ............................3 -6 Figure 3 -4 KOP 3 Visual Simulation ....................................................................... ............................3 -6 Figure 3 -5 KOP 9 Visual Simulation ....................................................................... ............................3 -6 Figure 3 -6 KOP 14 Visual Simulation ..................................................................... ............................3 -6 Figure 3 -7 KOP 16 Visual Simulation ..................................................................... ............................3 -6 Figure 3 -8 Noise Measurement and Modeling Locations .................................... ...........................3 -72 Figure 3 -9 Traffic Study Area Interesections ........................................................ ...........................3 -94 Figure3 -10 Cumulative Projects ....................................................................... ..............................3 -112 The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration V ICF 00914.11 e City of Santa Ana Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations µg /m3 microgram per cubic meter AB 939 California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 AELUP Airport Environs Land Use Plan afy acre -feet a year ALUC Airport Land Use Commission APST Aboveground Petroleum Storage Tanks AQMPs air quality management plans Basin South Coast Air Basin BAU business as usual CAA Clean Air Act CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards CalARP California Accidental Release Program Caltrans California Department of Transportation CBC California Building Code CCAA California Clean Air Act CDMG California Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology CEC California Energy Commission CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CH4 Methane City City of Santa Ana cKOPs candidate KOPs CMA Congestion Management Agency CMP Congestion Management Program CO carbon monoxide CO2 carbon dioxide CO2e carbon dioxide equivalents CPTED crime prevention through environmental design CPUC California Public Utilities Commission CUP Conditional Use Permit CUPA Certified Unified Program Agency DAMP Drainage Area Management Plan dBA A- weighted decibels DPM Diesel Particulate Matter EIR Environmental Impact Report EPA Environmental Protection Agency FAR floor -area -ratio Foundation Orangewood Children's Foundation FTA Federal Transit Administration The Academy Charter High School vi Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 31 B -47 June 2012 ICF 00914. 11 City of Santa Ana gpd gallons per day GWP global warming potential HCPs Habitat Conservation Plans HMD Hazardous Materials Disclosure I Interstate ICU Interesection Capacity Utilization IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IS initial study KOP Key Observation Point Leq equivalent continuous noise level LIP Local Implementation Plan LOS level of service LST Localized Significance Threshold LOFT Leaking Underground Fuel Tank MATES III Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study III MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act MCE Maximum Considered Earthquake Metropolitan Metropolitan Water District of Southern California mgd million gallons per day MMT million metric tons MND mitigated negative declaration MPO metropolitan planning organization MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Water System Museum Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County MUTCD Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards NCCPs Natural Community Conservation Plans NHMP Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan NO2 nitrogen dioxide NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 03 Ozone OCSD Orange County Sanitation District OCTA Orange County Transportation Authority OCTAM Orange County Transportation Analysis Model OCWD Orange County Water District OPR Office of Planning and Research P Professional PAO Professional & Administrative Office Pb Lead PHGA Peak Horizontal Ground Acceleration PM10 particulate matter less than or equal to 10 micrometers in diameter I ne Aca0emy Cnarter High School Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration vn �t '11 e Contents June 2012 ICF00910.11 City of Santa Ana PM2.5 particulate matter less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers in diameter PO City of Santa Ana Professional Office PPM parts per million PPV peak particle velocity RCPG Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide SAFD Santa Ana Fire Department SAPD City of Santa Ana Police Department SCAG Southern California Association of Governments SIP State Implementation Plan SMARA Significant Mineral Aggregate Resource Areas SOz sulfur dioxide SR State Route SR -22 State Route 22 SRA Source Receptor Area SRRE Source Reduction and Recycling Element SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan TACs toxic air contaminants TIA Traffic Impact Analysis TNM Traffic Noise Model UST Underground Storage Tanks VMT vehicle miles traveled VOCS volatile organic compounds WQMP Water Quality Management Plan WRCC Western Regional Climate Center Contents The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration viii ICF 00914.11 � � J Chapter 1 Introduction and Overview Overview The City of Santa Ana (City) as the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) has prepared this initial study (IS) and proposed mitigated negative declaration (MND) to evaluate the potential environmental consequences associated with The Academy Charter High School project. The proposed project consists of development and operation of a residential private charter high school for up to 450 students, 80 of which would reside onsite, on an approximately 7.2 -acre project site located at 1901 -1919 North Fairview Street in the northwestern portion of the City of Santa Ana. Implementation of the proposed project will require a Conditional Use Pert-nit (CUP) to allow a school within the P (Professional) Zoning district, a variance to deviate from the building and fence /wall height requirements, a lot merger, and a variance to reduce the required parking spaces. In addition, and as part of the City's approval process, the proposed project is required to undergo an environmental review in accordance with the CEQA. Authority The preparation of an IS /MND is governed by two principal sets of documents: CEQA (Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Section 15000, et seq.). Specifically, Section 15063 of the State CEQA Guidelines and Sections 15070 -15075 of Article 6 guide the process for the preparation of a negative declaration or a mitigated negative declaration. Where appropriate and supportive to an understanding of the issues, reference will he made either to the statute, the State CEQA Guidelines, or appropriate case law. This IS /MND, as required by CEQA, contains 1) a project description; 2) a description of the environmental setting, potential environmental impacts, mitigation measures for any significant effects, and consistency with plans and policies; and 3) names of preparers. The mitigation measures included in this IS /MND are designed to reduce or eliminate the potentially significant environmental impacts described herein. Where a mitigation measure described in this document has been previously incorporated into the project, either as a specific feature of design or as a mitigation measure, this is noted in the discussion. Mitigation measures are structured in accordance with the criteria in Section 15370 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Scope of the IS /MND This IS /MND evaluates the proposed project's effects on the following resource topics: aesthetics • agriculture and forestry resources The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mltigated Negative Declaration 1 1 ICF 00914.11 �' '�1� L City of Santa Ana Introduction and Overview • air quality • biological resources • cultural resources • geology /soils • greenhouse gas emissions • hazards & hazardous materials • hydrology /water quality • land use /planning • mineral resources • noise • population /housing • public services • recreation • transportation /traffic • utilities/ service systems • mandatory findings of significance Impact Terminology The following terminology is used to describe the level of significance of impacts: • A finding of no hnpact is appropriate if the analysis concludes that the project would not affect the particular topic area in any way. • An impact is considered less than significant if the analysis concludes that it would cause no substantial adverse change to the environment and requires no mitigation. • An impact is considered less than significant with mitigation incorporated if the analysis concludes that it would cause no substantial adverse change to the environment with the inclusion of environmental commitments or other enforceable measures that have been agreed to by the applicant. • An impact is considered potentially significant if the analysis concludes that it could have a substantial adverse effect on the environment. For the proposed project, no impacts were determined to be potentially significant. IS /MND Organization The content and format of this report are designed to meet the requirements of CEQA. The IS /MND consists of the proposed findings that the project, as mitigated, would have no significant impacts. The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 1 -2 ICF00914.11 31 B -51 City of Santa Ana Introduction and overview The bulk of this IS /MND consists of the initial study and supporting studies. The report contains the following sections. • Chapter 1, "Introduction and Overview," identifies the purpose and scope of the IS /MND and the terminology used in the report. • Chapter 2, "Project Description," identities the location, background, and planning objectives of the project and describes the proposed project in detail. • Chapter 3, "Environmental Checklist and Analysis," presents the checklist responses for each resource topic. This section includes a brief setting section for each resource topic and identifies the impacts of implementing the proposed project. • Chapter 4, "Mitigation Monitoring Plan and Report," presents a list of the mitigation measures, identifies the time frame for implementation, identifies the responsible monitoring agency, and includes a reporting form for verification of compliance. • Chapter 5, "References," identifies all printed references and individuals cited in this IS /MND. • Chapter 6, "List of Preparers," identifies the individuals who prepared this report and their areas of technical specialty. The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 1 -3 ICF 00914.11 'k mvA Chapter 2 Project Description Project Overview Orangewood Children's Foundation is proposing to construct and operate a new charter high school on the former Santa Ana Hospital Medical Center site in the City of Santa Ana. The project will consist of two new education buildings, one administrative /library building, and a gymnasium to accommodate 450 students. Ancillary to the school, the applicant is also proposing three residential buildings and one administrative /support building to accommodate 80 students that would reside onsite. The proposed project requires a CUP to allow a school, a variance to deviate from building and garden wall height limit requirements, a lot merger, and a variance to reduce the amount of required parking spaces. Project Location The project site consists of two parcels totaling 7.2 acres located at 1901 and 1919 North Fairview Street, which is south of State Route 22 (SR -22) near the southeast corner of North Fairview and Edna Drive in the northwestern portion of the City of Santa Ana (Figures 2 -1 and 2 -2). Regional access to the project site is generally provided by the Fairview Street exit from SR -22, Garden Grove Boulevard, and 17th Street, which is a major arterial in Santa Ana. Existing Setting Existing Site Conditions and Surrounding Land Uses The project site is currently vacant and undeveloped. Large areas of the site are covered with cement, asphalt, concrete building slabs, and a large pile of rubble that are remnants of the previous hospital and medical office buildings that were demolished in 2011. In addition, the site contains scattered trees, grass, other ornamental landscaping, and parking lot lighting from the previous development. The site is bound on three sides by a block wail that varies in height, but averages 6 feet high. Figure 2 -3 shows the existing condition of the project site. The project site is located within an urban and fully developed area that is surrounded by single - family and condominium residential uses, and a medical rehabilitation center (Figure 2 -2). Land uses in the project vicinity include a combination of commercial, office, religious, and single - family residential uses. Edna Park and the Santa Ana River lie approximately 0.1 mile to the east of the site, separated by single - family residential uses. Adjacent land uses include: • A convalescent hospital (St. Edna Subacute & Rehabilitation Center) and Edna Drive are located to the north. • North Fairview Street to the west, with a church, single - family residential and auto - related commercial uses across Fairview Street The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 2 -1 ICF 00914.11 31 B -54 City of Santa Ana Project Description • Multi - family residential uses adjacent to the south. • Single - family residential uses adjacent to the east. Existing General Plan and Zoning The site is designated by the City's General Plan for Professional & Administrative Office (PAO) land uses with a floor -area -ratio (FAR) of 0.5. The PAO General Plan land use designation with an FAR of 0.5 applies to areas where professional and /or administrative offices are predominant and areas intended for lower - intensity office and professional service uses that are compatible with residential neighborhoods. The existing zoning for the site is P (Professional), which provides for a variety of uses that are subject to a CUP (per municipal code section 41- 313.5), including extended care facilities, trade and professional schools, gymnasiums, and recreational uses. The purpose of the P zoning is to permit professional, business /service, medical, and administrative uses where no merchandise is sold. The current P zoning allows for the proposed project with the approval of a CUP. Uses subject to a CUP within the P zoning district include hospitals, trade and professional schools, and extended care facilities. The existing General Plan land use and zoning designations are shown on Figure 2 -4. Project Background The proposed project site was previously developed with hospital and medical buildings. A search of the site's history indicates that the site was utilized by Riverview Hospital from 1964 to 1985, at which time the site became the Santa Ana Hospital and Medical Center until it was demolished in 2011. The project applicant, Orangewood Children's Foundation (Foundation), was founded over 30 years ago as a 501(c)3 nonprofit for the purpose of developing a facility to shelter Orange County children who are victims of abuse, neglect, and abandonment. In 1985, the Foundation completed development of the Orangewood Children's Home, which is located in the City of Orange. This facility provides housing for minors, an onsite K -12 school and preschool, medical facilities, recreational facilities, a Child Abuse Services Team, and a Family Visitation Center. In addition to supporting the operation of the Children's Home, the Foundation currently provides a wide range of programs, activities, and education to Orange County foster children. Through operation of these programs the Foundation has realized that barely half of all teens in the Orange County foster care system are graduating from high school. As a result, the Foundation has identified a residential high school as a solution to this existing community issue and thus proposes this project. The purpose of the Academy is to meet the educational needs of foster youth by providing these young people with high- quality secondary education and a firm base of support. In addition, it will provide Orange County foster teens and at -risk youth with a solid foundation for life, instilling in them the skills and confidence needed to live healthy and productive lives that ultimately break the cycle of abuse. The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 2 z 1CF 00914.11 31 B -55 Figure 2 -1 Project Location Map The Academy, City of Santa Ana : •" 31 B -57 ICF :lip M a m N O C 'O Q C) o b V) C V Kv ui d O � a� v l 1 I�4r � r 3: 6 g° tl • .r g 4 � :lip M a m N O C 'O Q C) o b V) C V Kv ui d O � a� is I I wool w 's =15 0 • E . City of Santa Ana Project Description Proposed Project Description of the Proposed Project The proposed project includes the development of eight buildings on the 7.2 -acre project site, consisting of three residential buildings, two educational buildings, a gymnasium, an administrative /library building, and an administrative support building. At buildout, the project would support the enrollment of 450 students, including 80 students that would reside on the project site. As shown on Figure 2 -5, the eight proposed buildings would be located throughout the property and would be surrounded by existing development. The project's components would be developed in two phases, which are listed and summarized below in Table 2 -1. Table 2 -1. Summary of Proposed Project Phase I of the proposed project (shown in Figure 2 -5) would include the construction of six buildings — Buildings A, B, C, D, E, and G— totaling 110,517 square feet. Phase II would consist of the gymnasium (Building F) and one classroom building (Buildings H) totaling 35,619 square feet, and completing the total project buildout of 146,136 square feet. The timing of Phase Ii has not yet been determined, but estimated to be 5 years after the opening of Phase I, and is used as the assumption for the analysis in this document. All of the project buildings would range from one to three stories and would be between 25' and 55' in height. The project includes 146 parking stalls that would be constructed during Phase I and would be distributed around the perimeter of the site. Vehicular ingress to the project site would be provided from North Fairview Street at the south end of the site. Student drop -off areas would follow the perimeter of the site to egress onto North Fairview Street at the north end of the site. 1 ne Acaoerny Charter High School June 2012 Initial5tudy /Mtitigated Negative Declaration 2 -3 ICF00914.11 ' r. • Square Percent Building Use Stories /Height Number Feet of Total Phase i A Family Unit Building 3/35' 1 17,500 12/0 B Family Unit Building 3/35' 1 17,500 12% C Residential Administration /Support 1/25' 1 3,200 2% Building D Family Unit Building 2/25' 1 11,664 8% E Administration, Classroom, Assembly 2/35' 1 30,332 21% Building G Classroom 3/55' 1 30,321 21% Phase 1 Subtotal 5 110,517 76% Phase F Gymnasium 2/35' 1 21,660 14% H Classrooms 2/35' 1 13,959 10% Phase 11 Subtotal 2 35,619 24% TOTALS 146,136 100% Phase I would also include the construction of general site improvements, including parking facilities. Phase I of the proposed project (shown in Figure 2 -5) would include the construction of six buildings — Buildings A, B, C, D, E, and G— totaling 110,517 square feet. Phase II would consist of the gymnasium (Building F) and one classroom building (Buildings H) totaling 35,619 square feet, and completing the total project buildout of 146,136 square feet. The timing of Phase Ii has not yet been determined, but estimated to be 5 years after the opening of Phase I, and is used as the assumption for the analysis in this document. All of the project buildings would range from one to three stories and would be between 25' and 55' in height. The project includes 146 parking stalls that would be constructed during Phase I and would be distributed around the perimeter of the site. Vehicular ingress to the project site would be provided from North Fairview Street at the south end of the site. Student drop -off areas would follow the perimeter of the site to egress onto North Fairview Street at the north end of the site. 1 ne Acaoerny Charter High School June 2012 Initial5tudy /Mtitigated Negative Declaration 2 -3 ICF00914.11 ' r. • City of Santa Ana Project Description Visitor parking would be provided within the east portion of the site, and will have a separate egress driveway onto Fairview Street. The architectural style of the project would be contemporary /modern, incorporating concrete, vertical corrugated siding, smooth siding, wood, and glass. Project elevations are provided in Figure 2 -6. Each floor of the three Family Unit Buildings ( Buildings A, B, and b) would function as one family unit and include five student bedrooms (accommodating 10 students), a guardian suite, a kitchen, dining groom, living room, laundry, and a social worker resident office. Second and third story units would also include a front porch. The guardian suites each include two bedrooms, a living area, kitchen, and full bathroom. The Residential Administration /Support Building (Building C) would include offices and other areas dedicated to maintenance and housekeeping, in addition to a 1,300 square foot community room for events and meetings. Building E, the Administration, Classroom, and Assembly Building, would include offices for staff, a theater, student union, juice bar, fitness area, and classrooms for fine and applied arts and technology. Classroom Building G, which consists of a three -story structure, would contain a total of 12 classrooms equipped with a lab and learning commons on each level. Phase If would include Classroom Building H, containing a total of six labs, three on each floor, and a gymnasium that includes a 9,500 square foot basketball court, storage and maintenance areas, concessions, and a 2,400 square foot fitness area. The project would also include improvements to the existing onsite drainage facilities and installation of new landscaping and hardscape throughout the project area. As shown in Table 2 -2, buildout of the project would result in a slight reduction in the impervious surfaces on site. Pervious areas on site will consist of landscaping areas and permeable pavers. Table 2 -2. Summary of impervious Surfaces on the Project Site Pervious Impervious Square Footage Percent Square Footage Percent Existing Conditions 81,000 26% 230,540 74% Buildout Conditions 87,231 28% 224,309 72% Operations Tile Academy will operate on a traditional school schedule, typically starting in late August or early September, and ending in mid -June. The estimated schedule for the 2013 -2014 school year is to begin oil Thursday, August 29, 2013 and end on Tuesday, June 17, 2014. The total number of school days will be approximately 184 days per school year. However, the residential component of the project would operate year - round. The Academy will serve both the foster youth and educationally at -risk students residing in Orange County in grades 9 -12. Eighty of the students will reside on the campus in the residential facilities. In its first year of operation starting September 2013, the charter high school will serve approximately 80 students in 9th grade. Each subsequent year, it will add an additional 80 9th grade students until it reaches an enrollment of 320 students that will be served by the Phase I facilities, with 80 residing onsite. The addition of Phase it will allow the school to serve a total of 450 students, of which a The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 2 -4 ICF 00914.11 31 B -67 N C LL W d1 w O U Q 0 t H F' City of Santa Ana Project Description maximum of 80 will continue to reside onsite. The Academy's operational staffing will include a total of 72 positions, which include the following personnel: • 41 educational personnel during school hours for full occupancy of Phase 1, • 7 additional educational personnel would be needed during school hours for full occupancy of Phase I1, providing a total of 48 educational staff for operation of the project buildout. • 9 personnel would be onsite overnight year -round for residential staffing, • 15 additional personnel would be onsite during normal business hours year - round. The Academy classes will be arranged in a block schedule, which allows for classes of one hour and fifty minutes in length. The school day begins at 8:00 a.m. and finishes at 3:15 p.m. and consists of core academic classes as well as career - related courses, lunch, and physical education. The administrative support building will be occupied by staff during normal business hours, and the residential buildings will be occupied by staff and students 24 -hours per day. As described above, the residential component of the project will serve up to 80 foster youth in attendance at the Academy. The on- campus residence will be licensed by the State of California Community Care Licensing Division and will adhere to the highest standards of care. The youth will have 24 -hour supervision in a home -like setting. The Academy will partner with an experienced licensed group care provider for the administration of the residential program. Each family unit will be headed by a set of house parents who will each work with the 10 youth under their care. Onsite security is part of the project design and operations. The design of the Academy project provides the ability to secure the entire campus with two large vehicular gates at the north and south entrances to the site, which will prevent vehicle entrance to the campus during non - school hours. There will also be pedestrian gates at the primary entrance points to the campus to allow restricted pedestrian access. Only the visitor parking fronting Fairview Road will be accessible throughout the day and in the evenings. Furthermore, the Academy, in conjunction with Santa Ana police and fire departments, is preparing an emergency preparedness handbook drafted specifically to meet the needs of the school site. This handbook will include emergency response plans for fire, flood, earthquake, terrorist threats, and hostage situations. Access to buildings will be controlled using a key fob system. Key fobs will be programmed specifically for each individual, allowing them access to specific buildings and classrooms based on their employee responsibilities or student status. The entire campus will be equipped with an extensive security camera system that will monitor any illegal or suspicious activity on campus either during school or after hours. Construction Construction of Phase I is anticipated to take approximately 13 months to complete. Construction of Phase Il is anticipated to take 12 months. As listed in Table 2 -3, the project consists of various phases of activities over the construction period. As shown, the estimated maximum number of construction workers onsite at any one time would be 90, which would occur during Phase I construction. All construction staging and storage areas and activities would be located onsite. I ne Acaoemy Charter High School 12 20 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 2 -5 tCF 0 June 2011 • 00� City of Santa Ana Table 2 -3. Construction Activities Project Description The project site would be fenced during construction with access limited to construction personnel and other authorized personnel. Nighttime lighting onsite during construction would be limited, providing only lighting necessary for safety and security. Consistent with the City's Noise Ordinance, construction activity would be limited to between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on weekdays and Saturday. No construction is proposed on Sundays or federal holidays. Discretionary Approvals Required The City of Santa Ana is the lead agency under CEQA and is responsible for permitting the project. The applicant requests the following discretionary actions to implement the project: • Conditional Use Permit to allow trade and professional schools use with ancillary residential and recreational facilities uses; • Variance to allow for an increase in allowable building and garden wall height and a parking reduction; • Lot merger; and • Adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 2 -6 ICF00914.11 I Te J Total Estimated Maximum Round Truck Number of Construction Trip Truck Trips Per Activity Workers Activity Area Trips Day Duration Per Day Please I Excavation and Soils 5,000 cubic yards 360 180 2 days 10 Import (cy) Rough Grading and 312,945 square feet 35 0 -3 7 weeks 10 Bldg. Pad Prep (so Fine Grading & Soil 220,588 sf 10 0 -3 3 weeks 10 Prep Site Trenching and 312,945 sf 35 0 -3 7.5 weeks 20 Building Foundation Excavation Building Construction 92,357 sf 200 0 -3 11 months 90 Concrete for Footings 1,400 cy 140 0 -3 8 weeks 25 and Slabs Asphalt Parking Lot 62,964 sf 30 0 -3 2 weeks 10 Area Phase 11 Fitie Grading & Soil 30,450 sf 10 0 -3 3 weeks 10 Prep Site Trenching and 83,050 sf 25 0 -3 6 weeks 15 Building Foundation Excavation Building Construction 52,600 sf 150 0 -3 11 months 80 Concrete for Footings 1,000 cy 100 0 -3 6 weeks 20 and Slabs The project site would be fenced during construction with access limited to construction personnel and other authorized personnel. Nighttime lighting onsite during construction would be limited, providing only lighting necessary for safety and security. Consistent with the City's Noise Ordinance, construction activity would be limited to between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on weekdays and Saturday. No construction is proposed on Sundays or federal holidays. Discretionary Approvals Required The City of Santa Ana is the lead agency under CEQA and is responsible for permitting the project. The applicant requests the following discretionary actions to implement the project: • Conditional Use Permit to allow trade and professional schools use with ancillary residential and recreational facilities uses; • Variance to allow for an increase in allowable building and garden wall height and a parking reduction; • Lot merger; and • Adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 2 -6 ICF00914.11 I Te J 1. Project Title: 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: 3. Contact Person and Phone Number 4. Project Location: S. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: 6. General Plan Designation: 7. Zoning: 8. Description of Project: 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: 10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required: Chapter 3 Environmental Checklist The Orangewood Academy Charter High School City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency 20 Civic Center Plaza, M -20 Santa Ana, CA 92701 Vince Fregoso, Principal Planner, 714 - 667 -2713 1901 -1903 North Fait-view Street Santa Ana, CA, 92706 -2205 Assessor's Parcel Number 399 - 031 -23 (Figures 2 -1 and 2 -2) Orangewood Children's Foundation 1575 East 17th Street Santa Ana, CA 92705 PAO (Professional /Administrative Office) P (Professional) Development of a charter high school (The Academy) for education specific to Orange County foster youth. (See Chapter 2) Single- and multi - family residential, religious /church, commercial, parking, and roadways N/A The Academy Charter High School 3 June 2012 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 1CF00914.11 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checkllst Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would potentially be affected by this project (i.e., the project would involve at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact"), as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture and forest ❑ Air Quality Resources ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology /Soils ❑ Greenhouse Gas ❑ Hazards and Hazardous ❑ Hydrology /Water Quality Emissions Materials ❑ Land Use /Planning ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population /Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation /Traffic ❑ Utilities /Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑ i find that the proposed project COULD NOT ]lave a significant effect nit the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ® t find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions to the project have been made by of- agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARA'T'ION will be prepared. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have an impact on the environment that is "potentially significant" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" but at least one effect (2) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis, as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but It must analyze only the effects that rentaln to be addressed. ❑ I find that 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 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that arT up it the project, nothing further is required. A' 6 /T //)- Signature Date U(t4cr-,-, 1 -!S t��SU etc( (e S r*M ffr-IA Printed Name For The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Jelnal Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -9 ICF 00914.11 31B -71 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained if 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). 2. 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. 3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required. 4. "Negative Declaration: Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated" applies when the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from a "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less -than- Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less - than - significant level. (Mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross - referenced.) 5. Earlier analyses maybe used if, pursuant to tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration [Section 15063(c)(3)(D)j. In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a. Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where earlier analyses are available for review. b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures that were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site - specific conditions for the project. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, when appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9. The explanation of each issue should identify: a. the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b. the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to a less -than- significant level. The Academy Charter High School Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -3 2 ICF0 June 20 20212 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist b. Substantially damage scenic resources, ❑ ❑ ❑ ED including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings along a scenic highway? c. Substantially degrade the existing visual ❑ ❑ ® ❑ character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d. Create a new source of substantial light or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ glare that would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area? Discussion Existing Condition of Project Site and Vicinity Project Vicinity Characterization The existing visual condition of the project site's viewshed is a developed urban neighborhood with a mix of land uses. As described further in the Land Use Section, the majority of the project vicinity is developed with residential uses. Areas to the east of the site are developed with single family residential homes. Older single- family residential homes that were built in the 1950s lie to the west of the project site, across Fairview Street. Multi- family residential two -story condominiums are located to the south, adjacent to the project site, and to the southwest across Fairview Street. To the north of the site, separated by a 6 -foot block wall, is the St. Edna Subacute & Rehabilitation Center, a linear one -story building. Other commercial and educational land uses are scattered amongst the residential land uses along North Fairview Street and W. 17th Street, which are the two arterial roadways in the project vicinity. This established area has mature ornamental landscaping along the roadways and parcel frontages. Public Views Viewer groups are broadly characterized as having public or private views. Public views are available to all visual receptors, such as views from a neighborhood park or roadway. Private views, however, are exclusive to property owners and their guests or members, and include places such as residences and private facilities (e.g., golf clubs or tennis clubs). The project vicinity is developed and has public views that are generally limited to corridors along roadways, with the exception of Edna Park and the Santa Ana River. Public viewers of the project site include motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists along area roadways, and recreational viewers from Edna Park and the Santa Ana River trail. Edna Park is located adjacent to the Santa Ana River, The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -4 ICF 00914.11 SIM Less -than- Significant Potentially Impact with Less -than- Significant Mitigation Significant No 1. Aesthetics Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Vista? b. Substantially damage scenic resources, ❑ ❑ ❑ ED including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings along a scenic highway? c. Substantially degrade the existing visual ❑ ❑ ® ❑ character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d. Create a new source of substantial light or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ glare that would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area? Discussion Existing Condition of Project Site and Vicinity Project Vicinity Characterization The existing visual condition of the project site's viewshed is a developed urban neighborhood with a mix of land uses. As described further in the Land Use Section, the majority of the project vicinity is developed with residential uses. Areas to the east of the site are developed with single family residential homes. Older single- family residential homes that were built in the 1950s lie to the west of the project site, across Fairview Street. Multi- family residential two -story condominiums are located to the south, adjacent to the project site, and to the southwest across Fairview Street. To the north of the site, separated by a 6 -foot block wall, is the St. Edna Subacute & Rehabilitation Center, a linear one -story building. Other commercial and educational land uses are scattered amongst the residential land uses along North Fairview Street and W. 17th Street, which are the two arterial roadways in the project vicinity. This established area has mature ornamental landscaping along the roadways and parcel frontages. Public Views Viewer groups are broadly characterized as having public or private views. Public views are available to all visual receptors, such as views from a neighborhood park or roadway. Private views, however, are exclusive to property owners and their guests or members, and include places such as residences and private facilities (e.g., golf clubs or tennis clubs). The project vicinity is developed and has public views that are generally limited to corridors along roadways, with the exception of Edna Park and the Santa Ana River. Public viewers of the project site include motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists along area roadways, and recreational viewers from Edna Park and the Santa Ana River trail. Edna Park is located adjacent to the Santa Ana River, The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -4 ICF 00914.11 SIM City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist and both are approximately 500 feet to the south of the project site. The width of the Santa Ana River and its concrete -lined channel creates separation and more panoramic views than the adjacent street system in the area. The views from Edna Park and the Santa Ana River toward the project site are limited to a single view corridor provided by Huckleberry Road. This view corridor from Edna Park is constrained by existing residential structures and their associated landscaping, which create visual obstructions. Further, the view of the project site is constrained by the existing 6 -foot concrete wall the bounds the project site on three sides. Private Views Given the flat topography and the density of the built environment in the vicinity of the project, the residents directly adjacent to the project site have the most prominent views. The residential uses east and adjacent to the project site have direct views of the project site. Additionally, views from residences within the adjacent condominiums to the south have close views of the project site. However, the vast majority of the condominium residents do not have direct views of the project site because of the orientation of the residential units and the existing visual obstructions, including walls and trees that separate the parcels. Likewise, the recreational areas (i.e., swimming pool and tennis courts) within the condominium development are screened from the project site by the existing built environment. The residential land uses to the west of Fairview Avenue have over 80 feet of separation from the project site and a busy thoroughfare between residences and the project. In addition, these residences are largely faced inward, toward the residential streets, and not oriented toward Fairview Street or the project site. The St. Edna Subacute & Rehabilitation Center adjacent to the north of the project site has an exterior patio area in an enclave on the east side of the building adjacent to the parking lot. This area is screened from the project site by a jog in the building envelope that provides a visual obstruction. In addition, views of the project site, including patient rooms, are obstructed by the existing 6 -foot wall that exists between the rehabilitation center and the project site. Onsite Baseline Visual Conditions As evidenced by the panoramas shown on Figures 3 -1 and 3 -2, the views to and from the site are constrained by the density and intensity of the built environment that surrounds the site on all four sides. The perimeter walls on the north, east, and south of the property further constrain the viewshed. The walls average 6 feet in height and are painted an off -white color. The eastern wall has graffiti adjacent to a painted -over area that was likely covered with graffiti as well. The southern boundary wall adjacent to the multi- family residential development is shorter and topped with a 30- inch wrought -iron metal fence. The western viewshed is more open because it Is adjacent to Fairview Street and lacks a perimeter wall. The western boundary is defined by a temporary chain -link fence supported by round steel posts. Although chain -link fencing is visually unobtrusive from a distance, when viewed closely it is unattractive and industrial- looking. In addition, the Fairview Street road, sidewalks, and right -of- way creates additional openness from southwest to northwest views. However, the traffic along Fairview Street also creates a visual distraction and boundary. The character of the onsite landscape can be described as previously developed vacant land. The immediate foreground is dominated by concrete foundations. Their geometric shape is reinforced by the pollution prevention structures along their perimeters. Further into the foreground asphalt and concrete driveways transition smoothly along the foundations. Mature trees are the site's dominant The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -5 ICF 00914.11 31 B -74 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist vertical presence. The trees are the landscaping remnants of the site's former hospital and medical center buildings. With these buildings gone the landscaping no longer has context and the existing tree placement appears random; their aesthetic appeal is compromised. The smaller shrubs in the raised planting pits are in poor condition due to a.lack of irrigation. A temporary 25 -foot tall aggregate stockpile in the northeast corner of the property is a visual incongruity, which gives this portion of the site an industrial character. In addition, the power poles located along the site's southern boundary give it an industrial character. In summary, the baseline onsite visual conditions are inharmonious with the developed viewshed of the project vicinity, which is mostly a densely developed urban landscape. Key Observation Points Key observation points (KOPs) are public vantage points with views of the project site which may /will change from the baseline conditions as a result of project implementation. Because of the presence of the built environment, public views of the project site are associated with streets which, in an urban environment, create openness and consequently provide view corridors and public viewing locations. During the field reconnaissance investigations conducted on January 17, 2012,18 candidate KOPs (cKOPs) were identified and photographed. Figure 3 -3 is an aerial photograph of the project's vicinity showing the location and spatial distribution of the cKOPs. While all the cKOPs were from public vantage points, most are considered as also representing similar views which could be expected from residences in the immediate vicinity of the cKOP. The 18 cKOPs were evaluated for their relative visual sensitivity, and narrowed down to the top four KOPs that represent the highest sensitivity or are representative of general views of the project. These top four KOPs are described below, and are used for the visual simulations that are provided in Figures 3 -4 through 3 -7. KOP 3 KOP 3 is located at the terminus of Huckleberry Road in Edna Park, which is adjacent to the east of the Santa Ana River. The KOP is approximately 500 feet from the project site, and also within a residential neighborhood. This view provides context of the existing residential neighborhood and is representative of views in the park or adjacent residential area. This KOP is deemed sensitive because it is from a public recreation area. KOP 9 KOP 9 is located near 2309 Strawberry Lane. The KOP is located in close proximity to the project site, just 40 feet from the eastern wall of the project site. KOP 9 is within a residential area located between the project site and the Santa Ana River. This view provides context of the existing residential neighborhood and is representative of the private residential views in the area. This KOP is deemed sensitive due to proximity, concern level, and pervasiveness of the view. IX61zEI KOP 14 is located at the northwest intersection of Huckleberry Road and North Fairview Street; specifically, 2501 Huckleberry Road and the 1900 block of North Fairview Street on the public sidewalk. The view direction is east approximately 100 feet from the western project boundary. This view faces directly across Fairview Street toward the project site. The primary public viewer groups The Academy Charter High School 3-6 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ILF 00914.11 31 B -75 X F i i 31 B -76 L 03 N O n kE� R d u is I { -tall t< IL Z a pp o p r C O FQIII 9 - §. §4 } $ E. 2 a X12/ u § o § k � 2 � $ � k � \ � : � \\ ° rV,;`' ,j w flow e r!k � ^- r V p rry •T 'emu. i a� pm. Y .. «. R ti f emu. �.d 1 ;{ " aC rr P ��i �.� � Rl� ry _w•�R .. 1, < a, - Ir. P FM on ai k � ► r e � ► V • 1 -Vwt- ow WK r • "� - ' �` r "'� xafi a ' � tti d i q �x mwm� ICF t 1 s F' ge UP TA OM , ., NOW- � f ti ' � �ra�„w "mss *, ,y„..aror� .�,. •�^" �- Rai 1�` {� Pp ' It MMIW& KOP 9 Baseline Visual Conditions KOP 9 Design Visualization Figure 3 -5 KOP 9 Baseline Visual Conditions and Design Visualization The Academy, City of Santa Ana KOP 14 Baseline Visual Conditions KOP 14 Design Visualization Figure 3-6 KOP 14 Baseline Visual Conditions and Design Visualization The Academy, City of Santa Ana :1001 1 ,CF mms: City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist at this KOP are residents, motorists, and pedestrians. The KOP was deemed sensitive due to its proximity, concern level, and number of viewers. KOP 16 KOP 16 is located on western side of Fairview Street; it is a view from the sidewalk in the 1800 block. The view direction is north - northeast. The right -of -way of Fairview Street provides separation from the project site, but the view of the site is also panoramic. The primary viewer groups are motorists and pedestrians. The KOP was deemed sensitive due to its proximity, pervasiveness, and the number of viewers. The existing conditions and characterization of views and sensitive viewers, along with the KOPs described above, are used as the baseline for determining the potential impacts that could result from the proposed project when applying the thresholds below. Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less- than - Significant Impact. The proposed project would not have an adverse effect on a scenic vista. Scenic vistas are views that are generally greater than 1 mile from a receptor and consist of horizon line views. As described above, the project site is in an urban developed area where scenic vistas are generally limited to street corridors and the Edna Park /Santa Ana River areas, which are adjacent to one another and located approximately 500 feet to the east of the project site. As described previously, shown in Figure 3 -4, and evaluated in the KOP 3 discussion below, the Edna Park /Santa Ana River recreational area has a limited view of the project site via the Huckleberry Road viewshed and above the 6 -foot wall that borders the project site. From the park only a small portion of the project site is visible. Furthermore, the scenic vista from this location is in the opposite direction towards the open space of the Santa Ana River. As a result, implementation of the project will not have a substantial adverse effect on views from the Edna Park /Santa Ana River area toward the project site. There are no other scenic vistas or view corridors in the vicinity that have views of the project site. Therefore, development of the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista, and impacts are less than significant. b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings along a scenic highway? No Impact. There are no officially designated state scenic highways in the vicinity of the proposed project (Caltrans 2011). The only officially designated scenic highway within Orange County is a portion of SR -91. Eligible State Scenic Highways within the County include: SR -1, SR -74, portions of SR -91, and a portion of SR -57, none of which is in the vicinity of the project site. Likewise, there are no County- designated scenic highways that run through the City of Santa Ana. Additionally, as described in V.a below (Cultural Resources), there are no recorded historical resources located within 0.5 mile of the project site. Further, the proposed project site is relatively flat and surrounded by an urban environment. There are no other scenic resources, including trees and rock outcroppings, within or adjacent to the project area. Therefore, there are no potential impacts related to scenic resources within a state scenic highway, and no mitigation is required. The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -7 ICF00914.11 ' 0 1 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Less - than - Significant Impact. The proposed project would alter the existing visual character of the site. In terms of character, the area surrounding the site is best described as urban and developed. The project site was previously developed, but is currently vacant, underutilized, and visually incongruent to its developed urban surroundings, as described above in the onsite visual conditions discussion and shown in Figures 3 -1 and 3 -2. Because the site is somewhat degraded by the existing remnants of the previous development, the change in character after implementation of the project will improve the existing visual character or quality of the project site and the site would be more congruous with its surroundings. The proposed project will redevelop the project site with eight buildings on the 7.2 -acre project site, consisting of three residential buildings, three educational buildings, and two administrative support buildings. The buildings will be developed over two project phases (shown in Figure 2 -5). Phase 1 of the proposed project would include the construction and operation of six buildings — Buildings A, B, C, D, B, and G— totaling 110,517 square feet. Phase 11 would consist of the gymnasium (Building F) and one classroom building (Building H) totaling 35,619 square feet, and completing the total project buildout of 146,136 square feet. All of the proposed buildings would range from one to three stories and would be between 25 and 46 feet in height. The architectural style of the project would be contemporary /modern, incorporating concrete, corrugated siding, smooth siding, and glass. The exterior elevations of the buildings will utilize architectural details and both vertical and horizontal projections to enhance the aesthetics of the school campus and aesthetically reduce the scale and mass of the proposed structures. The architectural features divide the buildings' mass and scale with varying roof heights, canopies, sun shades, smooth fiber cement boards, corrugated siding, custom paint palettes, and windows and doors. The use of multiple material types will soften the overall appearance of the buildings and make them more consistent with the character of the surrounding area. The varying roof heights will aesthetically reduce the scale and mass of the buildings. Buildout of the project will cover 47% of the project site with education or residential buildings. In addition, the project includes 146 parking spaces that would be constructed during Phase 1. The parking facilities will be distributed around the perimeter of the site and are designed to be visually integrated and connected to appropriate portions of the site. Additionally, a large portion of the parking spaces will be shielded from views by the proposed buildings, landscaping, and the existing wall along three sides of the project site perimeter. implementation of the project would increase the overall density and intensity of the project site, which currently lies vacant with the exception of remnants of the former site uses consisting of debris, concrete, asphalt, and random ornamental landscaping. The proposed project would be visible from existing land uses surrounding the project site, as described in the visual simulations evaluation below. Evaluation of Visual Simulations The following discussion includes an analysis of the visual changes for each of the four key KOPs, as modified by the proposed project. Visual simulations of the proposed project features are overlaid on each of the existing KOP photos to demonstrate the potential visual changes that would be introduced by the proposed project. The Academy Charter High School Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-8 2012 June ne 20.2 City of Santa Ana KOP 3 Environmental Checklist Figure 3 -4 (KOP 3) demonstrates the baseline visual condition and the visual change that would occur from implementation of the project. The narrow view corridor from Edna Park to the project site is down Huckleberry Road. The surrounding one- and two -story residences create visual obstructions of the project site. In addition, the mature trees in the park and residential parcels provide screening that further constrains the view corridor, and thus views of the project site. As shown on Figure 3 -4, only a portion of Building H is visible from Edna Park. This view shows the project in scale with its surroundings and that the project exterior will blend into its surroundings when viewed from a distance. From this distance the project is only a small portion of the viewshed and the scenic vista from this location is in the opposite direction towards the open space of the Santa Ana River. As a result, implementation of the project will not have a substantial adverse effect on views from the Edna Park /Santa Ana River area toward the project site. KOP 9 Figure 3 -5 shows the existing baseline visual condition and a visual simulation that represents the view after development of the proposed project with the proposed landscaping at approximately 10- years of growth. KOP 9 is within a residential neighborhood adjacent to the east of the project site. The proposed buildings change this view by adding large, tall geometric forms to the previously vacant view. This is an urban environment where these types of structures are not an unusual architectural element. The building's exterior has a pleasant color and texture, and its mass is lessened by the windows and proposed landscaping. This view and similar views along the north -south trending streets in this neighborhood would be experienced primarily by local residents, motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists in the neighborhood. The proposed landscape plan provides vegetative screening along the eastern perimeter of the project site. KOP 9 may be considered a worst -case scenario from this neighborhood because the view is adjacent to the new structure. There are approximately six existing residences that would have views similar to KOP 9. Vantage points farther away along the neighborhood streets would have lesser view of the project site because the residential structures and landscaping in between would create visual obstructions, which substantially reduce the project's visual effect. The proposed landscape plan includes tall vertical components to the planting palette along the project's eastern boundary. The proposed landscaping softens the project's mass and diminishes the project's vertical presence. These tree species included on the landscaping plan are common throughout the surrounding landscape, so their presence will be consistent within the existing vegetative fabric. As a result, the project's visual impact from the public views to the east of the project site will be less - than - significant level, KOP 14 Figure 3 -6 shows the baseline visual condition and a visual simulation representing the view after development of the proposed project. The project introduces large geometric elements with building fagades and vertical and horizontal articulation that add visual interest. The project aims to enhance the aesthetics of the site by using the most current design standards, building materials, detailing, and colors to complement the local surroundings. The project incorporates perimeter landscaping and sidewalks that consist of pavers instead of concrete. These features allow the project to be compatible with the visual setting of the area. Hence, although the project would alter the character of the project site by developing a school facility on the vacant and underutilized site, the The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -9 ILF 00914.11 • Simlao-keJ City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist landscaping and architectural details will lessen the impact of the size and scale of the proposed structures. Additionally, the project would provide an overall improvement over the site that is currently degraded with remnants of the previous site uses. As a result, the visual impacts from KOP 14 are less than significant. KOP 16 Figure 3 -7 shows an oblique view of the project from Fairview Street that represents what the greatest number of people would see after implementation of the proposed project. As shown in Figure 3 -7, views of the project site from the Fairview Street vantage point will show the western elevation of the school buildings that would vary in height, color, and setback from Fairview Street, which provides visual depth and interest. Although the proposed buildings are greater than the mass and scale of the nearby residential and commercial structures, the addition of architectural detail, varied colors, landscaping, and varied building heights and setbacks reduces the overall visual effect of the large buildings and enhances the overall compatibility with surrounding land uses. As shown, the project landscaping plan along Fairview Street screens parking areas, and the building colors and exterior treatments are harmonious and create a sense of place. The remnant landscaping in the baseline conditions is replaced with landscaping that accentuates the attributes of the project. As a result, the visual impacts from KOP 16 are less than significant. d. Create a new source of substantial light orglare that would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area? Less - than - Significant Impact. As mentioned above, the project is located in an urbanized area that is developed with mixed uses. The project site is surrounded by a developed environment with fixed and mobile sources of exterior light and glare. Fixed sources of light and glare include exterior building- mounted and freestanding light fixtures, illuminated signage on existing land uses, and street lighting along Fairview Street and Blueberry Lane. Mobile sources of light and glare originate from vehicles. These existing light sources contribute to moderate levels of nighttime lighting. The project includes installation of nighttime lighting for security and signage purposes. This includes parking lot and sidewalk lighting within the residential component and lighting on, around, and within the residential units. All outdoor lighting will be low- level, downward - facing, hooded, and appropriately angled away from sensitive land uses. Further, the lighting will be the minimum necessary to safely light the project site and comply with the design standards outlined in the City's Municipal Code. As a result, the lighting used for the proposed project would not introduce a significant new source of light to the area and impacts related to lighting would be less than significant. Glare is a phenomenon which is primarily caused by sunlight striking and renecting off spectral surfaces. Glare is predictable and governed by the Law of Reflection. In an urban environment the primary spectral surfaces are glass or polished metal. The proposed project's buildings do not use polished metal as an exterior architectural treatment, which would have the potential to cause fugitive glare. The windows are not glazed or highly polished so their refractive index will be the same as ordinarywindow glass that is currently pervasive in surrounding area. The incremental increase in spectral surfaces that have the potential to cause glare proposed by the project is considered less than significant. The Academy Charter High School June 2022 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -10 Icf 0e 20.2 Lklilt • •, City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural Less -than- ❑ Significant Potentially Impact with Less -than- Significant Mitigation Significant No 11. Agriculture and Forest Resources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact In determining whether impacts on agricultural ❑ resources are significant environmental effects, ❑ lead agencies may refer to the California rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to timberland (as defined by Public Resources forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest Timberland Production (as defined by land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project, the Forest Legacy Assessment project, and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or ❑ ❑ ❑ Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California e. Involve other changes in the existing Resources Agency, to non - agricultural use? El b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural ❑ ❑ ❑ use or conflict with a Williamson Act contract? c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause ❑ ❑ ❑ rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(8)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion E] ❑ El of forest land to non - forest use? e. Involve other changes in the existing E] El El environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non - agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non - forest use? The Academy Charter High School 3 -11 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 ' • City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Discussion Would the project: a. Con vertPrime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland ofStatewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? No Impact. The proposed project is located in a fully developed urban environment. According to the California Department of Conservation Orange County Important Farmland 2008 map (California Department of Conservation 2008), the proposed project site is classified as "urban and built -up land," which does not contain any agricultural uses. As a result, the proposed project does not have the potential to convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non - agricultural uses. No impact would occur. h. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or conflict with a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The project site is currently designated for urban uses by the Santa Ana General Plan and Zoning Code, which designates the site for professional and office development. The project site is an infill redevelopment parcel within a fully developed area. No agricultural land uses and no property under Williamson Act contract exist in the vicinity of the proposed project. The proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract. No impact would occur. c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of; forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), tirnherland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(8))? No Impact. The project site is currently designated for urban uses by the Santa Ana General Plan and Zoning Code, which designates the site for professional and office development. The project site is an infill redevelopment parcel within a fully developed area. No land zoned as forest land or timberland exists within the proposed project boundaries. The proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for forest land or timberland. No impact would occur. d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non forest use? No Impact. As discussed in ll.c, no land zoned as forest land or timberland exists within the proposed project boundaries. The proposed project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to other uses. No impact would occur. e. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non - agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non- forest use? No Impact. No agricultural land uses, forest land, or timberland exist in the vicinity of the proposed project and the proposed project site has been developed for urban uses since 1964. The proposed school would not involve other changes in the existing environment that, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland to non- agricultural use or forest land to non - forest use. No impact would occur. i ne ACaaemy Charter High School 3 12 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration [CF 00914.11 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist III. Air Quality Potentially Significant Impact Less -than- Significant lmpactwith Mitigation Incorporated Less -than- Significant Impact No Impact When available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of El F-1 10 the applicable air quality plan? b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute E a El substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net O o 0 El increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is a nonattaimnent area for an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial Q 0 El pollutant concentrations? e. Create objectionable odors affecting a E ® E] substantial number of people? Discussion Regional Context The proposed project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin (Basin), an area covering approximately 6,745 square miles bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west and south and the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and east, The Basin includes all of Orange County and the non- desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties, in addition to the San Gorgonio Pass area in Riverside County. The terrain and geographical location determine the distinctive climate of the Basin, which is a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills. The Southern California region lies in the semi - permanent high- pressure zone of the eastern Pacific. As a result, the climate is mild, tempered by cool sea breezes. The usually mild climatological pattern is interrupted infrequently by periods of extremely hot weather, winter storms, or Santa Ana winds. The extent and severity of the air pollution problem in the Basin is a function of the area's natural physical characteristics (weather and topography) as well as human -made influences (development patterns and lifestyle). Factors such as wind, sunlight, temperature, humidity, rainfall, and topography all affect the accumulation and dispersion of pollutants throughout the Basin, making it an area of high pollution potential. The Academy Charter High School 3 13 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration iCF00914.11 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist The greatest air pollution impacts in the Basin occur from June through September, and are generally attributed to the large amount of pollutant emissions, light winds, and shallow vertical atmospheric mixing. This condition frequently reduces pollutant dispersion, thus causing elevated air pollution levels. Pollutant concentrations in the Basin vary with location, season, and time of day. Ozone (03) concentrations, for example, tend to be lower along the coast, higher in the near inland valleys, and lower in the far inland areas of the Basin and adjacent desert. Air quality within the basin is regulated by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD or District), which has jurisdiction over an area of approximately 10,743 square miles, including all of Orange County, Los Angeles County except for the Antelope Valley, the non- desert portion of western San Bernardino County, and the western and Coachella Valley portions of Riverside County. The Basin is a sub - region of the SCAQMD jurisdiction. While air quality in this area has improved, the Basin requires continued diligence to meet air quality standards. The SCAQMD has recently completed the Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study III (MATES 111), an ambient air- monitoring and evaluation study conducted in the Basin. MATES III was a follow up to previous air toxics studies in the Basin and is part of the SCAQMD Governing Board Environmental justice Initiative. Over the past 30 years, substantial progress has been made in reducing air pollution levels in Southern California. For example, compared to previous studies of air toxics in the Basin, MATES III found a decreasing risk for air toxics exposure, with the population weighted risk down by 17% from the analysis in MATES 11. However, although there has been improvement in air quality regarding air toxics, the risks are still unacceptable and are higher near sources of emissions such as ports and transportation corridors. Diesel particulate continues to dominate the risk from air toxics, and the portion of air toxic risk attributable to diesel exhaust is increasing compared to the MATES Il Study. The highest risks are found near the port, central Los Angeles, and transportation corridors. The results from the MATES Ill study underscore that a continued focus on reduction of toxic emissions, particularly from diesel engines, is needed to reduce air toxics exposure. The MATES III study concluded that the average carcinogenic risk throughout the Basin, attributed to toxic air contaminants (TACs), is approximately 1,194 in one million. Mobile sources (e.g., cars, trucks, trains, ships, aircraft, etc.) represent the greatest contributors. About 83.6% of all risk is attributed to diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions. Data from the closest climate monitoring station— Western Regional Climate Center's (WRCC) Santa Ana Fire Station —was used to characterize project vicinity climate conditions. The average project area summer (August) high and low temperatures are 84.7 and 61.6 °F, respectively; the average winter (January) high and low temperatures are 68.0 and 43.0 °F, respectively. The average annual rainfall is 13.79 inches (WRCC 2012). The closest wind monitoring station is the Anaheim wind monitoring station, which was used to characterize study area wind conditions. Wind patterns in the project vicinity display a nearly unidirectional flow, primarily from the south - southwest and southwest, at an average speed of 8 mph. Calm wind conditions are present 14.73% of the time (SCAQMD 2012). Wind direction is reversed from the stated direction only 2 -3% of the time. The Academy Charter High School 3 14 June 2012 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration IcF 00914.11 •III City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Existing Pollutant Levels The SCAQMD has divided the Basin into air monitoring areas and maintains a network of air quality monitoring stations throughout the Basin. The project site is located in the Central Orange County Area (i.e., Source Receptor Area [SRA) Number 17). The nearest monitoring station is in the City of Santa Ana, located approximately 5 miles northwest of the project location. The Anaheim - Pampas monitoring station in the City of Anaheim monitors the following criteria pollutants: carbon monoxide (CO), 03, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (S02), and particulate matter less than or equal to 10 or 2.5 micrometers in diameter (PM10 and PM2.5, respectively). The most recent data available covers 2008 to 2010. Monitoring data (Table 3 -1) show the following pollutant trends: state 1 -hour 03 standards were exceeded three times during the 3 -year reporting period. The national 8 -hour 03 standard was exceeded a total of six times during the 3 -year period. CO and NO2 concentrations are low and no exceedances were recorded during the 3 -year reporting period. Particulate (PM10 and PM2.5) concentrations are largely affected by meteorology and show some variability during the 3 -year reporting period. The state 24 -hour PM10 standard was exceeded three times in 2008 and once in 2009. The national PM23 standard was exceeded five times in both 2008 and 2009, and not once in 2010. Table 3 -1. Air Quality Data from Costa Mesa Station (ARB 30195) and Anaheim - Pampas Lane Station (ARB 30178) Pollutant Standards 2008 2009 2010 Ozone (03) State Standard (1- HourAverage = 0.09 ppm) National Standard (8- HourAverage = 0.07S ppm) Maximum Concentration 1 -Hour Period 0.105 0.093 0.104 (ppm) Maximum Concentration 8 -Hour Period 0.086 0.077 0.088 (ppm) Days State 1 -Hour Standard Exceeded 2 0 1 Days National 8 -Hour Standard Exceeded S 1 1 Carbon Monoxide (CO) State Standard (8-Hour Average = 9 ppm) National Standard (8-Hour Average = 9 ppm) Maximum Concentration 8 -Hour Period 3.44 2.73 1.98 Win) Days State /National 8 -Hour Standard 0 0 0 Exceeded Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) State Standard (1 -Hour Average= 0.18 ppm) Maximum 1 -Hour Concentration 0.081 0.065 0.070 Days State Standard Exceeded 0 0 0 Suspended Particulates (PM10) State Standard (24- HourAverage = 50 pg /m3) National Standard (24-Hour Average =150 pg/ne) The Academy Charter High School Initial study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -15 •11 June 2012 ICF 00914.11 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Pollutant Standards 2008 2009 2010 Maximum State 24 -Hour Concentration 61.0 62.0 43.0 Maximum National 24 -How- Concentration 111.5 97.4 43.0 Days Exceeding State Standard 3 1 0 Days Exceeding National Standard 0 0 0 Suspended Particulates (PM2.5) National Standard (24-Hour Average = 35 pcg /m3) Maximum 24 -Hour Concentration 67.8 64.5 31.7 Days Exceeding National Standard 5 5 0 Notes: ppn1= parts per million µg /m3 = microgram per cubic meter Source: ARB 2012. Sensitive Receptors and Locations Some population groups, such as children, the elderly, and acutely and chronically ill persons, especially those with cardio- respiratory diseases, are considered more sensitive to air pollution than others. Sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the project include residential land uses located on three sides of the project site and the St. Edna Subacute and Rehabilitation Center adjacent to the north of the project site. Regulatory Setting Federal Federal Clean Air Act The Clean Air Act (CAA) was first enacted in 1963 and has been amended numerous times in subsequent years (1967, 1970, 1977, and 1990). The CAA establishes the National Ambient Air Quality Standards ( NAAQS) and specifies future dates for achieving compliance. The CAA also mandates that the state submit and implement a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for local areas not meeting those standards. The plans must include pollution control measures that demonstrate how the standards will be met. Because the City of Santa Ana is within the Basin, it is in an area designated as nonattainment for certain pollutants that are regulated under the CAA. The 1990 amendments to the CAA identify specific emission- reduction goals for areas not meeting the NAAQS. These amendments require both a demonstration of reasonable further progress toward attainment and incorporation of additional sanctions for failure to attain or meet interim milestones. The sections of the CAA that would most substantially affect the development of the proposed project include Title 1 (Nonattainment Provisions) and Title 11 (Mobile- Source Provisions). Title I provisions were established with tite goal of attaining the NAAQS for criteria pollutants. Table 3 -2 shows the NAAQS currently in effect for each criteria pollutant. The NAAQS were amended in July 1997 to include an 8 -hour standard for 03 and adopt a standard for PM2.5. The Basin (Orange County portion) fails to meet national standards for 03, PM10, and PM2.5 and therefore is The Academy Charter High School 3 -16 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration [CF 00914.11 • V� City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist considered a federal nonattainment area for these pollutants. Table 3 -3 lists each criteria pollutant and their related attainment status. Table 3 -2. Federal and State Ambient Air Quality Standards Pollutant Averaging Time CAAQSa NAAQSb Ozone (03) 1 hour 0.09 ppnnc — 8 hour 0.070 ppm 0.075 ppm Carbon Monoxide (CO) 1 hour 20 ppm 35 ppm 8 hour 9.0 ppm 9 ppm Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) 1 hour 0.18 ppm 100 ppb Annual Arithmetic Mean 0.030 ppm 53 ppb Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) 1 hour 0.25 ppm 75 ppb 24 hour 0.04 ppm 0.14 ppm Respirable Particulate Matter 24 hour 50 leg /mac 150 µg /1113 (PM10) Annual Arithmetic Mean 20 11g /1113 — Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 24 hour — 35 leg /1113 Annual Arithmetic Mean 12 µg /m3 15.0 leg /m3 Sulfates 24 hour 25 pg /1113 — Lead (Pb) 30 day average 1.5 pg /m3 — Calendar quarter — 1.5 pg /1113 Rolling 3 -Month Average — 0.15 "g/m3 Hydrogen Sulfide 1 hour 0.03 ppm --- Vinyl Chloride 24 hour 0.01 ppm — Notes: a The California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for 03, CO, S02 (1 -hour and 24- hour), NO2, PM10, and PM2.5 are values not to be exceeded. All other California standards shown are values not to be equaled or exceeded. b'rhe NAAQS, other than 03 and those based on annual averages, are not to be exceeded more than once a year. The 03 standard is attained when the expected number of days per calendar year with maximum hourly average concentrations above the standard is equal to or less than 1. c ppm = parts per million by volume; ppb = parts per billion; jig/1113 = micrograms per cubic meter. Source: ARB 2012. Table 3 -3. Federal and State Attainment Status for Orange County Portion South Coast Air Basin Pollutants Federal Classification State Classification 03 (1 -hour standard) — Nonattainment, Extreme O3 (8 -hour standard) Nonattainment, Extreme Nonattainment, Extreme PM10 Nonattainment, Serious Nonattainment PM2.5 Nonattainment Nonattainment CO Attainnent /Maintenance Attainment NO2 Nonattainnent Nonattainment S02 Attainment Attainment Source: ARB 2012. The Academy Charter High School Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-17 2 IrJ June une 2 2 01.12 •�ca City of Santa Ana State California Clean AirAct Environmental Checklist The California Clean Air Act (CCAA), signed into law in 1988, requires all areas of the state to achieve and maintain the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) by the earliest practical date. The CAAQS incorporate additional standards for most of the criteria pollutants and set standards for other pollutants recognized by the state. In general, the California standards are more health protective than the corresponding NAAQS. California has also set standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, vinyl chloride, and visibility- reducing particles. The Basin is in compliance with these California standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, visibility- reducing particles, and vinyl chloride. Table 3 -2 details the current NAAQS and CAAQS, and Table 3 -3 provides the Basin's (Orange County portion) attainment status with respect to federal and state standards. Local South Coast Air Quality Management Disti-ict SCAQMD has adopted a series of air quality management plans (AQMPs) to meet the CAAQS and NAAQS. These plans require, among other emissions- reducing activities, control technology for existing sources, control programs for area sources and indirect sources, a SCAQMD permitting system designed to allow no net increase in emissions from any new or modified (i.e., previously permitted) emission sources, and transportation control measures. The 2007 AQMP was adopted on June 1, 2007 (SCAQMD 2007), and is currently in the process of being updated. The 2012 AQMP Advisory Group was approved by the AQMD Governing Board in September 2011, and was directed to consider the following in updating the AQMP: latest scientific/ technological information and planning assumptions (including the 2012 Regional Transportation Plan /Sustainable Communities Strategy), updated emission inventory methodologies for various source categories, and a strategy to implement zero or near -zero emission measures to reach attainment of particulate matter and ozone standards. SCAQMD adopts rules and regulations to implement portions of the AQMP. Several of these rules may apply to construction or operation of the project. For example, SCAQMD Rule 403 requires implementing the best available fugitive dust control measures during active operations capable of generating fugitive dust emissions from onsite earth - moving activities, construction /demolition activities, and construction equipment travel on paved and unpaved roads. SCAQMD has published the CEQA Air Quality Handbook (November 1993) to help local governments analyze and mitigate project - specific air quality impacts. This handbook provides standards, methodologies, and procedures for conducting air quality analyses for CEQA documents, which, in combination with up -to -date and current emissions factors, is used within the SCAQMD jurisdiction. In addition, SCAQMD has published two additional guidance documents — localized Significance Threshold Methodology for CEQA Evaluations (June 2003) and Particulate Matter (PM) 2.5 Significance Thresholds and Calculation Methodology (October 2006) —that provide guidance for evaluating localized effects from mass emissions during construction. Both were used in the preparation of this analysis. Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the regional planning agency for Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Imperial Counties. It addresses regional The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study/Mitigated Ne ative Declaration 3 -1$ g ICf 017924.31 1 •i_� City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist issues relating to transportation, the economy, community development, and the environment. SCAG is the federally designated metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for the majority of the southern California region and is the largest MPO in the nation. With respect to air quality planning, SCAG has prepared the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) for the region, which includes Growth Management and Regional Mobility chapters that form the basis for the land use and transportation components of the AQMP. These chapters are utilized in the preparation of air quality forecasts and the consistency analysis that is included in the AQMP. Methodology Construction Mass daily combustion emissions, fugitive PM10 and PM2.5, and off - gassing emissions (e.g., evaporative emissions of volatile organic compounds [VOCs] from the application of architectural coatings and asphalt paving) were compiled using CalEEMod, which is an emissions estimation /evaluation model developed in collaboration with air quality management districts of California. The CalEEMod model separates the construction process into multiple phases that account for everything from structure demolition and site clearing to asphalt paving and the application of architectural coatings. Site preparation emissions (e.g., grading and excavation) would include fugitive dust emissions from soil disturbance activity, as well as combustion exhaust emissions from onsite construction equipment, haul truck trips, and worker commute trips. Structure erection and finishing emissions would include combustion exhaust emissions from onsite construction equipment, haul truck trips, and worker commute trips, as well as fugitive off - gassing emissions from the application of architectural coatings and asphalt paving. Assumptions regarding construction phasing and equipment use were developed based on information received from the project applicant. A complete listing of the construction equipment by phase, construction phase duration assumptions, and changes to modeling default values used in this analysis is included within the CaiEEMod printout sheets that are provided in Appendix A of this IS /MND. Operations The CalEEMod software was also used to compile the mass daily emissions estimates from mobile and area sources that would occur during long -term project operations. In calculating mobile- source emissions, the CalEEMod default trip assumptions were applied to arrive at the total vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Area- source emissions were compiled using CalEEMod default assumptions. The analysis of roadway CO impacts followed the protocol recommended by Caltrans and published in their Transportation Project -Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol (Garza 1997). It is also consistent with procedures identified through the SCAQMD's CO modeling protocol. For any intersection that shows potential to generate a CO hotspot by failing SCAQMD- recommended screening criteria, local area CO concentrations are evaluated using the CALiNE 4 line- source dispersion model developed by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) combined with EMFAC2012 emission factors. All emissions calculation worksheets and air quality modeling output files are provided in Appendix A. The Academy Charter High School 3 19 tune 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Thresholds of Significance Appendix G, Section [I[ of the Environmental Checklist Form in the State CEQA Guidelines states that, where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make determinations regarding air quality impacts. Because of SCAQMD's regulatory role in the Basin, the significance thresholds and analysis methodologies outlined in their CEQA Air Quality Handbook, Localized Significance Threshold Methodology for CEQA Evaluations, and Particulate Matter (PM) 2.5 Significance Thresholds and Calculation Methodology guidance documents were used in evaluating project impacts. The SCAQMD construction and operational emissions thresholds identified in Table 3 -4 is used for this assessment. Table 3 -4. SCAQMD Emission Thresholds (pounds per day) Regional Emissions Thresholds Pollutant Construction Operation Localized Emissions Thresholds Construction Construction Operation (5 acre) (2 acre) Nitrogen Oxides 100 5S 183 115 183 (NOx) Reactive Organic 75 55 N/A N/A N/A Compounds (ROC) Suspended Particulate Matter 150 150 13 6 3 (PM10) Fine Particulate 55 55 7 4 2 Matter (PM2,5) Sul hit- Oxides (SOX) 150 150 N/A N/A N/A Carbon Monoxide 550 550 1,253 715 1,253 (CO) Lead (Pb)t 3 3 N/A N/A N/A Notes: 1 The proposed project would have no lead emissions sources during the construction or operations period. As such, lead emissions are not evaluated in this report Localized thresholds derived from SCAQMD Localized Significance'rhreshold Tables and are based on the project location (Source Receptor Area [SRA] 17, the Central Orange County), project area disturbed in any given day (5 -acres for Phase 1 and 2 -acres for Phase 11), and the distance to the nearest sensitive receptor (25 meters). Source: SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, 1993 (As amended at http: / /wmv.agmd.gov /cega/ handbook /signthres.pdf); SCAQMD Localized Significance Threshold Methodology for CEQA Evaluations; and Particulate Matter (PM) 2.5 Significance Thresholds and Calculation Methodology. Would the project: a. Conflict with or obstruct Implementation of the applicable air quality plan? No Impact. SCAQMD is required, pursuant to the federal CAA, to reduce emissions of criteria pollutants for which the Basin is in nonattainment (i.e., 03, PM 10, and PM2.5). The project would be subject to SCAQMD's AQMP, which contains a comprehensive list of pollution control strategies directed at reducing emissions and achieving ambient air quality standards. These strategies are The Academy Charter High School 3 20 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist developed, in part, based on regional population, housing, and employment projections prepared by SCAG. The project site is located within the City of Santa Ana PO (Professional Office) land use designation and zoning designations, which provides for school uses along with approval of a CUP. Hence, the existing land use and zoning for the project site and vision for the land use and zoning is consistent with the proposed project, as further detailed in the Section X, "Land Use and Planning." The proposed project includes a residential component that would provide year -round housing for 80 Orange County foster students. These students are existing members of the community. Thus, the project would not result in unanticipated population growth, as discussed in Section XIII, "Population and Housing." Therefore, all project - related emissions are accounted for in the AQMP, which is crafted to bring the Basin into attainment for all criteria pollutants. Additionally, all construction activities will be in compliance with AQMP regulatory measures, including SCAQMD rules pertaining to fugitive dust (Rules 403, 404, and 405), visibility of emissions (Rule 401), nuisance activities (Rule 402), and limiting VOC content in both asphalt and architectural coatings (Rules 1108 and 1113). Finally, as discussed below under III,b, project operational emissions would fall below the SCAQMD thresholds of significance. Accordingly, the proposed project would be consistent with the projections in the AQMP. No impact would occur with respect to AQMP implementation and no mitigation measures are required. G. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Less - than - Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. As discussed above, the project site is located within the Basin, where state and federal air quality standards are occasionally exceeded. The proposed project would contribute to regional air pollutant emissions during construction (short -term) and project operations (long- term). Construction Impacts Construction of the proposed project has the potential to create air quality impacts through the use of heavy -duty construction equipment and through vehicle trips generated from construction workers traveling to and from the project site. In addition, fugitive dust emissions would result from site work related to the cut and fill of 500 and 5,000 total cubic yards of soil materials, respectively. Mobile source emissions, primarily NOx, would result from the use of construction equipment such as graders, scrapers, bulldozers, wheeled loaders, and cranes. During the structure erection /finishing phase, paving operations and the application of architectural coatings (i.e., paints) and other building materials would release ROC emissions. Construction emissions can vary substantially from day to day, depending on the level of activity, the specific type of operation, and, for dust, the prevailing weather conditions. The assessment of construction air quality impacts considers each of these potential sources. Construction of the proposed project is anticipated to take approximately 24 months to complete, divided into two phases. The total magnitude of construction activity, duration of construction activity, and intensity of construction activity would have a substantial effect upon the quantity of construction emissions (and related pollutant concentrations) occurring at any one time. As such, the emission forecasts provided herein reflect a specific set of conservative assumptions based on the expected construction scenario wherein a relatively large amount of construction activity is The Academy Charter High School 1 202 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 3-21 June ne 20 2 i ; •h City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist occurring in a relatively intensive manner. As provided in Table 3 -5, construction- related daily (short -term) emissions for the worst -case scenarios during which emissions from construction components would overlap to exceed the SCAQMD regional significance thresholds for ROG and NOx emissions in Phase 1, and ROG emissions in Phase 11. Thus, Mitigation MeasuresAQ -1 through AQ -3 have been included to reduce short -term construction emissions to a less -than- significant level. Table 3 -5. Estimate of Regional Construction Emissions (pounds per day) Before Mitigation Measures Notes: Construction emission calculation worksheets are included in Appendix A. a PM10 emissions estimates take into account compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements for fugitive dust suppression, which require that no visible dust be present beyond the site boundaries, as well as the use of EPA Tier 2 equipment. b lmplementation of Excavation & Soils Import and Rough Grading & Bldg Pad Prep 2012; and Fine Grading, Bldg Construction, Asphalt Parking Lots & Architectural Finishing 2013 within Phase 1 have the potential to overlap, thus emissions are summed. Implementation of Fine Grading, Bldg Construction & Architectural Finishing 2019 within Phase II have the potential to overlap, thus emissions are summed. Source: ICF 2012. The Academy Charter High School June 2012 initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -22 ICF 90914.11 ' 00� ROG NOx CO SOx PM10a PM2.5 Phase I Excavation & Soils Import 2012 29 284 152 <1 29 14 Rough Grading & Bldg. Pad Prep 2012 6 51 24 <1 5 3 Fine Grading & Soil Prep 2013 4 31 16 <1 2 2 Site Trenching & Foundation Excavation 2012 4 35 17 <1 4 2 Building Construction 2012 7 39 37 <1 15 3 Building Construction 2013 6 36 36 <1 14 3 Concrete Transit Mix - For Footings /Slabs 2012 1 9 11 <1 8 <1 Asphalt Parking Lot Area 2013 4 28 13 <1 2 1 Architectural Finishing 2013 207 3 3 <1 1 <1 SCAQMD Regional Threshold (5 acres) 75 100 550 150 150 55 Excavation & Soils Import and Rough Grading & Bldg Pad Prep 2012b 35 335 176 <1 34 17 Fine Grading, Bldg Construction, Asphalt Parking Lots & Architectural Finishing 20136 221 99 68 <1 19 6 Exceed Threshold? Yes Yes No No No No Phase II Fine Grading & Soil Prep 2018 2 15 13 <1 2 1 Site Trenching & Foundation Excavation 2018 4 22 19 <I 3 1 Building Construction 2018 4 20 25 <1 11 1 Building Construction 2019 4 18 25 <1 10 1 Concrete Transit Mix - For Footings /Slabs 2019 1 4 4 <1 5 <1 Architectural Finishing 2019 83 2 2 <1 <1 <1 SCAQMD Localized Significance Threshold (2 acres) 75 100 550 150 150 55 Fine Grading, Bldg Construction & Architectural Finishing 2019r 89 36 40 <1 12 2 Exceed Threshold? Yes No No No No No Notes: Construction emission calculation worksheets are included in Appendix A. a PM10 emissions estimates take into account compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements for fugitive dust suppression, which require that no visible dust be present beyond the site boundaries, as well as the use of EPA Tier 2 equipment. b lmplementation of Excavation & Soils Import and Rough Grading & Bldg Pad Prep 2012; and Fine Grading, Bldg Construction, Asphalt Parking Lots & Architectural Finishing 2013 within Phase 1 have the potential to overlap, thus emissions are summed. Implementation of Fine Grading, Bldg Construction & Architectural Finishing 2019 within Phase II have the potential to overlap, thus emissions are summed. Source: ICF 2012. The Academy Charter High School June 2012 initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -22 ICF 90914.11 ' 00� City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist As indicated in Table 3 -6, implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ -1, AQ -2, and AQ -3 would result in reductions of all criteria pollutant emissions, most notably of ROG by 89% and NOx emissions by 74% for the worst -case scenarios in Phase i, and a reduction of ROG by 89% in the worst -case scenario in Phase 11. Implementation of these mitigation measures would reduce emissions of ROG and NOx below the SCAQMD significance threshold. As such, air quality emission impacts related to construction would be less than significant after implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ -1 through AQ -3. Table 3 -6. Estimate of Regional Construction Emissions (pounds per day) After Implementation of Mitigation Regional Construction Emissions ROG NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5 Phase I Excavation & Soils import and Rough Grading & Bldg Pad Prep 2012 Fine Grading, Bldg Construction & Architectural Finishing 2013 Phase 1I Fine Grading, Bldg Construction & Architectural Finishing 2019 SCAQMD Regional Threshold (5 & 2 acres) Exceed 'threshold? Notes: 9 88 57 <1 19 4 24 83 66 <1 18 5 10 36 40 <1 12 2 75 100 550 150 150 55 No No No No No No Construction emission calculation worksheets are included in Appendix A. a PM10 emissions estimates take into account compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements for fugitive dust suppression, which require that no visible dust be present beyond the site boundaries, as well as the use of EPA Tier 2 equipment. b Implementation of Excavation & Soils Import and Rough Grading & Bldg Pad Prep 2012 and Fine Grading, Bldg Construction, Asphalt Parking Lots & Architectural Finishing 2013 within Phase 1 have the potential to overlap, thus emissions are summed. Implementation of Fine Grading, Bldg Construction & Architectural Finishing 2019 within Phase II have the potential to overlap, thus emissions are summed. Source: ICF 2012. Mitigation Measure AQ -1: During construction of Phase 1, the excavation and soils import and rough grading and soil prep components will be extended from 2 days to 4 days, and that the maximum number of truck trips for export of soil /excavation material be reduced to a maximum of 90 trips per day. These limitations shall be specified in the final grading permits and bid specifications to be approved by the City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency prior to issuance of a grading permit. Adherence to these requirements would thereby reduce the daily intensity and NOx emissions of Phase I associated with the excavation and soils import component. Mitigation Measure AQ -2: During all construction phases, construction- related equipment, including heavy -duty equipment, motor vehicles, and portable equipment, will be turned off when not in use for more than 5 minutes. These requirements shall be specified in the final grading permits and bid specifications to be approved by the City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency prior to issuance of a grading permit. I he Acaoemy Charter High School 3 23 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Mitigation Measure AQ -3: During construction, architectural coating material shall be Super - Compliant Low VOC paint that meets "super - compliant" VOC standard of <10 g/L of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (Rule 1113). These requirements shall be specified in the final architectural plans to be approved by the City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency prior to issuance of building permits. Operational Impacts Regional air pollutant emissions associated with project operations would be generated by the consumption of electricity and natural gas and by the operation of on -road vehicles. Pollutant emissions associated with energy demand (i.e., electricity generation and natural gas consumption) are classified by SCAQMD as area source emissions. Mobile- and area - source emissions were calculated using the CalEEMod emissions inventory model, which multiplies an estimate of daily VMT by applicable EMFAC2007 emissions factors.' The CaIEEMod model output and worksheets for calculating regional operational daily emissions are provided in Appendix A. As shown in Table 3 -7, regional emissions resulting from the operation of Phase I on its own, along with the fully completed project (Phase I and Phase 11 together) would not exceed regional SCAQMD thresholds for CO, NOx, PM10, ROC, SOx, or PM2.5. Thus, operation of the proposed project would not exceed regional SCAQMD thresholds, and regional operations emissions would result in a less - than - significant long -term regional air quality impact. No mitigation measures are necessary. Table 3 -7. Estimate of Regional Operational Emissions (pounds per day) Regional Operational Emissions ROG NOx CO sox PM10 PM2.5 Phase On -site Area Source a 4 <1 4 <1 <1 <1 Off -site Electricity Sources <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 On Road Mobile Sources 5 10 56 <1 12 1 Total Phase 1 10 11 60 <1 12 1 SCAQMD Daily Significance Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Exceed SignificantThreshold? No No No No No No Phase I and 1I On -site Area Source a 5 <1 4 <1 0 0 Off -site Electricity sources <1 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 On Road Mobile Sources 8 14 77 <1 16 1 Total Project (Phase I and 11) 13 is 81 <1 16 1 SCAQMD Daily Significance Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Exceed Significant Threshold? No No No No No No Notes: a Area sources include landscape equipment emissions and miscellaneous sources (e.g., detergents and cleaning compounds). Source: ICF 2012. ' Daily VMT estimate derived by applying CalEEMod default trip length estimates (per land use) to the proposed project default trip generation estimates (per land use). The Academy Charter High School 3 24 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00414.11 III City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist c, Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is a nonattainment area for an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? s)? Less- than - Significant Impact The SCAQMD's approach for assessing cumulative impacts is based on the AQMP forecasts of attainment of ambient air quality standards in accordance with the requirements of the federal and state Clean Air Acts. As discussed earlier in III.a., the proposed project would be consistent with the AQMP, which is intended to bring the Basin into attainment for all criteria pollutants.2 In addition, the mass regional emissions calculated for the proposed project presented earlier in Table 3 -6 (regional construction emissions) and Table 3 -7 (regional operations emissions) are less than the applicable SCAQMD daily significance thresholds, which factor in cumulative effects and are designed to assist the region in attaining the applicable state and national ambient air quality standards. As such, cumulative impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures would be necessary. d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less - than - Significant Impact. The proposed project would contribute to localized air pollutant emissions during construction (short -term) and project operations (long- term). A discussion of the project's localized potential construction- and operations- period air quality impacts is provided below. Local Construction Impacts SCAQMD has developed a set of mass emissions rate look -up tables that can be used to evaluate localized impacts that may result from construction - period emissions. if the onsite emissions from proposed construction activities are below the Localized Significance Threshold (LST) emission levels found in the LST mass rate look -up tables for the project site's SRA, then project emissions would not have the potential to cause a significant localized air quality impact. As discussed previously, mass daily emissions during construction were compiled using the CaIEEMod emissions inventory model. However, only onsite construction emissions were considered for purposes of comparison with the LST mass rate look -up tables (consistent with SCAQMD LST Guidelines, offsite delivery /haul truck activity and employee trips were not considered in the evaluation of localized impacts). A conservative estimate of the project's construction- period onsite mass emissions is presented in Table 3 -8. As provided in Table 3 -8, construction - related daily (short -term) emissions for the worst -case scenarios during which emissions from construction components that overlap would exceed the SCAQMD regional significance thresholds for PM2.5 in Phase I. However, implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ -1, AQ -2, and AQ -3 will reduce short -term construction emissions to a less- than - significant level. As 2 CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3) states "A lead agency may determine that a project's incremental contribution to a cumulative effect is not cumulatively considerable if the project will comply with the requirements in a previously approved plan or mitigation program which provides specific requirements that will avoid or substantially lessen the cumulative problem (e.g., water quality control plan, air quality plan, integrated waste management plan) within the geographic area in which the project is located. Such plans or programs must he specified in law or adopted by the public agency with jurisdiction over the affected resources through a public review process to implement, interpret, or make specific the law enforced or administered by the public agency." The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -25 ICF00914.11 31 B -101 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist shown on Table 3 -9, with implementation of mitigation maximum emissions would not exceed SCAQMD localized significance criteria. Table 3 -8. Estimate of Localized Construction Emissions (pounds per day) Localized Construction Emissions ROG NOx CO SOx PM10a PM2.5 Phase I Excavation & Soils Import 2012 12 108 44 <1 7 5 Rough Grading & Bldg. Pad Prep 2012 6 51 22 <1 4 3 Fine Grading & Soil Prep 2013 4 30 14 <1 2 2 Site Trenching & Foundation Excavation 2012 4 34 16 <1 2 2 Building Construction 2012 6 37 24 <1 3 3 Building Construction 2013 5 35 23 <1 2 2 Concrete Transit Mix - For Footings /Slabs 2012 <1 4 1 <1 <1 <1 Asphalt Parking Lot Area 2013 4 28 13 <1 1 1 Architectural Finishing 2013 207 3 2 <1 <1 <1 SCAQMD Localized Significance Threshold (5 acres) - 183 1253 - 13 7 Excavation & Soils Import and Rough Grading & Bldg Pad Prep 2012b 17 159 67 <1 11 9 Fine Grading, Bldg Construction, Asphalt Parking Lots & Architectural Finishing 2013b 214 61 29 <1 3 3 Exceed Threshold? No No No No No Yes Phase 11 Fine Grading & Soil Prep 2018 2 14 12 <1 1 1 Site Trenching & Foundation Excavation 2018 3 22 17 <1 1 1 Building Construction 2018 3 19 18 <1 1 1 Building Construction 2019 3 18 18 <1 1 1 Concrete Transit Mix - For Footings /Slabs 2019 <1 2 1 <1 <1 <1 Architectural Finishing 2019 83 2 2 <1 <1 <1 SCAQMD Localized Significance Threshold (2 acres) - 115 715 - 6 4 Fine Grading, Bldg Construction & Architectural Finishing 2019 88 33 31 <1 2 2 Exceed Threshold? No No No No No No Notes: Construction emission calculation worksheets are included in Appendix A. a PM 10 emissions estimates take into account compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements for fugitive dust suppression, which require that no visible dust be present beyond the site boundaries, as well as the use of EPA Tier 2 equipment. b Implementation of Excavation & Soils Import and Rough Grading & Bldg Pad Prep 2012; and Fine Grading, Bldg Construction, Asphalt Parking Lots & Architectural Finishing 2013 within Phase I have the potential to overlap, thus emissions are summed. c Implementation of Fine Grading, Bldg Construction & Architectural Finishing 2019 within Phase II The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-26 [CF00914.11 FIVA City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist have the potential to overlap, thus emissions are summed. a Localized thresholds derived froth SCAQMD Localized Significance Threshold Tables and are based on the project location (Source Receptor Area [SRA] 17, the Central Orange County), project area disturbed in any given day (5 acres for Phase I and 2 acres for Phase 11), and the distance to the nearest sensitive receptor (25 meters). Source: SCAQMD Localized Significance Threshold Methodologyfor CEQA Evaluations, and Particulate Mottet•(PM) 2.5Significance Thresholds and Calculation Methodology. Source: ICF 2012. As indicated in Table 3 -9, implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ -1, AQ -2, and AQ -3 will result in reductions of all criteria pollutant emissions, most notably of PM10 by 33% for the worst -case scenario in Phase 1. Implementation of these mitigation measures would reduce emissions of PM10 below the SCAQMD significance threshold. As such, air duality emission impacts related to construction would be less than significant after implementation of mitigation. Table 3 -9. Estimate of Localized Construction Emissions (pounds per day) After Implementation of Mitigation Localized Construction Emissions ROG NOx CO SOx PM10a PM2.5 Phase I Excavation & Soils import and Rough Grading & Bldg Pad Prep 2012 11 100 43 <1 8 6 SCAQMD Localized Significance Threshold (5 acres) - 183 1253 - 13 7 Exceed Threshold? No No No No No No Notes: Construction emission calculation worksheets are included in Appendix A. a PM10 emissions estimates take into account compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements for fugitive dust suppression, which require that no visible dust be present beyond the site boundaries, as well as the use of EPA Tier 2 equipment. b Implementation of Excavation & Soils Import and Rough Grading & Bldg Pad Prep 2012 and Fine Grading, Bldg Construction, Asphalt Parking Lots & Architectural Finishing 2013 within Phase I have the potential to overlap, thus emissions are summed. Source: ICF 2012. Local Operational Impacts Within an urban setting, vehicle exhaust is the primary source of CO. Consequently, the highest CO concentrations are generally found close to congested intersections. Under typical meteorological conditions, CO concentrations tend to decrease as the distance from the emissions source (i.e., congested intersection) increases. For purposes of providing a conservative, worst -case impact analysis, CO concentrations are typically analyzed at congested intersection locations, because if impacts are less than significant close to congested intersections, impacts will also he less than significant at more distant sensitive receptor locations. Project traffic during the operational phase of the project would have the potential to create local area CO impacts. SCAQMD recommends a quantitative hot -spot evaluation of potential localized CO impacts when volume -to- capacity ratios are increased by 2% at intersections with a level of service (LOS) of C or worse. Given these criteria, no intersections met the aforementioned requirements for The Academy Charter High School 3 27 tune 2012 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 li :S11191, City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist selection based on information provided in the TIA prepared by Fehr & Peers (Appendix C). Because no intersections met the criteria necessary for a quantitative analysis, the project activity would not have a significant impact upon 1- or 8 -hour local CO concentrations from mobile source emissions. Thus, operation of the project would not result in significant impacts related to 1- or 8 -hour local CO concentrations from mobile source emissions. Because significant impacts would not occur at any intersections located adjacent to sensitive receptors, no significant impacts are anticipated to occur at any other locations in the study area because the conditions yielding CO hotspots would not be worse than those occurring at the analyzed intersections. Consequently, the sensitive receptors that are included in this analysis would not be significantly affected by CO emissions generated by the net increase in traffic that would occur under the project. Because the project does not cause an exceedance, or exacerbate an existing exceedance of an ambient air quality standard, the project's localized operational air quality impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation measures are necessary. With respect to the project's onsite mass emissions, Table 3 -10 shows that onsite operations- period emissions would be below SCAQMD's localized significance thresholds. Impacts from emissions of these criteria pollutants would be less than significant. No mitigation measures are necessary. Toxic Air Contaminants SCAQMD recommends that health risk assessments be conducted for substantial sources of diesel particulate emissions (e.g., truck stops and warehouse distribution facilities) and has provided guidance for analyzing mobile source diesel emissions. In addition, typical sources of acutely and chronically hazardous TACs include industrial manufacturing processes, automotive repair facilities, and dry cleaning facilities. Since the proposed project would not contain such uses, the proposed project does not warrant a health risk assessment. Potential project - generated air toxic impacts on surrounding land uses would be less than significant. No mitigation measures are necessary. Table 3 -10. Estimate of Operation- Period Localized (Onsite) Emissions NOx CO PM10 PM21S Onsite Area Source Emissions Phase la <1 4 <1 <1 Onsite Area Source Emissions Phase 1 & Ila <1 4 <1 <1 SCAQMD Daily Significance Threshold (lbs /day)b 183 1253 5 2 Exceed Significance Threshold? No No No No Notes: I Onsite emissions calculated using the CalEEMod emissions model (area - source emissions). Model output sheets are provided in Appendix A. b'rhe project site is located in SCAQMD SRA 17. These LSTs are based on the site location SRA, distance to the nearest sensitive- receptor location from the project site (25 meters), and the project area (5 acres). Source:1CF 2012. e. Create objectia ►able odor s affectilug a substantial number of people? Less - than - Significant Impact. According to the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, land uses associated with odor complaints typically include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass The Academy Charter High School 3 28 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 MWally City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist molding. The proposed project does not include any uses identified by the SCAQMD as being associated with odors and therefore would not produce objectionable odors. Odors resulting from the construction of the proposed project are not likely to affect a substantial number of people due to the fact that construction activities do not usually emit offensive odors. Potential odor emitters during construction activities include asphalt paving and the use of architectural coatings and solvents. SCAQMD Rules 1108 and 1113 limit the amount of VOCs from cutback asphalt and architectural coatings and solvents, respectively. Given mandatory compliance with SCAQMD rules, no construction activities or materials are proposed that would create a significant level of objectionable odors. As such, potential impacts during short -term construction would be less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. .. �..7 ...a •a .su a�nwi 012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-29 June 2 ICf Oe 2 12 31 B -105 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any ❑ ❑ ❑ riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Set-vice? c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally ❑ ❑ ® ❑ protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marshes, vernal pools, coastal wetlands, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of ❑ ® ❑ ❑ any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances ❑ ❑ ❑ protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted ❑ ❑ ❑ habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Discussion Would the project; a. Have a substantial adverse effect, 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 Service? Less - than - Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The project site is located within a fully developed urban area. The site is adjacent to an arterial roadway on the west, a convalescent hospital to the north, and residential development to the east and south. In addition, the project site The Academy Charter High School 3 -30 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 II: Less -than- Significant Potentially Impact with Less -than- Significant Mitigation Significant No IV. Biological Resources Impact Incorporated Impact hnpact Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect, 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 Service? b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any ❑ ❑ ❑ riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Set-vice? c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally ❑ ❑ ® ❑ protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marshes, vernal pools, coastal wetlands, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of ❑ ® ❑ ❑ any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances ❑ ❑ ❑ protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted ❑ ❑ ❑ habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Discussion Would the project; a. Have a substantial adverse effect, 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 Service? Less - than - Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The project site is located within a fully developed urban area. The site is adjacent to an arterial roadway on the west, a convalescent hospital to the north, and residential development to the east and south. In addition, the project site The Academy Charter High School 3 -30 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 II: City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist has been developed and used as a hospital site since 1964, until the medical buildings were demolished in 2011. The project site currently comprises large areas of asphalt, cement, building pads, a large pile of rubble, and sand bags. Limited areas of vegetation exist in non -paved areas, which consist of ruderal (weedy) vegetation, nonnative grasses, and ornamental trees and shrubs. A variety of ornamental trees are located around the former hospital building footprints and along the edges of the project site. The project site does not provide native vegetation or wildlife habitat that has the potential to accommodate sensitive biological resources, including candidate, sensitive, or special - status species. Therefore, the project would not result in impacts to sensitive habitats or other direct effects that could result in a substantial adverse effect to any candidate, sensitive or listed special - status species. However, the ornamental trees within the project site provide potentially suitable nesting habitat for various bird species. Potential impacts on nesting birds may occur if removal of the existing ornamental trees occurs during the breeding season (February 15 through September 15). Therefore, Mitigation Measure BIO -1 requires preconstruction nesting bird surveys to be conducted and appropriate buffer areas established around any active nests if removal of the existing trees or construction activities related to the existing trees occur between February 15 and September 15. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO -1 would reduce potential impacts to nesting birds to a less - than - significant level. Mitigation Measure BIO -1; Prior to issuance of grading and building permits, the applicant will retain a qualified biologist to conduct preconstruction nesting bird surveys prior to removal, trimming, or any other tree - disturbing activities that will occur within breeding /nesting season (February 15 through September 15). Prior to commencement of tree related activities during this timeframe, a qualified biologist will perform a preconstruction survey to determine whether nests are present in or around the proposed project area. If a nest is found, an appropriate buffer will be established by the qualified biologist. No construction or other activities will be allowed to occur within the buffer until the young have fledged or the nest becomes inactive. The results of the preconstruction nesting bird survey will be provided to the City of Santa Ana Planning Manager, prior to issuance of grading permits. b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or othersensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impact. The project site is undeveloped, but disturbed with rubble, asphalt, cement, building foundations, and some ornamental landscaping. No riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community exists on the proposed project site. The project would have no effect upon any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities and no mitigation measures are required. c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean WaterAct (including, but not limited to, marshes, vernal pools, coastal wetlands, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Less- than - Significant Impact. The proposed project site does not contain any wetlands or vernal pools, as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. However, the Santa Ana River is classified as Waters of the US and Waters of the State and is located within 500 feet east of the project site. No components of the proposed project would involve construction activities within or adjacent to the river channel and construction activities would not result in the discharge of fill materials that could impact the jurisdictional area. Also, the proposed project would be required to obtain a General 1 r — aucmy %.miter mgn acnow June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -31 ICF June 2012 31 B -107 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Construction Permit, which requires the development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP). The SWPPP identifies pollutants that may affect the quality of storm water discharges and includes a list of BMPs to provide sediment and erosion control, waste handling measures, and non - stormwater management. As such, any storm flow discharges that deposit into the Santa Ana River would not result in a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands and impacts would be less than significant. d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursetysites? Less - than - Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The project site is located within a fully developed environment and is surrounded by roadways and medical and residential development. Further, the project site is bound on three sides by a block wall that averages 6 -feet in height. There are no running waters, drainages, or other corridors that allow for wildlife movement on or within the vicinity of the project site. As such, the proposed project site is not within an established wildlife corridor, and the proposed project would not interfere with the movement of any native wildlife species. Additionally, the project would not involve the construction of extensive facilities or fences that could impede wildlife movement. The proposed project would not interfere with the movement of any native resident or migratory wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, and would not impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. However, as described above, the project site contains numerous ornamental trees, which may support nesting birds. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) protects all common wild birds found in the United States except the house sparrow, starling, feral pigeon, and resident game birds such as pheasant, grouse, quail, and wild turkey. The MBTA makes it unlawful for anyone to kill, capture, collect, possess, buy, sell, trade, ship, import, or export any migratory bird including feathers, parts, nests, or eggs. Further, the CDFG Code 3503 makes it illegal to destroy any birds' nest or any birds' eggs that are protected under the MBTA. Potential impacts on nesting birds may occur if removal of the existing ornamental tees occurs during the breeding season (February 15 through September 15). Therefore, Mitigation Measure B10 -1 requires preconstruction nesting bird surveys to be conducted and appropriate buffer areas established around any active nests, if tree removal is to occur between February 15 and September 15. Implementation of Mitigation Measure B10 -1 would reduce potential impacts to nesting birds to a less -than- significant level. e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact. The City of Santa Ana does not have any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources at the project site. As a result, the proposed project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, and impacts would not occur. f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? No Impact. There are no Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs), Natural Community Conservation Plans (NCCPs), or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans that apply to the project site. Therefore, there are no impacts related to this issue, and no mitigation is required The Academy Charter High School 3 32 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Less -than- Significant Potentially Impact with Less -than- Significant Mitigation Significant No V. Cultural Resources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 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 an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique ❑ ❑ ® ❑ paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d. Disturb any human remains, including those ❑ ❑ ® ❑ interred outside of formal cemeteries? Discussion Would the project: a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance ofa historical resource as defrned in Section 15064,5? No Impact. The proposed project would not impact any known historical resources. The project site is currently unoccupied land that was once the location of a hospital and medical offices. These structures were demolished in 2011. ICF conducted a cultural resources records search on January 11, 2012 at the South Central Coastal Information Center, which revealed results from two previous studies that included the project site. Petra Resources, Lie. surveyed North Fairview Street, located along the western edge of the project site, in 1997. This study identified 18 historic buildings within a 0.5 -mile radius of the project site. None of these structures was located within or near the project area (Jertberg and Rosenthal 1997). Michael Brandman Associates resurveyed North Fairview Street in 2002. Results of this study also did not identify any historic or other cultural resources within or near the project site (Dice 2002). Additionally, a review of the Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility, the Directory of Properties in the Historic Property Data Files, the California Register of Historical Resources, the California Historical Landmarks, the California Points of Historical Interest, the California Inventory of Historical Resources, and the National Register of Historic Places reveal that previous cultural resources studies have not identified any resources listed in, or potentially eligible for, the National Register of Historic Properties or the California Register of Historical Resources within the Project area. Previous studies have not identified any California Historical Landmarks or California Points of Historical Interest within the Project area. As such, the proposed project would not result in impacts to historic resources. TheACaoemy Charter High School 3 33 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 1CF90914.11 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist b. Caitse a stibstatitial advel se chatige iii the significance of all archaeological resow ce piiisuant to Section 15064.5? Less - than - Significant Impact. As described above, the project site was previously used for a hospital and medical office. These structures have been demolished and the site is currently vacant. A portion of the project area was previously surveyed for cultural resources by Petra Resources, Inc, in 1997 and Brandman Associates in 2002. The surveys did not identify any cultural resources on or near the project site, but did not encompass the entire project parcel. A cultural resources records search at the South Central Coastal information Center did not identify any archaeological resources within the project area or within a 0.5- mile- radius of the project area. An archaeological survey was not conducted for this project because the project parcel is covered in asphalt, concrete, and ornamental landscaping from previous development. The project area is located approximately 500 feet west of the now- channelized Santa Ana River. This suggests the project area may have a moderate sensitivity for prehistoric archaeological resources. However, the Geotechnical Exploration Report (Appendix B) that was prepared for the proposed project identified 3 to 5 feet of fill material dining a sub - surface investigation on site. Because the site contains this fill material, it is unlikely that any archaeological resources exist within 3 to 5 feet of the ground surface. Further, as described in Chapter 2, "Project Description; the proposed project would require minimal grading and a maximum excavation depth of 5 feet below the existing grade. Therefore, because archaeological resources have not been previously identified within the project vicinity during previous surveys and construction and grading activities would largely occur within the fill material, there is a low likelihood that archaeological resources would be encountered during construction. As a result, project impacts related to the adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource are less than significant. c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Less - than - Significant Impact. As described above, the project area has previously been surveyed and does not contain any documented cultural resources. In a letter to ICF International, the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (Museum) states a thorough search of the Museum's paleontology collection records revealed no reports of vertebrate fossil localities within the project boundaries. Likewise, development surrounding the project site has not resulted in any documented paleontological resources. The Museum's analysis indicates that the project soils consist of 3 -5 feet of fill that is underlain by young terrestrial Quaternary Alluvium, derived primarily as flood deposits from the Santa Ana River that flows approximately 500 feet east of the project area, and that older terrestrial Quaternary sediments occur at various depths beneath this young surficial alluvium. These young terrestrial Quaternary Alluvium deposits typically do not contain significant vertebrate fossils. Furthermore, the Museum estimates that the upper 6 feet of sediment in the Project area is unlikely to contain significant fossil remains (McLeod pees. comm.). However, there are fossil localities near the project area from the same older terrestrial Quaternary sediments units that occur as subsurface deposits in the proposed project area. One vertebrate fossil locality from these deposits was reported on the western side of the Santa Ana River (LACM 1652) north - northeast of the proposed project area along Rio Vista Avenue south of Lincoln Avenue, which produced a fossil specimen of sheep at shallow, but unstated, depth. The closest vertebrate fossil locality in older Quaternary sediments is (LACM 4943) north - northeast of the proposed project area The Academy Charter High School 3 34 June 2012 initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration iCF 06914.11 'J City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist along Fletcher Avenue east of Glassell Street. LACM 4943 is somewhat higher in elevation than the proposed project site, but produced a horse fossil at a depth of 8 -10 feet below ground surface (McLeod pers. comm.). Given the geology of the project area it is unlikely that unknown paleontological resources exist because the young surface sediments onsite do not typically contain paleontological resources. Further, any superficial paleontological resources that could have existed at one time have likely been previously unearthed by past development activities, as evidenced by the 3 to 5 feet of fill material on the project site. As discussed in Chapter 2, "Project Description," the proposed project would require minimal grading and a maximum excavation of approximately 5 feet below the existing grade. Therefore, there is a low likelihood that paleontological resources would be encountered during construction. Because the project vicinity has no history of documented resources, contains sediments generally not containing paleontological resources, and has been previously disturbed, the project is not anticipated to result in significant impacts related to paleontological resources. As a result, project impacts related to the direct or indirect destruction of a unique paleontological resource or geologic feature are less than significant. d. Disturb any human re►nains, inchrding those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Less - than - Significant Impact. The project site is not a formal cemetery and is not adjacent to a formal cemetery. The project vicinity is fully developed, and there is no record of human remains being identified during development of the area. Further, portions of the project site and vicinity have been surveyed for archaeological resources and are not known to contain human remains interred outside formal cemeteries. Nor is the site known to be located on a burial ground. Therefore, it is highly unlikely the proposed project would disturb any human remains during construction. Should human remains be uncovered during construction, as specified by State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, no further disturbance will occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code 5097.98. If such a discovery occurs, excavation or construction will halt in the area of the discovery, the area will be protected, and consultation and treatment will occur as prescribed by law. if the coroner recognizes the remains to be Native American, he or she will contact the Native American Heritage Commission, who will appoint the Most Likely Descendent. Additionally, if the bones are determined to be Native American, a plan will be developed regarding the treatment of human remains and associated burial objects, and the plan will be implemented under the direction of the Most Likely Descendent. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. The Academy Charter high School 1 202 initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -35 [CF June ne 2012 31 B -111 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist The Academy Charter High School 3 -36 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 31 B -112 June 2012 Kr 0091411 Less-than- Significant Potentially Impact with Less -than- Significant Mitigation Significant No VI. Geology and Soils Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Would the project: a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 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? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Seismic- related ground failure, including ❑ ® ❑ ❑ liquefaction? Landslides? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of ❑ ❑ ® ❑ topsoil? c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is ❑ ® ❑ ❑ unstable or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in an onsite or offsite landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting ❑ ❑ ❑ the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems in areas where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? The Academy Charter High School 3 -36 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 31 B -112 June 2012 Kr 0091411 City of Santa Ana Discussion Would the project: Environmental Checklist a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injilay, or death involving. a1. Rupture ofa 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 ofa known farrlt?RefertoDivision of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42, Less - than - Significant Impact The Alquist - Priolo Act requires the California State Geologist to identify areas in the state that are at risk from surface fault rupture. These areas are known as Earthquake Fault Zones. As described in the Geotechnical Exploration Report prepared for the proposed project (Appendix B), the project site is not located within a mapped Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, and there are no known surface traces of any active, potentially active, or inactive faults crossing through or extending toward the project site. The nearest fault zone is the Newport Inglewood, which is associated with potentially active faults in the vicinity of Newport Beach and the Los Angeles Basin and is located approximately 8.6 miles to the southwest of the proposed project site (Appendix B). As a result, the potential for a surface rupture to occur at the project site is low. Therefore, potential impacts related to rapture of a known earthquake fault are less than significant. a2. Strong seismic ground shaking? Less - than - Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. As discussed in Vl.al, the proposed project is not located within or adjacent to a fault zone. However, because the proposed project is located within a seismically active region, in fairly close proximity to several major active faults, the project site is likely to experience strong ground shaking during the lifespan of the proposed project. The Newport - Inglewood Fault Zone (8.6 miles distant) is of most concern to the project site. In addition, the San Andreas (43 miles distant) and Raymond Faults (30 miles distant) are also proximate and could affect Santa Ana (City of Santa Ana 1982). Earthquake intensities experienced at the project site would vary depending upon the earthquake's magnitudes, distance between the project site and the fault, and the types of materials underlying the project site. According to the Land Use Element of the City's General plan, the greatest potential for earthquake damage is expected to come frorn a large earthquake along the Newport - Inglewood fault. A magnitude 7 earthquake along this fault would be expected to cause significant damage regionally. In preparation of the Geotechnical Exploration Report, a site- specific evaluation of the peak ground accelerations associated with the event having a 2% probability of being exceeded in 50 years and the maximum magnitude event on the fault system. Based on the site - specific ground motion evaluation, the results of the analyses suggest that the site specific design Peak Horizontal Ground Acceleration (PHGA) is approximately 0.38g based on the site - specific Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) PHGA of 0.57g. The ground motions were determined using the site - specific criteria per the 2010 CBC. In addition to this information, the Geotechnical Exploration Report provides recommendations that have been developed based on the engineering properties of the onsite soils and their anticipated behavior during and after construction. The Academy Charter High School 12 3 37 tune 20 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 0092011 31 B -113 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist All new construction in the State of California must comply with the seismic design parameters contained in the 2010 California Building Code (CBC) seismic requirements. Compliance with the CBC standards in the design and construction of the proposed project would reduce impacts related to ground shaking. Additionally, as required in Mitigation Measure GEO -1, the proposed project would comply with all geotechnical recommendations provided in the Geotechnical Exploration Report (Appendix B) to minimize seismic damage and reduce seismic ground shaking impacts. Therefore, potential impacts related to strong seismic ground shaking are less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO -1. Mitigation Measure GEO -1: Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits, the City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency will ensure that all design criteria and specifications set forth in the Geotechnical Exploration Report will be implemented as a condition of project approval and shown on the appropriate engineering plans and documents. At a minimum the recommendations will include the following: Providing a design capable of withstanding seismic hazards related to strong ground motions. • Earthwork procedures to address soils and subsurface conditions, including liquefaction. • Recommendations for foundations, soils preparations, and slabs design to resist the effects of lateral pressures. a3. Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less - than - Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Soil liquefaction is a phenomenon in which saturated, cohesionless soils layers, located within approximately 50 feet of the ground surface, lose strength due to cyclic pore water pressure generation from seismic shaking or other large cyclic loading. During the loss of stress, the soil acquires "mobility" sufficient to permit both horizontal and vertical movements. Soils that are most susceptible to liquefaction are clean, loose, saturated, and uniformly graded fine- grained sands that lie below the groundwater table within approximately 50 feet below ground surface. The Geotechnical Exploration Report identified liquefaction as a potential geological condition of the project site (Appendix B). Also, according to both Exhibit 5 of the Seismic Safety Element of the City's General Plan and the California Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG) Seismic Hazards Zone Map for the Anaheim Quadrangle (California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology 1998), the project site is located within a liquefaction area where historic occurrence of liquefaction or local geological, geotechnical, and groundwater conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground displacements. Historical high groundwater elevations below the project site are as shallow as 15 feet bgs. For preparation of the Geotechnical Exploration Report, nine borings were taken at the project site to measure for depths to groundwater. Groundwater was encountered in all borings at depths below 32 feet bgs. The depth to groundwater ranges between 32.0 and 41.6 feet. Soils at the project site consist of undocumented artificial fill which blankets most the site at depths ranging from 3 -5 feet bgs and Quaternary age fluvial soils which consist predominately of sands of the Santa Ana River drainage. The pre - dominant near - surface material is brown to light yellow brown, thinly bedded to massive, loose to medium dense, dry to moist, fine to coarse sand with varying proportions of silt with sub - rounded to well - rounded gravel. Locally soft to stiff, thinly bedded to laminated, brown to olive brown, moist to wet sandy clayey silts to fat lean clays were also encountered on the project site (Appendix B). The Academy Charter high School 3-38 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 31 B -114 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Although the project site has been mapped by the CDMG as an area of liquefaction hazard, the project - specific Geotechnical Exploration Report classifies the project site as having a low risk of liquefaction based on the liquefaction potential index. The liquefaction potential index combines depth, thickness, and factor of safety of liquefiable material inferred from a cone penetrometer test sounding into a single parameter. The liquefaction potential index for the project site ranges from 1 to 2.5. Liquefaction potential index values lower than five are deemed low risk The potential for liquefaction at the project site is generally confined within thin layers at depths ranging from about 20 to 50 feet bgs (Appendix B). Between one and two inches of liquefaction- induced settlement is expected to take place in relatively thin layers at depths generally greater than 20 feet bgs. Seismically induced settlement at the project site is expected to be between 1 to 2 inches. Seismically induced differential settlement is expected to be half an inch over a horizontal distance of 100 feet. As described above, the proposed project would comply with all CBC requirements and standards related to liquefaction. Additionally, as required in Mitigation Measure GEO -1, the proposed project would comply with all geotechnical recommendations provided in the Geotechnical Exploration Report (Appendix B) to minimize potential impacts related to liquefaction. Therefore, potential impacts related to seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction are less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO -1. a4. Landslides? Less - than - Significant Impact. Landslides and other slope failures are secondary seismic effects that are common during or soon after earthquakes. Areas that are most susceptible to earthquake - induced landslides are steep slopes underlain by loose, weak soils, and areas on or adjacent to existing landslide deposits. As discussed in Vl.a1, the proposed project site is located in a seismically active region subject to strong ground shaking. However, according to the CDMG Seismic Hazards Zone Map for the Anaheim Quadrangle, the project site is not located within or adjacent to an earthquake- induced landslide area. The project site is located in a generally flat developed urban area that does not contain large slopes, and development of the project would not generate large slopes on the project site. As a result, implementation of the proposed project would not expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects involving landslides. Impacts are considered less than significant. b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less - than - Significant Impact Construction of the proposed project would include ground surface disruption that could result in soil erosion. During Phase 1, rough grading and site trenching and building foundation excavation would take place on approximately 312,945 square feet, and fine grading and soil preparation would take place on approximately 220,588 square feet. During Phase 11, site trenching and building foundation excavation would take place on approximately 83,050 square feet and fine grading and soil preparation would take place on approximately 30,450 square feet. Construction activities would expose areas of soil to wind and water erosion, and during a storm event, exposed soils could be transported off the site as runoff. Because the project would disturb over 1 acre of land, the proposed project is subject to the SWRCB General Construction Permit. Compliance with the General Construction Permit requires the development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP). The SWPPP requires identification of sources of sediment and a list of BMPs to provide sediment and erosion The Academy Charter High School 3 39 tune 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ItF 0091412 31 B -115 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist control. The SWPPP is required to meet or exceed measures required by the Construction General Permit. In addition, the proposed project is required to prepare a NPDES post - construction stormwater management plan in accordance with the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) and the City of Santa Ana Local Implementation Plan (LiP). The stormwater management plan must include all applicable post - construction BMPs for this project. In addition to the implementation and maintenance of BMPs, erosion would also be controlled by the landscaping proposed for the project site. All of the site specific regulations and BMPs will be provided in a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to be implemented for post - construction operations of the project. Compliance with existing state, regional, and local regulations, NPDES permit requirements, and project- specific BMPs identified in the SWPPP, coupled with installation of landscaping and ongoing maintenance and monitoring of construction and subsequent post - construction phase BMPs, would ensure that project impacts with respect to topsoil loss and erosion would be less than significant. c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in an on -site or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? Less - than - Significant Innpact with Mitigation Incorporated. As described in response VLO, the project site is located within an area identified as susceptible to liquefaction; however, the surface manifestation of liquefaction is deemed unlikely. Exhibit 4 of the Seismic Safety Element of the City's General Plan indicates that the project site is located within an area subject to subsidence. Subsidence usually occurs as a result of excessive groundwater pumping or oil extraction. The proposed project would not require groundwater pumping, nor would oil extraction occur as a result of the proposed project. For lateral spreading or flow failure to occur, a continuous, laterally unconstrained liquefiable zone must be free to move along gently sloping ground toward an unconfined area. The project site is relatively flat. Although the Santa Ana River channel and levee are located approximately 200 feet south and east of the project site, the river channel near the site is concrete - lined, and the depth is generally shallower than the soil layers at the project site deemed susceptible to liquefaction, and thus would have no effect related to lateral spreading on or adjacent to the project site. Accordingly, the potential for lateral spreading is deemed low (Appendix B). The proposed project would comply with all CBC requirements. Additionally, as required in Mitigation Measure GEO -1, the proposed project would comply with all geotechnicai recommendations provided in the Geotechnical Exploration Report {Appendix B) to minimize potential impacts related to soils and geology. Therefore, potential impacts related to unstable soils are less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO -1. d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Less - than - Significant Impact. Expansive soils are fine- grained soils (generally High plasticity clays) that can undergo a significant increase in volume with an increase in water content and a significant decrease in volume with a decrease in water content. Changes in the water content of an expansive soil can result in severe distress to structures constructed upon the soil. The near surface soils at the project site are generally granular with localized sandy silt to clay layers. Based on the geotechnicai exploration report prepared for the proposed project, the near surface soils have low expansion The Academy Charter High School 3 40 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICE 00414.11 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist potential (Appendix B). As a result, the proposed project would not be located on expansive soils that could create substantial risks to life or property. Impacts are considered to be less than significant. e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or• alternative wastewater disposal systems in areas where sewers are not available for• the disposal of wastewater-? No Impact. The project site is located within an urban setting where sewer service is available. The proposed project would connect to and be serviced by the City's existing sewer system. Accordingly, the proposed project would not require septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Therefore, no impacts related to septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would occur. The Academy Charter High School 12 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 1 3-41 June 20CF009201 31 B -117 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Less-than- Significant Potentially Impact with Less -than- Significant Mitigation Significant No VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Would the project: a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or ❑ ® ❑ ❑ indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation ❑ ❑ ® ❑ adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Discussion Environmental Setting State Greenhouse Gas Emissions Worldwide, California is the 121h to 16th largest emitter of carbon dioxide (CO2) and is responsible for approximately 2% of the world's CO2 emissions (CEC 2006). Transportation is responsible for 38% of the state's GHG emissions, followed by the industrial sector (23 %), electricity generation (18 %), and agriculture (7 %) (CARB 2011). Emissions of CO2 and nitrous oxide (N20) are byproducts of fossil fuel combustion, among other sources. Methane (CH4), a highly potent GHG, results from off - gassing associated with agricultural practices and landfills, among other sources. Sinks of CO2 include uptake by vegetation and dissolution into the ocean. California GHG emissions in 2009 totaled approximately 456.8 million metric tons (MMT) in carbon dioxide equivalents (COze). Greenhouse gas emissions other than COz are commonly converted into carbon dioxide equivalents, which takes into account the differing global warming potential (GWP) of different gases. For example, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (fPCC) finds that N20 has a GWP of 310 and methane has a GWP of 21(IPCC 2007). Thus, emissions of 1 ton of N20 and 1 ton of CH4 are represented as the emissions of 310 tons and 21 tons of COze, respectively. This method allows for the summation of different greenhouse gas emissions into a single total. Climate change could impact the natural environment in California in the following ways (among others): • Rising sea levels along the California coastline, particularly in San Francisco and the San Joaquin Delta due to ocean expansion. • Extreme -heat conditions, such as heat waves and very high temperatures, which could last longer and become more frequent. • An increase in heat - related human deaths, infectious diseases, and a higher risk of respiratory problems caused by deteriorating air quality. The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 42 iCP 00914.11 Ik :9 1 Fee� City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist • Reduced snow pack and stream flow in the Sierra Nevada mountains, affecting winter recreation and water supplies. • Potential increase in the severity of winter storms, affecting peak stream flows and flooding. • Changes in growing season conditions that could affect California agriculture, causing variations in crop quality and yield. • Changes in distribution of plant and wildlife species due to changes in temperature, competition from colonizing species, changes in hydrologic cycles, changes in sea levels, and other climate - related effects. These changes in California's climate and ecosystems are occurring at a time when California's population is expected to increase from 34 million to 59 million by the year 2040 (CEC 2006). As such, the number of people potentially affected by climate change, as well as the amount of anthropogenic GHG emissions expected under a "business as usual" (BAU) scenario, are expected to increase. Changes similar to those noted above for California would also occur in other parts of the world with regional variations in resources affected and vulnerability to adverse effects. GHG emissions in California are attributable to human activities associated with industrial/ manufacturing, utilities, transportation, residential, and agricultural sectors (CEC 2006) as well as natural processes. Regulatory Setting Federal Climate Change Policy Twelve U.S. states and cities (including California), in conjunction with several environmental organizations, sued to force the EPA to regulate GHGs as a pollutant pursuant to the federal CAA (Massachusetts vs. Environmental Protection Agency et al. [U.S. Supreme Court No. 05 -1120; argued November 29,2006; decided April 2, 2007]). The court ruled that the plaintiffs had standing to sue, that GHGs fit within the CAA's definition of a pollutant, and that the EPA's reasons for not regulating GHGs were insufficiently grounded in the CAA. Despite the Supreme Court ruling, there are no promulgated federal regulations to date limiting GHG emissions. On December 7, 2009, the EPA Administrator signed two distinct findings regarding greenhouse gases under section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act: • Endangerment Finding: The Administrator finds that the current and projected concentrations of the six key well -mixed GHGs —0O2, CHa, N20, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6 —in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations. • Cause or Contribute Finding: The Administrator finds that the combined emissions of these well -mixed GHGs frorn new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to the greenhouse gas pollution which threatens public health and welfare. Although these findings did not themselves impose any requirements on industry or other entities, this action was a prerequisite to finalizing the U.S. EPA's Proposed Greenhouse Gas Emission Standardsfor Light-Duty Vehicles, which was published on September 15, 20093, On May 7, 2010, the final Light -Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards was published in the Federal Register. 3 http:// www. epa. gov/ cliniatecliange /endangerment.htnil The Academy Charter High School 12 20 3 43 June Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration IcF June 20]r l J City of Santa Ana California Climate Change Policy Environmental Checklist On June 1, 2005, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order S -3 -05, the goal of which is to reduce California's GHG emissions to (1) 2000 levels by 2010, (2) 1990 levels by 2020, and (3) 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. In 2006, this goal was further reinforced with the passage of AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 sets the same overall GHG emissions reduction goals while further mandating that ARB create a plan, which includes market mechanisms, and implement rules to achieve "real, quantifiable, cost - effective reductions of greenhouse gases." In response to the state's efforts to reduce GHG emissions, the Secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal /EPA) created the Climate Action Team (CAT), which, in March 2006, published the first Climate Action Team Report to Governor Schwarzenegger and the Legislature (the "2006 CAT Report "). The 2006 CAT Report identifies a recommended list of strategies that the state could pursue to reduce climate change GHG emissions. These are strategies that could be implemented by various state agencies to ensure that the Governor's targets are met and can be met with existing authority of the state agencies. Executive Order S -20 -06 further directs state agencies to begin implementing AB 32, including the recommendations made by the state's Climate Action Team. In consultation with ARB and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), the California Energy Commission (CEC) established a GHG emission performance standard for local, public - owned electric utilities (pursuant to SB 1368). This standard limits the rate of GHG emissions to a level that is no higher than the rate of emissions of GHGs for combined -cycle natural gas base load generation. In October 2007, Governor Schwarzenegger signed SB 97, which required the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to prepare CEQA guidelines for the mitigation of GHG emissions. OPR prepared the proposed revisions to the CEQA Guidelines, which were adopted by the Natural Resources Agency on December 31, 2009, and became effective on March 18, 2010. The latest text from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines is included above in the Environmental Checklist of this IS /MND. OPR and the Natural Resources Agency are required to periodically review the guidelines to incorporate new information or criteria adopted by the ARB pursuant to AB 32. South Coast Air Quality Management district To provide guidance to local lead agencies on determining significance for GHG emissions in their CEQA documents, the SCAQMD staff is convening an ongoing GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group. Members of the working group include government agencies implementing CEQA and representatives from various stakeholder groups that provide input to the SCAQMD staff on developing GHG CEQA significance thresholds. On December 5, 2008, the SCAQMD Governing Board adopted the staff proposal for an interim GHG significance threshold of 10,000 metric tons per year for industrial permitting projects where the SCAQMD is lead agency. The board letter, resolution, interim GHG significance threshold, draft guidance document, and attachments can be found under the Board Agenda Item 31 on the December 5, 2008, Governing Board meeting agenda. No other quantitative thresholds have been developed by SCAQMD that would apply to the proposed project. The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -44 1CF00914.11 C City of Santa Ana Methodology Environmental Checklist Section 15064.4 of the State CEQA Guidelines establishes a two -step process for the determination of significance of greenhouse gas emissions. First, it requires lead agencies to calculate or estimate the overall magnitude of a project's greenhouse gas emissions. Second, once the magnitude of emissions has been estimated, it must analyze those emissions using applicable factors (i.e., does the project increase or decrease emissions; does project emissions exceed an applicable threshold; does the project comply with applicable regulations or an applicable plan). Project - related GHG emissions were estimated using the CalEEMod software program, which calculates CO2, CH¢ and N2O emissions, and presents said emissions in terms of CO2e. Following the methodology prescribed by the SCAQMD CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group, project emissions calculated include direct and indirect emissions during short -term construction and long -term project operations. Construction emissions were amortized over the life of the project, defined as 30 years, and added to the operational emissions to obtain total annual GHG emissions. In order to accurately reflect the respective emissions profile from the different operational footprints (Phase I for the first 5 years of operation, and then the completed project), the operational emissions for Phase I and the completed project were weighted accordingly. Thresholds of Significance CEQA Guidelines do not provide numeric or qualitative thresholds of significance for GHG. However, AB 32 requires that greenhouse gases emitted in California be reduced to 1990 levels by the year 2020 and 80 %t below 1990 levels by 2050. The 2020 reduction target equates to a decrease of approximately 28.5% below the business -as -usual GHG emissions. Business -as -usual is defined as the emissions that would be expected to occur in the absence of any GHG reduction measures. The OPR Technical Advisory on CEQA and Climate Change suggests that in absence of regulatory guidance or standards, lead agencies such as the City of Santa Ana must undertake a project -by- project analysis that is consistent with available guidance and current CEQA practice to ascertain project impacts under CEQA. As such, for determining whether the project will generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant effect on the environment, the overall AB 32 target reduction goal of 28.5% below business -as -usual at the year 2020 threshold will be used. Impacts and Mitigation Measures a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? Less - than - Signifi cant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Construction of the proposed project would generate GHG emissions through the use of onsite heavy -duty construction equipment and offsite vehicle trips generated from construction workers, as well as haul /delivery trucks that travel to and from the project site. Mobile source emissions would result from the use of construction equipment such as graders, scrapers, bulldozers, wheeled loaders, cranes, etc. Construction of the proposed project would take approximately 24 months to complete, over two phases (Phase 1 -13 months, and Phase 11 -12 months). Operation of the proposed project is expected to result in emissions of GHG emissions related to vehicular trips (i.e., mobile - source emissions) and energy I ne Acaaemy Charter High School 3 45 June 2012 Initial5tudy /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF00914.11 31 B -121 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist consumption related to building illumination, heating and cooling, as well as water conveyance and treatment. Table 3 -11 presents an estimate of project - related GHG emissions of COz, CH4, and N20, expressed in terms of CO2e. Table 3 -11. Estimate of Project - Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions Annual CO2e Emissions (metric tons) With Project -level Mitigation and AB 32 Types of Project Emissions Project Emissions Scoping Measures Construction Emissions (30 year amortization) 102 102 Operations Emissions - Mobile 1,481 1,040 Operations Emissions - Area Sources 1 1 Operations Emissions - Energy Sources 347 215 Operations Emissions - Waste Sources 65 52 Operations Emissions - Water Consumption 61 53 Sources Project Emissions Annual Total 2,058 1,463 Percent Reduction below BAU 29% Notes: In order to accurately reflect the respective emissions profile from the different operational footprints (Phase I for the first 5 years of operation, and then the completed project), the operational emissions for Phase 11 and the completed project were weighted accordingly. Source: ICF 2012. CaiEEMod outputs and GHG calculation sheets are provided in Appendix A. As shown in Table 3 -11, the proposed project's annual GHG emissions under BAU conditions are estimated to be 2,092 metric tons CO2e. These estimates reflect emissions from all construction and operation activity. To put this number into perspective, statewide CO2e emissions for year 2009 were estimated to be 456.8 million metric tons (GARB 2011). The City currently does not have plans or programs explicitly mandating GHG emission reductions. The proposed project would contribute, to some degree, to increased GHG emissions, which have been determined to be a significant contribution to the effects of climate change. Therefore, project - specific Mitigation Measures GHG -1 through GHG -4 has been included to reduce potential impacts to a less - than - significant level. GHG emissions would be further reduced with implementation of AB 32 scoping measures such as Pavley emissions standards, low- carbon fuel standard, and renewables portfolio standard, among other standards. As shown in Table 3 -11, implementation of Mitigation Measures GHG-1 through GHG -3, along with state implementation of AB 32 Scoping Measures, would reduce the incremental GHG emissions associated with the proposed project by 29 %. As this level of reduction would exceed the AB 32 target reduction goal of 28.5%, impacts after mitigation would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures GHG -1: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant will prepare a recycling /solid waste reduction plan that includes equal provisions for both recycle and solid waste disposal The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -46 ICF 00914.11 31 B -122 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist facilities and provides recycle and solid waste services that are consistent with Municipal Code Chapter 16. This plan is subject to review and approval by the City of Santa Ana Public Works Agency. The City will ensure that the proposed project includes a recycling /solid waste reduction program that achieves a minimum reduction of 50% by volume. GHG -2: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency will ensure that the proposed project incorporates energy conservation measures in Title 24's 2008 Building Energy Efficiency Standards into the design of the proposed project that exceed mandatory requirements, and may include, but will not be limited to, the following: • Building form and orientation will maximize use of natural lighting. • Indoor /outdoor lighting will apply energy efficient technologies. • Insulation and window glazing will minimize heat transfers to regulate internal temperatures. • Building envelope and internal layout will be designed for efficient insulation, heating, and cooling of space. • Hot water systems will incorporate the latest technologies. • Installation of efficient heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) units will minimize energy demands. GHG -3: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency will ensure that the proposed project incorporates water conservation measures that may include, but will not be limited to, the following: Use water - efficient landscaping, including drought - tolerant, native, and appropriate climate zone species. Incorporate efficient irrigation systems, including drip, micromisters, and smart irrigation controls. • Reduce potable water demands by installing water - conserving fixtures (low -flow faucets, toilets, urinals, etc.). b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Less - than - Significant Impact. As described previously, AB 32 identified a 2020 target level for GHG emissions in California of 427 MMT of CO2e, which is approximately 28.5% less than the year 2020 BAU emissions estimate of 596 MMT CO2e. To achieve these GHG reductions there will have to be widespread reductions of GHG emissions across California, Some of those reductions will need to come in the form of changes in vehicle emissions and mileage standards, changes in the sources of electricity, and increases in energy efficiency by existing facilities. The remainder will need to come from requiring new facility development to have lower carbon intensity than BAU conditions. Therefore, this analysis uses a threshold of significance that is in conformance with the state's goals. On December 12, 2008, ARB adopted the AB 32 Scoping Plan, which details specific GHG emission reduction measures that target specific GHG emissions sources. While none of the Scoping Plan measures are applicable to the proposed project, nevertheless, project- related GHG emissions would be reduced as a result of several AB 32 Scoping Plan measures. The Scoping Plan considers a range of actions that include direct regulations, alternative compliance mechanisms, monetary and non- The Academy Charter High School 3 47 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 31 B -123 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist monetary incentives, voluntary actions, and market based mechanisms (e.g., cap -and -trade system). Some examples include the following: • Mobile - source GHG emissions reduction measures o Pavley emissions standards (19.8% reduction) o Low carbon fuel standard (7.2% reduction) o Vehicle efficiency measures (2.8% reduction) • Energy production related GHG emissions reduction measures • Natural gas transmission and distribution efficiency measures (7.4% reduction) • Natural gas extraction efficiency measures (1.6% reduction) o Renewables (electricity) portfolio standard (33.0% reduction) These reductions in mobile- source and energy production GHG emissions would occur in addition to the project - specific GHG emissions reductions discussed above (Mitigation Measures GHG -1 through GHG -3). Project- specific mitigation measures would reduce project - specific GHG emissions related to energy consumption and water use by 10 and 20 %, respectively. Overall, the proposed project would be consistent with the AB 32 goal of reducing state -wide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by year 2020. Currently no other GHG reduction plan (i.e., SCAG, SCAQMD, County or City) applies to the proposed pproject. The proposed project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases; therefore, impacts would be less than significant. The Academy Charter High School 3 46 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 31 B -124 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Less -than- Significant Potentially Impact with Less -than- Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Would the project: a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the ❑ ❑ ® ❑ environment through the routine transport use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the ❑ ❑ ® ❑ environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c. Emit hazardous emissions or involve handling ❑ ❑ ® ❑ hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d. Be located on a site that is included on a list of ❑ ❑ ❑ hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e. Be located within an airport land use plan area ❑ ❑ ❑ or, where such a plan has not been adopted, be within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, and result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f. Be located within the vicinity of a private ❑ ❑ Q airship and result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g. Impair implementation of or physically ❑ ❑ ® ❑ interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h. Expose people or structures to a significant ❑ ❑ ❑ risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Discussion Would the project: a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Less - than - Significant impact. A hazardous material is defined as any material that, due to its quantity, concentration, or physical or chemical characteristics, poses a significant present or potential hazard to human health and safety or to the environment if released into the workplace or The Academy Charter High School 3 49 June 2012 Initial StudyJMltigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 31 B -125 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist environment. Hazardous materials include, but are not limited to, hazardous substances, hazardous wastes, and any material that a business or the local implementing agency has a reasonable basis for believing would be injurious to the health and safety of persons or harmful to the environment if released into the workplace or the environment. There are multiple state and local laws that regulate the storage, use, and disposal of hazardous materials. The County of Orange Environmental Health Division was designated by the State Secretary for Environmental Protection on January 1, 1997, as the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) for Orange County (County of Orange Health Care Agency Environmental Health Services 2011), including the City of Santa Ana. The CUPA is the local administrative agency that coordinates the following six programs regulating hazardous materials and hazardous wastes: Hazardous Waste, Underground Storage Tanks (UST), Aboveground Petroleum Storage Tanks (APST), Hazardous Materials Disclosure (HMD), Business Plan, and California Accidental Release Program (CalARP). Additionally, the Orange County Code of Ordinances provides regulations for the use and storage of hazardous materials. Section 3 -3 -14 of Chapter 27 requires the Orange County Fire Authority Chemical Classification packet to be completed and approved prior to approval of plans and /or the storage, use, or handling of chemicals on any premise. Currently, the project site contains asphalt, cement, building pads, a large pile of rubble, and sand bags and does not contain any hazardous materials. The proposed construction activities would involve the transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials such as paints, solvents, oils, grease, and caulking. In addition, hazardous materials would be needed for fueling and servicing construction equipment on the site on a temporary basis. These types of materials are commonly used during new building construction and are not acutely hazardous. Furthermore, all storage, handling, use, and disposal of these materials are regulated by Orange County regulations, which the project construction activities are required to strictly comply with. As a result, hazardous material impacts related to construction activities would be less than significant. Operation of the proposed project includes residential and school activities, which generally use hazardous materials including solvents, cleaning agents, paints, pesticides, batteries, and aerosol cans. Although the project would utilize common types of hazardous materials, normal routine use of these products would not result in a significant hazard to residents or workers in the vicinity of the project. Therefore, operation of the proposed project would not result in a significant hazard to the public or to the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous waste during operation of the proposed project. Impacts would be less than significant. b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Less - than - Significant Impact. Former hospital and medical office buildings at the site involved the presence and routine use of hazardous materials. However, as a result of previous clean -up activities, testing has not identified any remaining hazardous materials on the project site. An Environmental Site Assessment prepared in June 2011 (Athanor 2011b) determined that potential asbestos - containing materials existed in the former hospital buildings that date back to 1964. The potentially asbestos - containing materials were abated, and prior to demolition, the air monitoring was completed, which confirmed that all air sample results are within the guidelines established by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for reoccupation of an area that has undergone asbestos abatement. In addition, an underground storage tank (UST) previously existed within the The Academy Charter High School 3 50 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICE 00914.11 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist project site, but has been appropriately removed and the City's Fire Department provided a closure letter in 2005 to the site's previous owner. As such, the project site does not contain any hazardous materials that could result in the release of materials into the environment. As discussed in VIII.a, project construction and operation activities would involve a limited use of hazardous materials. Equipment that would be used in construction of the proposed project has the potential to release oils, greases, solvents, and other finishing materials through accidental spills. However, the consequences of construction- related spills are not substantial because the volume of hazardous materials held within any single piece of construction equipment is limited. Construction - related spills of hazardous materials are not uncommon, but the enforcement of construction and demolition standards, including BMPs by appropriate local and state agencies, would minimize the potential for an accidental release of petroleum products and /or hazardous materials or explosions during construction. Federal, state, and local regulations would be followed by the construction contractor to reduce the effects of potential hazardous materials spills. Likewise, operation of the proposed project would use and store a limited amount hazardous materials including solvents, cleaning agents, paints, and pesticides. Large volumes of these hazardous materials would not be stored on site. Any spill or release of the hazardous materials stored or routinely used in operation of the project is not anticipated to have the volume to result in a significant hazard to residents or workers in the vicinity of the project. Farther, because the project would comply with federal, state, and local hazardous waste regulations, the proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Less - than - Significant Impact. The proposed project involves the construction and operation of a residential school and is also located within 0.25 mile of other school sites. As described in VIII.b, construction and operation of the proposed project would involve the use of small amounts of hazardous materials subject to federal, state, and local regulations. No element of the proposed project would involve acutely hazardous materials, substances, or wastes. In addition, emissions from construction and operation of the project were evaluated in the air quality analysis presented in Section iil. It was determined that after implementation of mitigation, the maximum emissions from the project would not cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standards. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials within 0.25 mile of a school. d. Be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites that complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? No Impact. A Phase i site assessment was prepared in 2011, which included a federal, state, and local database search and determined that the proposed project site is not included on a list of hazardous material sites (Athanor 2011a). In addition, soil and groundwater investigations were completed in June 2011 that tested for pesticides, nitrates, petroleum hydrocarbons, toxic heavy metals, mercury, VOCs, and PCBs. The testing determined that the only compound to exceed its The Academy Charter High School 3 5� June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration (CF 00924.11 31 B -127 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist respective Residential Screening Level per the USEPA is arsenic. The Environmental Site Assessment determined that the level of arsenic found on site is reflective of the natural background for arsenic in soils and shallow groundwater in the region. Because this is reflective of the natural condition, the project site would not be considered a hazard related to arsenic. The testing also identified pesticides; however, the pesticide levels were found to be within Residential Screening Levels and do not create a hazardous material condition on the project site. As described previously under VI ll.b., the previously identified hazardous materials related to a UST and asbestos containing materials on site have been removed. Therefore, there are no existing hazardous materials on site that would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment e. For a project within an airport land rise plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles 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? No Impact. The project site is not within 2 miles of any public or private airport facility. John Wayne Airport is located about 8 miles southeast of the project site, and the Fullerton Municipal Airport is located approximately 11 miles to the northwest (Google Earth 2011). The project site is not located within the boundaries of the Airport Environs Land Use Plan ( AELUP) for john Wayne Airport or the Fullerton Municipal, which is administered by the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). As such, the proposed project would not conflict with the ALUC or any other applicable rules and regulations as they pertain to airports and airport safety, and no impacts would result upon implementation of the proposed project. f. Fora project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. The project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. As described above under V11I.e, the closest airport facility is John Wayne Airport, which is a public airport. The project site is located outside of the ALUEP and would not be subject to the rules and regulations as they pertain to this airport. Additionally, because there are no private airstrips within the vicinity of the project, no hazard impacts related to private airstrips would occur with implementation of the proposed project. g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or enrergencyevacuation plan? Less -than- Significant Impact. Emergency response and evacuation is the responsibility of the City of Santa Ana Fire Department. The City of Santa Ana also maintains a Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan (NHMP); however, there are no designated emergency evacuation routes or location- specific goals or policies addressing emergencies. The NHMP identifies three primary hazard risk areas, which include earthquakes, flooding, and wind storms. Direct access to the project site for emergency vehicles is provided on the western side of the site along North Fairview Street. Construction activities would occur within the project site and would not restrict access of emergency vehicles to the project site. After construction of the project, emergency access to the site would remain via North Fairview Street. The project is required to design and construct internal emergency access, and size and location of fire suppression facilities (e.g., hydrants and sprinklers) to conform to Fire Department standards. The Santa Ana Fire Department would review the development plans prior to approval to ensure adequate emergency access. The Academy Charter High School 3 52 June 2612 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 1CF 00914.11 MWNKOO� City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Specific internal circulation descriptions, project - related traffic increase, and potential effects to emergency response - related traffic conditions are discussed in Section XVI, "Traffic and Circulation." As described, traffic generated from operation of the project would not result in significant traffic impacts; as such, project - related traffic would not result in delays to emergency vehicles. As described, the proposed project would not block emergency vehicle access to the site or adjacent areas, and the project would not interfere with the adopted NHMP. In addition, and as mentioned in the Project Description, the Academy is preparing an emergency preparedness handbook drafted specifically to the needs of the school site in conjunction with the police and fire departments. This handbook will include emergency evacuation plans for fire, flood, earthquake, terrorist threats, and hostage situations. As a result, implementation of the proposed project would not impair or physically interfere with an emergency response and impacts are considered to be less than significant. h. Expose people orstructures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urban !zed areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? No Impact. The proposed project site is located within an urban developed area and is not located within an identified wildland fire hazard area, as identified by the Orange County Operations Centel- and the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Figure 20, Orange County Fire Hazard Severity Zones; County of Orange n.d.). Implementation of the proposed project would also require adherence to the following chapters of the City's Municipal Code to reduce potential fire hazards: Chapter 8.2 Uniform Building Code, Chapter 8.4 Uniform Mechanical Code, Chapter 8.5 National Electric Code, and Chapter 14 City of Santa Ana Fire Code. Additionally, the project would be in compliance with any further guidelines from the City of Santa Ana Fire Department related to fire prevention and is subject to approval by the City's Building Department. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death from wildfires. The Academy Charter High School 1 202 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration tCF 3 -53 tune ne 20 2 �1 M Wan City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist The Academy Charter High School 3 S4 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 Less-than- Significant Potentially Impact with Less -than- Significant Mitigation Significant No IX. Hydrology and Water Quality Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Would the project: a. Violate any water quality standards or waste ❑ ❑ ® ❑ discharge requirements? b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies ❑ ❑ ® ❑ or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, resulting in a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level that would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? C. Substantially alter the existing drainage ❑ ❑ ® ❑ pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation onsite or offsite? d. 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 that would result in flooding onsite or offsite? e. Create or contribute runoff water that would ❑ ❑ ® ❑ exceed the capacity of existing or planned storinwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f. Otherwise substantially degrade water ❑ ❑ ® ❑ quality? g. Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard ❑ ❑ ❑ area, as mapped on a federal Flood liazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h. Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area ❑ ❑ ❑ structures that would impede or redirect flood flows? i. Expose people or structures to a significant ❑ ❑ ® ❑ risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or darn? j. Contribute to inundation by seiche, tsunami, ❑ ❑ ❑ or mudflow? The Academy Charter High School 3 S4 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Would the project: a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Less- than - Significant Impact. The proposed project could potentially result in impacts to water quality from both construction and operation, which are discussed separately below. Watersheds are typically areas that drain to a single point or receiving water (any watercourse or wetland into which surface water flows). The project site is located in the Santa Ana River watershed which is underlain by the southwest portion of tine Coastal Plain of Orange County Groundwater Basin. The project site is located at approximately 40 feet above mean sea level on flat terrain that slopes gently downward to the south - southwest (Athanor 2011x). The project site is drained generally by water sheet flows over asphalt -paved surfaces into the existing stormwater drainage system, which discharges into the Santa Ana River (County channel E01; OCFCD 2008; Property Condition Assessment 2011). The Santa Ana River is the major drainage channel flowing through the City and ultimately outlets into the Pacific Ocean. The Santa Ana River is located within 500 feet to the east of the project site and is not impaired (303(d) listed) in the vicinity of the project site (Reach 1; SWRCB 2006). Construction Impacts Tire potential impacts of construction activities on water quality focus primarily on sediments, turbidity, and pollutants associated with sediments. Construction - related activities that expose and move soils are primarily responsible for sediment releases. The project includes removal of existing concrete building pads and vegetation, site grading, soil preparation, and site trenching. These project activities could result in wind and rain erosion of the existing onsite soils and could increase the amount of suspended solids contained in storm flows due to erosion of exposed soils. Non - sediment potential contaminants that could enter water runoff from the construction site include paints, solvents, metals, oil, gasoline, petroleum products, concrete- related products, chemicals, and trash. All of these contaminants could contribute to the degradation of water quality. Because the project would disturb over 1 acre of land, the proposed project is subject to the General Construction Permit. The General Construction Permit, which was adopted by the SWRCB as Water Quality Order 99- 08 -DWQ on August 19, 1999, is required for soil disturbance activities that would be greater than 1 acre. Compliance with the General Construction Permit requires the development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP), the elimination or reduction of non - stormwater discharge off site into storm drainage systems or other water bodies, and the implementation of BMPs. The SWPPP requires a description of the proposed project site, identification of sources of sediment and other pollutants that may affect the quality of storm water discharges, a list of BMPs to provide sediment and erosion control, waste handling measures, and non- stormwater management. The SWPPP would be required to meet or exceed measures required by the Construction General Permit. As a result, construction of the proposed project would result in less - than - significant impacts related to water quality standards. Impacts on Groundwater Quality. Historical high groundwater elevations below the project site are as shallow as 15 feet bgs. According to subsurface evaluations conducted for the 2011 geotechnical exploration study, depth -to- groundwater on the project site ranges between 32.0 and 41.6 feet. As described in Chapter 2, "Project Description," the proposed project would require minimal grading and a maximum excavation depth of 5 feet below the existing grade. Because The Academy Charter High School 12 20 June Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -55 !CF June 2011 31 B -131 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist excavations would be limited to 5 feet below the existing grade, it is not anticipated that groundwater would be encountered during construction. Furthermore, implementation of the SWPPP (as described above) would prevent runoff, contaminated soils, or construction contaminants from entering excavated areas. Therefore, no impacts related to water quality standards would occur from implementation of the proposed project. Operational Impacts The City is a copermittee under the Orange County Municipal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit for the Santa Ana Region, Orders No. 118- 2009 -0030 and 1.8- 2010 -0062 (NPDES No. CAS618030; Santa Ana RWQCB 2003). To implement the requirements of the Municipal Separate Storm Water System (MS4) Permit, a Drainage Area Master Plan (DAMP) was developed to provide a framework and a process for following the MS4 Permit requirements to incorporate watershed protection /stormwater quality management principles into the environmental review and development permit approval processes. Per the requirements in the DAMP and the MS4 Permit, the City has adopted a Local Implementation Plan (LIP) implementing the DAMP and MS4 Permit within the city limits. in addition, the DAMP and the LIP are enforced by the City of Santa Ana's Water Pollution Regulations (Section 18, Article 4 of the City's Municipal Code). The DAMP establishes a baseline set of BMPs focusing on improving water quality for receiving waters in Orange County. Under the DAMP, the proposed project is considered a priority project because the project will replace more than 5,000 square feet of impervious surface and more than 50% of the impervious surface on the site. As a priority project, the project applicant would be required to prepare a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and incorporate all source- control BMPs. Using the LiP as a guide, the applicant has prepared a WQMP for the proposed project. The WQMP targets control of pollutants in runoff typically produced by the proposed project's land use (e.g., sediment, nutrients, trash and debris, oxygen - demanding substances, oil and grease, bacteria, and pesticides) to reduce impacts on water quality during project operation. As of August 17, 2011, all WQMPs must conform to the requirements outlined within the 2011 Model WQMP established by the Santa Ana RWQCB. As required by existing regional regulations being implemented by the City, the proposed project would comply with all BMPs and design specifications required in the WQMP to minimize runoff and erosion impacts that could result in a violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Specifically, the project's water pollution control measures include installation of a bioretention system and permeable pavers to treat onsite stormwater. The bioretention system will be a soil and plant -based filtration device that removes pollutants. It typically consists of a grass buffer strip, sand bed, ponding area, organic layer or mulch layer, planting soil and plants. Permeable paving is comprised of impermeable blocks separated by spaces and joints, through which water can drain. Pervious paving reduces runoff volume while filtering flows. As a result of compliance with existing regulations and implementation of BMPs, operational impacts related to the violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements would be less than significant. The Academy Charter High School 3 -56 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 1CF 00914.11 L City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist b. Substantially deplete groundwatersupplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, resulting in a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level that would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? Less than- Significant Impact. The City of Santa Ana is a member agency of the Orange County Water District (OCWD), which provides the City of Santa Ana with approximately 62% of its water from the Orange County Groundwater Basin. The remaining 38% of the City's water demand is imported from Northern California and the Colorado River by the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan). Water recharge in Orange County occurs from the Santa Ana River, recycled water, and imported water. The OCWD recharge basins are located solely in the cities of Anaheim and Orange (OCWD 2012). The OCWD maintains 30 recharge facilities with a combined total storage volume of about 26,000 acre -feet and 1,067 acres of wetted areas, none of which are located near the proposed project site (OCWD 2009). However, the Santa Ana River is located within 500 feet east of the project site and, although it is concrete -lined through the City, it is identified as a source for groundwater recharge. The project site is currently covered with 74% impervious surfaces that consist of concrete slabs and paving. The site is not a source for groundwater recharge. The project would redevelop the site with school uses that would not result in a substantial change in impervious surfaces. The redeveloped site would be 72% impervious. Because the project would not result in a substantial change over existing conditions, and because the site does not contain recharge facilities, the project would not interfere with groundwater recharge. The projected water demand associated with the proposed project is estimated at approximately 25,992 gallons per day at maximum capacity on a school day, which is substantially less than the historic water use from the project site. This volume of water use by the proposed project will not result in substantial depletion of water resources from the Orange County Groundwater Basin (see Utilities and Service Systems for an expanded discussion on water). Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the substantial depletion of groundwater supplies or substantially interfere with groundwater recharge such that there would be net deficit in aquifer volurne or lowering of the groundwater table. Impacts related to lowering the groundwater table and groundwater recharge are less than significant. c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, Including through tine alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on site or off site? Less -than- Significant Impact. The proposed project would result in minimal changes to the amount of impervious surfaces on site, and will not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the project site or alter the course of the Santa Ana River in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation onsite or offsite. Although the project site is within 500 feet of the Santa Ana River, development of the proposed project would not directly affect its course or flow patterns. Current drainage patterns consist of surface flow across the site and into an offsite storm drain system along 17th Street, which empties into a concrete -lined portion of the Santa Ana River channel and levee located south -east of the project site. The project would slightly increase pervious surfaces (approximately 2% or 6,000 sf of area) on the project site that would result in less storm flow. The planned operational stormwater drainage for the center portion of the project site will direct surface flow to drain into a bioretention system that The Academy Charter High School 3 57 June 2012 20 initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF ne 2011 l Y, City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist will treat stormwater. The treated stormwater will be discharged at four locations along North Fairview Street and join the existing drainage pattern of the street that will transport flows into the existing storm drain system in 17th Street. Stormwater from the remainder of the site will infiltrate into permeable pavers, with any overflow going to the existing curb and gutter on North Fairview Street. The project does not include changes to the existing offsite drainage patterns as a result of the proposed project. The project would not alter the course of a stream or river and would not result in substantial erosion or siltation offsite. As discussed above under IX.a, a required NPDES General Construction permit and a SWPPP would be required to address sediment control and flooding during construction activities. As a result of compliance with existing regional and local regulations, impacts are related to changes in the drainage pattern or erosion /siltation from the site and are less than significant. d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site orarea, including through the alteration of the course ofastreamorilver, orsubstantia llyincreasetherateorarnountof surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on site or offsite? Less - than - Significant Impact. Refer to IX.c. Although construction of the proposed project would take place within 500 feet of the concrete -lined portion of the Santa Ana River, development of the proposed project would not impact its course or flow patterns. Existing flows from the project site enter the river through existing stormwater facilities, as described in IX.c. The overall drainage pattern of the site would not be substantially altered, and the project would construct onsite stormwater infrastructure to connect to the existing offsite facilities. The planned operational stormwater drainage for the center portion of the project site will direct surface flow to drain into a bioretention system that will treat stormwater. The treated stormwater will be discharged at four locations along North Fairview Street and join the existing drainage pattern of the street that will transport flows into the existing storm drain system in 17th Street. Stormwater from the remainder of the site will infiltrate into permeable pavers, with any overflow going to the existing curb and gutter on North Fairview Street. The project does not include changes to the existing offsite drainage patterns. Offsite stormwater flows from the proposed project would be conveyed in the same manner as existing conditions, and the project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site. In addition, as described previously, the project site will include a 2% increase in pervious area, which is approximately 6,000 sf greater than the pre - project condition. As a result, stormwater flows from the project site would not increase with development of the project and flooding on or off site will not result. As discussed in Ma, the project would be required to obtain a General Construction Permit and implement a SWPPP containing BMPs and a WQMP, which would address flooding issues for construction and post - construction phases. As a result, the proposed project would not alter the existing drainage pattern or increase runoff in a manner that would result in flooding. Therefore, impacts are less than significant after mitigation. e. Create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polhuted runoff? Less - titan- Significant Impact. Refer to IX.a and IX.c. As described above, the proposed project would not alter the existing drainage pattern or substantially change the amount of impervious surfaces on the project site. Because the project site has been long developed with approximately 74% impervious surfaces, redevelopment of the site with 72% impervious surfaces would not The Academy Charter High School 12 3 58 June 20 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 0092011 31 B -134 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist generate a substantial increase in runoff water that would exceed the capacity of the existing or planned stormwater drainage system. As described in Section XVII, "Utilities," the site is located within an urban and fully developed area with drainage that is directed to improved stormwater infrastructure that has been serving the largely impervious project site. As described previously, the proposed project would result in a 2% reduction in impervious surfaces on site. Furthermore, post - development drainage will consist of surface flow in the center of the project site draining into a bioretention system and surface flow along the parking areas and perimeter of the site draining into permeable pavers. Any overflow will be directed into the existing curb and gutter. Treated stormwater will discharge at four locations along North Fairview Street and join the existing drainage pattern of the street. The project will not include changes to the existing offsite drainage pattern. Therefore, the project would result in less - than- significant impacts related to the capacity of existing and planned stormwater drainage systems. f. Otlierwise substantially degrade water• quality? Less - than - Significant Impact. As described in IX.a through IX.e, the proposed project would result in less -than- significant short -term construction or long -term operational impacts on water quality. Construction impacts would be reduced through the implementation of BMPs identified in the SWPPP and as required by the regional stormwater permit and DAMP. Implementation of the project in compliance with existing regulations would result in less - than - significant impacts related to water quality. g. Place houshrg within a 100 year flood hazard area, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood lnsm ance Rate Map or other-flood hazard delineation map? Less - than - Significant Impact. The proposed project site is not located within any type of flood zone (including a 100 -year flood hazard area) per Flood Insurance Rate Map No. 06059C0144j, December 3, 2009. Therefore, the project does not place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area, and no impacts would occur. h. Place within a 100 year flood hazard area sia'uctures that would impede or redirect flood flows? No Impact. As discussed in 1X.g, the project site is not located within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on the Flood Insurance Rate Map for the area. Further, the proposed residential development is located within a developed urban area and would not be located in an area that would impede or redirect flood flows. No impacts related to 100 -year flood hazard areas would occur with implementation of the proposed project. i, Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or, death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Less - than - Significant Impact. As described previously, the proposed project is not located within a flood zone, it is located within S00 feet of the Santa Ana River, which (like large portions of Santa Ana) could be inundated in the event of a significant failure of the Prado Dam that is located approximately 21 miles upstream. Flood waters from the dam could travel down the Santa Ana River toward the Pacific Ocean. In the event of a large -scale failure of the Prado Dam, flood waters would take approximately 6 hours to travel the distance to the project vicinity, approximately 7.5 The Academy Charter High School Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -59 12 tCf June ne 20 2011 31 B -135 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist hours for the flood waters to peak at an elevation of 96 NAVD, which is approximately 4 feet over the existing Santa Ana River bank height in the project vicinity (CCCD 2011). Implementation of the proposed project will include operation of an emergency plan and preparation of an emergency preparedness handbook in conjunction with Santa Ana police and fire departments. The emergency operations plan will be drafted specifically to meet the needs of the school site. This handbook will include emergency response plans for fire, flood, earthquake, terrorist threats, and hostage situations. Because the project site is located approximately 21 miles froth Prado Dam and flood waters would take approximately 6 hours to the project area, the project's planned emergency response operations would protect students and employees onsite in the unlikely event of a Prado Dam failure. As a result, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or darn. j. Contribute to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudjoow? No Impact. The proposed project site is located over 12 miles away from the Pacific Ocean, and is generally considered too far away to be subject to a tsunami. Additionally, the County of Orange Emergency Operations Plan map of inundation zones along the coastline shows that the project site is not located within an area anticipated to be at risk of a tsunami (County of Orange 2005). Therefore, the project would not result in impacts related to potential tsunami inundation. The closest enclosed bodies of water that could result in an earthquake- induced seiche to the site is the Prado Dam located 21 miles upstream from the project site. The Santa Ana River Main Stem Project has implemented flood control improvements to both the Prado Dam and Lower Santa Ana River, which has reduced the risk of inundation in the event of a seiche in the Prado Dam (Orange County Flood 2012). Therefore, there would be no impact to the project site as a result of overflow caused by a seiche. The project site is located within a fully developed area, and on a site with limited topographical relief. The project site is not located downhill from any slope of sufficient size to cause mudflows. Therefore, the project would not result in impacts associated with mudflows. The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -60 ICF 00914.11 l : 111 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Less -than- Significant Potentially Impact with Less -than- Significant Mitigation Significant No X. Land Use and Planning Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 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, a 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 nlan? Discussion Would the project: a. Physically divide an established carnrnunity? No Impact. The proposed project involves development of a previously developed vacant area for a residential charter high school. The 7.2 -acre project site is currently vacant and undeveloped, but it is within a completely developed urban area bounded by roadways and developed areas (existing medical and residential). The project would develop an infill project site that would become part of a community, not physically divide a community. In addition, the proposed residential charter high school development would be consistent with general plan land uses. Therefore, the project would not physically divide an established community, and impacts would not occur. b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, ageneral plan, specific plan, local coastal program, orzoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Less - than - Significant Impact. The project site has a Professional /Administrative Office (PAO) land use designation. The General Plan states that this land use designation is intended for a variety of professional office and service activities that are focused in areas where offices are the predominant land use or nodes within the city for office and office- related uses. The zoning designation for the site is Professional (P), which provides for a variety of uses, including trade and professional schools, hospitals, adult day care facilities, clubs, fraternities, and lodges. The P zoning designation allows for the proposed school project with the approval of a CUP. Therefore, the existing land use and zoning designation for the project site is consistent with the proposed project, which would develop a residential charter high school with approval of a CUP. However, the proposed project includes a proposed variance to allow for an increase in building height above what is regularly allowed within the P zone. As described in Section 41 -314 of the The Academy Charter High School 12 20 3 61 June Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration icF June 2011 31 B -137 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist City's Municipal Code, the P district has the following development guidelines related to building heights: (a) No structure shall exceed thirty -five (35) feet in height except as provided by section 41 -602 for Height District H. (b) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 41 -602 (d), all structures shall not exceed three (3) stories or thirty -five (35) feet within one hundred forty (140) feet of property used or zoned for residential purposes. (c) Notwithstanding any other height provision of this chapter, all structures shall not exceed two (2) stories or twenty -five (25) feet in height within the rear fifty (50) percent of a lot abutting on the rear property line of property zoned or used for residential purposes. The project proposes buildings that exceed these height restrictions. As shown in Table 3 -12, buildings D, F, G, and H are proposed to be higher than allowed by the P zoning designation. Buildings D, F, and H are within the rear 50% of the project site and are adjacent to residential buildings. Thus, these buildings are restricted by the zoning code to a maximum height of 25 -feet. Building G is proposed to be over the general 35 -foot height limitation for the P zone. These building heights are part of the P zone to ensure that development is massed appropriately and not in conflict with adjacent residential areas. Table 3 -12. Proposed Building Heights Phase Building Allowable Height Proposed Height 1 A 35' 32' -9" 1 B 35' 33' 1 C 25' 23' -5" 1 D 25' 32' -5" 1 E 35' 31' -11" 2 1± 25' 34' 1 G 35' 46' -7" 2 H 25' 31' -7" In addition, the project requests a variance to allow for an increase in wall height above what is regularly allowed within the P zone. As described in Section 41 -322 of the City's Municipal Code, the P district has the following development guidelines related to building heights: A six -foot high minimum solid decorative masonry wall designed in the same manner as the proposed building shall be provided along the side and rear property lines. Notwithstanding, said wall shall not exceed forty-two (42) inches in height within twenty (20) feet of the property line abutting a street. If the site is abutting a nonresidential use, the wall height requirement may be reduced by the planning director. The project proposes that the existing walls bounding three sizes of the project remain. These existing walls vary in height, but average 6 -feet high, which is above the 42 -inch requirement for properties abutting a street. The Academy Charter High School 3-62 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 06914.11 Clty of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist As described within Section 1, "Aesthetics," with implementation of mitigation, the proposed building heights and massing would not result in significant aesthetic impacts to the existing adjacent residential areas. Also, as described in Table 3 -13 below, the project will be consistent with General Plan goals and policies that direct development to be harmonious and compatible in scale and character with existing surrounding development. Furthermore, with approval of the variance the project would not be in conflict with the zoning ordinance. With adoption of the CUP and variance, the project would be consistent with the existing General Plan and zoning designations of the site, and would not conflict with any land use policy or plan adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Table 3 -13 outlines the City's General Plan goals, objectives, and policies that are applicable to the proposed project and discusses the project's consistency with each applicable goal, objective, or policy. Several General Plan elements and policies are not included in Table 3 -13 because they address issues that are not relevant to the proposed residential chatter high school project. As described in Table 3 -13, the proposed project is consistent with, or furthers the intent of, all of the applicable City General Plan goals, objectives, and /or policies. Impacts would be less than significant. Table 3 -13. Project Consistency with the Santa Ana General Plan Consistency Goal, Objective, or Policy Consistency Discussion Determination Conservation Element Policy - Minimize changes in The project would be required to obtain a Consistent hydrology and pollutant General Construction Permit to develop the loading; require proposed project. A General Construction incorporation of control, Permit addresses soil disturbance activities including structural and greater than 1 acre and includes the non - structural and Best development and implementation of a Management Practices to SWPPP, WQMP, and BMPs to provide mitigate the projected sediment and erosion control, waste increases in pollutant loads handling measures, and non stormwater and flows. management As such, the proposed project would include BMPs to mitigate the projected increases in pollutant loads and flows, consistent with this policy and RWQC13 requirements. Policy - Ensure that post- The project would result in an increase in Consistent development runoff rates post - development runoff from the site and and velocities from a site the City's DAMP and LIP would require have no significant adverse implementation of a WQMP to incorporate impact on downstream source- control BMPs. There are no streams erosion and stream habitat. or rivers within or adjacent to the project site and no significant adverse impacts on downstream erosion or stream habitat are anticipated. The project would be consistent with this uolicv. Education Element Goal 1 - Provide sufficient The project would result in the Consistent cultural, recreational and development of an educational facility, educational services and which would contribute to meeting the City The Academy Charter High School 01 22 3 -63 tune Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 1CF ne 2 12 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Consistency Goal, Objective, or Policy Consistency Discussion Determination facilities to meet the City of of Santa Ana's educational needs, consistent Santa Ana's educational with this goal. needs. Policy 2 - Encourage the The project includes the development of a Consistent shared use of school sites residential charter high school that would and their facilities as well as provide multiple uses on site, including other public facilities (i.e., residential, educational, and recreational. libraries, recreation As such, the proposed project would be centers), where appropriate. consistent with this policy. Enemy Element Variance to allow for an increase in Policy - Encourage higher The project includes a proposal to entitle a Consistent densities of housing and residential private charter high school on a office (mixed use) 7.2 -acre site and would require a development to relate to Conditional Use Permit to allow child care areas of higher facilities, trade and professional schools, transportation access and gymnasiums, and recreational uses and a capacity. Variance to allow for an increase in allowable building height and a parking reduction. Furthermore, the project site is located amid existing urban development along North Fairview Street. Access to and from the site would be achieved via North Fairview Street, Also, North Fairview Street provides access to existing bus routes and SR -22, which is located about a mile north of the project site. The project would therefore provide infill development within an existing office and residential area that will provide direct access to transportation, which is consistent with this policy. Land Use Element Goal 3 -- Preserve and The project would result in the Consistent improve the character and development of a residential charter high integrity of neighborhoods. school on a previously developed, but vacant site that is within a completely developed urban area. Because the project would result in infill development that is consistent with the objectives of the Professional (P) district with a CUP, and would provide improvements to a vacant parcel that is covered with asphalt and building pads, the project would improve the character and integrity of the project area, which is consistent with this goal. Goal 5 - Ensure that the The proposed project is subject to an Consistent impacts of development are evaluation of potential impacts as required mitigated. by State CEQA law. As the Lead Agency, the City of Santa Ana determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration would be sufficient to ensure that the impacts of development are mitigated to a level below The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -64 ICF00914.11 'J City of Santa Ana Goal, Objective, or Policy Consistency Discussion Environmental Checklist Consistency Determination Consistent Consistent Policy 5.2 - Protect the significance. A complete discussion of the community from project's potential impacts and mitigation incompatible land uses. measures are included within this MND document, which ensures that the impacts of the proposed development are mitigated through the proposed mitigation measures; therefore, the project would be consistent with this goal. Policy 2.10 - Support new The project would result in development of development which is a residential charter high school on a vacant harmonious in scale and lot surrounded by existing urban character with existing development. Existing development development in the area. surrounding the project includes commercial, office, medical, and single- and multi- family residential uses. The St. Edna Subacute & Rehabilitation Center, which is a single -story building, is located adjacent to the project site to the north. To the east and west of the project site are a variety of single - family residential homes, and a development of multi - family townhomes occurs south of the project site. Further south along North Fairview Street is a strip commercial center with auto - related uses and a variety of local- serving commercial uses. The development of the proposed 450 - student high school will consist of eight 1 -3 story structures that will be spread equally across the 7.2 -acre project site and will be harmonious in scale and character with existing surrounding development. Thus, the proposed project would be consistent with this policy. Policy 3.5 -- Encourage new The project would introduce a residential development and /or charter high school to an existing urban additions to existing mixed use neighborhood. As discussed development that are above under Policy 2.10, surrounding compatible in scale, and development consists of commercial, office, consistent with the and single- and multi- family residential architectural style and uses, and the project would be compatible character of the with the character of the neighborhood. The neighborhood, project's architectural style would be consistent with the style of surrounding buildings along North Fairview Road. Therefore, the project is consistent with this policy. Environmental Checklist Consistency Determination Consistent Consistent Policy 5.2 - Protect the The project site consists of a previously Consistent community from developed vacant lot surrounded by a mix incompatible land uses. of urban uses, including single- and multi- family residential, office, and commercial development. The project would be compatible and appropriate at the proposed The Academy Charter High School 3 -65 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 31 B -141 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Consistency Goal, Objective, or Policy Consistency Discussion Determination location with the surrounding community with the approval of a CUP to allow for child care facilities, trade and professional schools, gymnasiums, and recreational uses; and approval of a variance for the increase in building height. In addition, the project will be separated, and thereby protected, from adjacent uses by the existing 6 -foot high wall and the landscaping that would be installed with the project. Thus, the project is consistent with this policy. Policy 5.4 - Support land The project would result in the Consistent uses which are consistent development of residential charter high with the Land Use Plan of school. The project site is designated as the Land Use Element. Professional /Administrative Office by the Land Use Element of the Santa Ana General Plan. Under this designation, the residential school use is appropriate with approval of a CUP. Therefore, the project will support land uses that are consistent with the Land Use Plan of the Land Use Element: Policy 5.5 - Encourage See consistency determination for Policy Consistent development which is 2.10 and Policy 3.5 of the Land Use Element, compatible with, and above. supportive of surrounding land uses. Policy 5.11- Encourage The proposed project would result in a Consistent development which does not residential charter high school generate obnoxious fumes, development, and no commercial or toxins, or hazardous industrial land uses are proposed. The materials. proposed school would not generate fumes, toxins, or hazardous materials beyond typical school and residential uses. During construction, activities would involve the use of typical construction related hazardous materials such as paints, solvents, oils, grease, and caulking. These types of materials are not acutely hazardous, and all storage, handling, use, and disposal of these materials are regulated by federal and state regulations, which construction activities are required to comply with. Therefore, the project would be consistent with this policy. Public Safety Element Policy - Assure minimum The proposed project is located about 1.8 miles Consistent feasible response time to from Fire Station #1, which would first respond fire calls in all areas of the to the site in the event of a fire emergency. City. Strictly enforce Additionally, the site is approximately 2.4 miles safety provisions of from Fire Station #8. The hire Department building and zoning codes. estimates that response times to the site are 5 The Academy Charter High School 3 -66 June ne 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 2012 icr 31 B -142 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Consistency Goal, Objective, or Policy Consistency Discussion Determination minutes or less, which is considered adequate by the fire department. Furthermore, the fire department requires the proposed project to meet all access, water, and fire protection systems per the California Building Code and Fire Code, as well as all other applicable City Municipal Codes. Due to coordination with the fire department, the existing response times from Stations #1 and #8 to the project site, as well as the enforcement of building code requirements, the project is consistent with this policy. Seisinic Safety Element The project would include modern architectural Consistent Goal 1- Provide a safe As discussed in Sections Vi of this document Consistent environment for all Santa (Geology and Soils), the proposed project will be Ana residents and designed and approved in consistency with the workers. California Building Code and site - specific design finishes, and construction. recommendations within the geotechnical Policy 1.4 - Development investigation. The approval process, by the City and other design features of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency that prevent loitering, includes confirmation that the proposed vandalism, graffiti, and development fully complies with the California visual deprivation are to Building Code. Other potential safety concerns are addressed throughout this document, and sufficient mitigation measures are provided to ensure that no significant impacts occur as a result of the proposed project. As such, the project would provide a safe environment for all Santa Ana residents and workers, and the project would be consistent with this goal. Objective 1.3 - Minimize Pursuant to requirements of the California Consistent seismic risk in the Building Code, the City of Santa Ana, and construction of new Mitigation Measure GEO -1, the project would structures. incorporate appropriate design measures to minimize the seismic risk related to seismic movement. The incorporation of measures pursuant to these requirements would minimize seismic risk. The project would be consistent with this policy. Urban Design Element Policy 1.1- New The project would include modern architectural Consistent development and elements that represent the highest quality redevelopment projects design, materials, finishes, and construction, must have the highest consistent with this policy. See consistency quality design, materials, determination for Policy 2.10 and Policy 3.5 of finishes, and construction. the Land Use Element, above. Policy 1.4 - Development The project would be required to submit a Consistent and other design features Security Plan to the Santa Ana Police that prevent loitering, Department for approval and to comply with the vandalism, graffiti, and CPTED principles to the satisfaction of the police visual deprivation are to department. In addition, the project site would The Academy Charter High School 67 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF00914.11 'kil:5 I City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist 31 B -144 Consistency Goal, Objective, or Policy Consistency Discussion Determination be included in all projects. have a security (fob) system that would provide security access throughout the site. Further, the project would include a camera surveillance system, and onsite security personnel to prevent vandalism of the proposed facilities. Therefore, the project is consistent with this policy. Policy 1.5 - Enhanced See consistency determination for Policy 2.10 Consistent architectural forms, and Policy 3.5 of the Land Use Element, above. textures, colors, and materials are expected in the design of all projects. Goal 2 - Improve the See consistency determination for Policy 2.10 Consistent physical appearance of and Policy 3.5 of the Land Use Element, above. districts through development that is proportional and aesthetically related to its district setting. Policy 2.2 - New See consistency determination for Policy 2.10 Consistent development must be and Policy 3.5 of the Land Use Element, above. consistent with the scale, bulk, and pattern of existing development. Policy 2.7 - New See consistency determination for Policy 2.10 Consistent development must exhibit and Policy 3.5 of the Land Use Element, above. a functional, comfortable scale in relation to its neighborhood. Policy 2.11 - New See consistency determination for Policy 2.10 Consistent developments must re- and Policy 3.5 of the Land Use Element, above. enforce, or help establish district character. Policy 2.12 -- The proposed project would develop a private Consistent Development and residential charter high school surrounded by subdivision patterns are existing development and has been designed to be compatible with to integrate with the surrounding residential, existing patterns of commercial, and office development. The development in and project would provide for a smooth transition around districts and to adjacent development and the surrounding neighborhoods, and street network, consistent with this policy. provide a smooth transition along designated edges. The Academy Charter High School Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 68 June 2012 ICF 00914.11 31 B -144 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? No Impact. There are no Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs), Natural Community Conservation Plans (NCCPs), or other conservation plans that apply to the project site. Therefore, there are no impacts related to this issue, and no mitigation is required. The Academy Charter High School 3 69 June 2012 20 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration KF ne 2011 31 B -145 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Less -than- Significant Potentially Impact with Less -than- Significant Mitigation Significant No XI. Mineral Resources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Would the project: a. Result in the loss of availability of a known ❑ ❑ ❑ mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally ❑ ❑ ❑ important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? Discussion Would the project: a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? No Impact. According to the City of Santa Ana Land Use Element, there are no areas identified as having significant mineral resources and no areas having a Significant Mineral Aggregate Resource Areas (SMARA) designation within the vicinity of the project site or within the City. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not contribute to the loss of availability of a known mineral resource. No impact would occur. b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? No Impact. As discussed in XLa, the City's General Plan Land Use Element states that there are no mineral extraction activities in the City. As a result, implementation of the project would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site. No impact would occur. The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -70 ICF00914.11 iffl:a Me, City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Less-than- Significant Potentially Irnpactwith Less -than- XII. Noise Significant impact Mitigation Incorporated Significant Impact No Impact Would the project: a. Expose persons to or generate noise levels in ❑ ® ❑ ❑ excess of standards established in a local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Expose persons to or generate excessive ❑ ❑ ® ❑ groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c. Result in a substantial permanent increase in ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d. Result in a substantial temporary or periodic ❑ ® ❑ ❑ increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e. Be located within an airport land use plan ❑ ❑ ❑ area, or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport and expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? E Be located in the vicinity of private airstrip ❑ [] ❑ and expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Existing Conditions at Project Site The existing noise - sensitive receivers in the vicinity of the project site include: multi- family residences adjacent to the south, occupants of the St. Edna Subacute & Rehabilitation Center adjacent to the north, single - family residences located to the east across Blueberry Lane, and single - family residences located to the west across Fairview Street. The primary existing noise source in the project area is from traffic noise generated from Fairview Street. Other noise sources in the project vicinity are noises that are typical of residential land uses, such as cars starting up and barking dogs. Five short -term and one long -term attended sound level measurements were conducted on January 24, 2012 through January 25, 2012, with a Larson Davis Type 812 sound level meter (short term), which is classified as a Type 1 (precision grade) instrument and a Rion NL -21 sound levels meter, which is classified as a Type 2 instrument. As shown on figure 3 -8, noise was measured at five noise - sensitive locations near the project site and one long -term location on the project site. During the field measurements, the physical observations of the predominant noise sources included: traffic along Fairview Street and Trask Avenue, aircraft on approach to John Wayne Airport, and ambient noise sources such as birds, landscape maintenance activities, and rustling leaves. The Academy Charter Nigh School tune 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -72 ICF 00914.11 31 B -147 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist The results of the attended short -term sound level measurements are summarized in Table 3 -14. As shown, the measured noise levels during daytime hours in and around the project site ranged from 61 to 63A- weighted decibels (dBA) equivalent continuous noise level (Leq). Table 3 -14. Existing Noise Volumes Regulatory Background: Noise Standards and Thresholds of Significance The proposed project is subject to the policies and standards contained in the Noise Element of the City of Santa Ana's General Plan and the City's Noise Ordinance. Table 1 of the City's General Plan Noise Element sets interior and exterior noise limits for residential land uses at 45 dBA and 65 dBA CNEL4, respectively. The City's General Plan Noise Element also requires that "all Residential uses should be protected with sound insulation over and above that 4 Community Noise Equivalent Level, is the average sound level over a 24 hour period, with a penalty of 5 dB added between 7 p.m. and 10 p.m. and a penalty of 10 dB added for the nighttime hours of 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 72 1cF00914.11 M - •11 �� Distant Aircraft, Distant Children Noise Measurement Results Playing Measurement Period 3:35 (dBA) Site Measurement Strawberry Start Duration Lane and Sidney of Strawberry ID Location Date Time (mni:ss) Noise Sources LeQ1 Lalax LMi„ Lgo Lso L10 ST -1 Wintersberg 1/24/2012 1:20 10:00 Traffic along 68.5 75.6 52.1 61.5 67.6 71.4 School, 12752 Presbyterian Distant Aircraft, p.m. Fairview Street ST -5 Park Glen 1/26/2012 10:30 Church, 2000 Apartment p.m. Fait-view Complex 1811 Avenue, Distant Fairview Street Landscaping, Distant Aircraft ST -2 2229 Cotter 1/24/2012 2:36 10:00 Traffic along 59.0 69.6 48.4 50.8 56.9 62.5 Street p.m. Trask Avenue, Regulatory Background: Noise Standards and Thresholds of Significance The proposed project is subject to the policies and standards contained in the Noise Element of the City of Santa Ana's General Plan and the City's Noise Ordinance. Table 1 of the City's General Plan Noise Element sets interior and exterior noise limits for residential land uses at 45 dBA and 65 dBA CNEL4, respectively. The City's General Plan Noise Element also requires that "all Residential uses should be protected with sound insulation over and above that 4 Community Noise Equivalent Level, is the average sound level over a 24 hour period, with a penalty of 5 dB added between 7 p.m. and 10 p.m. and a penalty of 10 dB added for the nighttime hours of 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 72 1cF00914.11 M - •11 �� Distant Aircraft, Distant Children Playing ST -3 2706 1/24/2012 3:35 10:00 Traffic along 53.4 67.4 44.3 45.3 48.3 56.9 Strawberry p.m. Strawberry Lane (Corner Lane and Sidney of Strawberry Street Lane and Sidney Street ST -4 Leroy L. Doig 1/26/2012 8:5S 10:00 Traffic along 59.7 682 49.5 51.3 56.1 64.3 Intermediate p.nl. Trask Avenue, School, 12752 Distant Aircraft, Trask Avenue Birds ST -5 Park Glen 1/26/2012 10:30 10:00 Traffic on 56.6 67.4 48.5 50.3 53.4 56.1 Apartment p.m. Fait-view Complex 1811 Avenue, Distant Fairview Street Landscaping, Distant Aircraft r The 10- minute duration, energy - averaged noise level Leq is commonly accepted as being representative of a 1 -hour average in urban and suburban environments. It is used as the basis for community noise equivalent level calculations. Regulatory Background: Noise Standards and Thresholds of Significance The proposed project is subject to the policies and standards contained in the Noise Element of the City of Santa Ana's General Plan and the City's Noise Ordinance. Table 1 of the City's General Plan Noise Element sets interior and exterior noise limits for residential land uses at 45 dBA and 65 dBA CNEL4, respectively. The City's General Plan Noise Element also requires that "all Residential uses should be protected with sound insulation over and above that 4 Community Noise Equivalent Level, is the average sound level over a 24 hour period, with a penalty of 5 dB added between 7 p.m. and 10 p.m. and a penalty of 10 dB added for the nighttime hours of 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 72 1cF00914.11 M - •11 �� ri IF T I A�,c W , , TV jj P. t am Jw e� - J All" K- A A Cf' e, r Ti t!!4 xw t 4 �117� zj t "A lig '� r'j # --the Legend r 0: 0 Project Site Long Term Location Modeled Receiver Location Short Term Location I a !a L.3 N 0 125 250 *at Source: ESRI StrestMep North Murics (2009): DigiM C40o (2009) P A&'A 'CF 'J City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist provided by normal building construction when constructed in areas exposed to greater than 60 dB CNEL" (City of Santa Ana 1982). Table 1 of the City's noise element sets interior and exterior noise limits for Institutional land uses at 45 dBA and 65 dBA CNEL, respectively. Institutional land uses refer to land uses such as hospitals, school classrooms /playgrounds, churches, and libraries. Article IV, Section 18 -314 of the City's Municipal Code specifies permitted hours for construction activities. Noise associated with construction of any real property is exempt provided that it does not occur between the hours of 8 :00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or any time on Sunday or a federal holiday (City of Santa Ana 2011). Discussion Would the project; a. Expose persons to orgenerate noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, at- applicable standards of other agencies? Less - than - Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Impacts related to construction and operation of the proposed project are discussed separately below. Construction Construction activities related to development of the project would occur in two phases. Construction of Phase I is anticipated to take approximately 13 months and construction of Phase If is anticipated to take 12 months, as described in the Project Description, Construction activities would cause short -term elevated noise levels at the residential land uses to the south and east; and at the St. Edna Subacute & Rehabilitation Center to the north of the proposed project site. As described above and provided in (Table 3 -14), existing noise levels at short -term measurement location ST -5 were approximately 57 dBA Leq, which is representative of noise at sensitive receivers to the north, east, and south. Noise levels at short -term measurement location ST -1 were approximately 69 dBA Leq, which is representative of the existing noise at sensitive receivers to the west of the project site across Fairview Street. Noise generated during construction would be dependent on the types of construction equipment used during construction activity, site geometry (i.e., shielding from intervening terrain or other structures), and the distance between the noise source and receiver. Noise from construction equipment would be audible at sensitive receivers surrounding the project site, the closest of which are immediately north, east, and south of the project site. The anticipated construction noise levels were calculated using the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM). This model factors in distance from construction noise equipment to receiver, construction vehicle mix, presence or absence of shielding from existing walls, and average daily noise levels to calculate noise levels at residences surrounding the project site. Table 3 -15 shows the noise levels calculated at a distance of 50 feet during construction phases where all pertinent equipment is present and operating. The Academy Charter High School 3 73 Lune 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration [CF 00914.11 31 B -151 City of Santa Ana Table 3 -15. Typical Noise Levels from Construction Activities at 50 Feet Average Sound Level at 50 feet Construction Activity (dBA Leq)' Phase I Excavation and Grading 87 Final Grading, Building 86 Construction, Trenching, Concrete Mixing, and Asphalt Parking Phase lI Final Grading, Building 86 Construction, Trenching, and Concrete Mixing 1 Sound level with all pertinent equipment operating. Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1971. Environmental Checklist Table 3 -16 shows noise levels that would occur from implementation of the project at the existing sensitive receivers adjacent to the project site. The noise levels shown are calculated from the acoustical center of construction. The acoustical center of construction is the idealized point from which construction could occur. It takes into account the mobility of construction equipment and is derived from multiplying the furthest distance construction equipment could be from a sensitive receiver times the closest distance and then taking the square root of the product. Table 3 -16. Noise Levels from Construction Activities at Closest Sensitive Receivers Construction Activity Noise Levels at Receiver 15outh of Project (dBA Leq) Noise Levels at Receiver 2 East of Project (dBA Leq) Noise Levels at Receiver 3 North of Project (dBA Leq) Noise Levels at Receiver 3 West of Project (dBA Leq) Phase I Excavation and Grading 72 73 72 72 Fine Grading, Building 70 71 70 70 Construction, Trenching, Concrete Mixing, and Asphalt Parking Phase 11 Fine Grading, Building 70 71 70 71 Construction, Trenching, and Concrete Mixing As shown in Table 3 -16, the calculated loudest construction noise level would be during the excavation and grading phase of Phase 1. Construction noise levels would range between 72 -- 73 dBA Leq. These noise levels are higher than the typical ambient daytime noise levels measured at the sensitive receivers to the north, east, and south of the project site. Noise levels of this magnitude would be readily audible and would likely dominate the noise environment in the area during The Academy Charter High School 3 74 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 31 B -152 Clty of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist project construction activities. Construction noise levels would be slightly lower, but similar to the existing noise levels currently experienced at receivers to the west of the project site across Fairview Street, based on noise measurements taken at sensitive receiver ST -1 (69 dBA LeQ). As provided above, the City's noise ordinance exempts construction activities from the noise standard (providing that such activities take place between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8 :00 p.m. on weekdays and Saturdays). The construction activities of the proposed project would not exceed the City's permitted construction hours. However, the short -term noise from construction would be loud at times at the nearby noise- sensitive land uses, and although temporary, could be disruptive. Therefore, Mitigation Measure N0I -1, which requires implementation of noise control measures, is provided to reduce construction noise levels to a less -than- significant level. Mitigation Measure NOT -1: To reduce construction noise generated by the proposed project, the City will ensure that the contractor will implement the following measures: • All mobile or fixed noise- producing equipment used on the project that is regulated for noise output by a local, state, or federal agency will comply with such regulation while in the course of project activity. • Electrically powered equipment will be used instead of pneumatic or internal combustion powered equipment, where feasible. • Material stockpiles and mobile equipment staging, parking, and maintenance areas will be located as far as practicable from noise - sensitive receivers. • The use of noise- producing signals, including horns, whistles, alarms, and bells, will be for safety warning purposes only. • The onsite construction supervisor will have the responsibility and authority to receive and resolve noise complaints. A clear appeal process to the City will be established prior to construction commencement that will allow for resolution of noise problems that cannot be immediately solved by the site supervisor. • Construction signs will be posted at the project site identifying a contact name and phone number to register noise complaints. Operation Traffic (Offsite Land Uses) Project - Related Traffic Noise. The project Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by Felir & Peers (Appendix C) was used to determine potential traffic impacts from the proposed project. The TIA evaluated operational traffic impacts broken down by phase of the proposed school on the surrounding land uses. Traffic noise levels were analyzed using the FHWA's Traffic Noise Model (TNM). This model analyzes traffic noise based on number of vehicles, traffic mix (automobiles, medium trucks, and heavy trucks), project site geometry with respect to roadways, shielding from structures such as walls or buildings, and other parameters. The most recent version of TNM (version 2.5) was used in this analysis. Using the TIA's estimated peak -hour traffic volumes, TNM calculates noise levels in terms of the peak hour Leq noise level for modeled receivers. To determine the corresponding CNEL, the peak hour noise levels were input into an Excel spreadsheet which models diurnal traffic patterns. Table 3 -17 provides the modeled dBA CNEL noise levels for modeled receivers for existing, existing plus project, Phase I, existing plus project Phase 11, opening year (2013), opening year (2013) plus Phase I, opening year (2019), and opening year (2019) plus Phase If scenarios. ;C r,Lauerny Lna Ile r rngn xnooi June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -75 ICF 00914.11 31 B -153 City of Santa Ana Wintersberg 69 69 0 0 Presbyterian 70 0 Environmental Checklist 0 Table 3 -17. Predicted Off Site Exterior Existing, Opening Year (2013), and Opening Year (2019) 62 Fairview Traffic Noise Levels with and without the Project Street 0 50 ST -2 2229 Cotter 62 62 0 Street � h 2706 50 d Strawberry " � Lane Corner as t � o 0 co 'd M o z ay cay a',z Sidney Street SP -4 DOIG 63 63 0 az Intermediate 0 Z 0 W a �W tn� 19 Z a�i d t°.W a�i W V W nt �'+ W t0 •-. 04 L 7 O H v O� V O tI) u ~O b� -aIS.z q b p.zb A.� q '~Cb �� C Iw Receiver ° o r, a, ° r, a d a " ad � " d Receiver Location s. %"b 0 A X P. Z N — 3 A � .a 9 .a A ST -1 Wintersberg 69 69 0 0 Presbyterian 70 0 62 0 Church 2000 62 0 62 Fairview s0 0 50 Street 0 50 ST -2 2229 Cotter 62 62 0 Street ST -3 2706 50 50 0 Strawberry Lane Corner of Strawberry Lane and Sidney Street SP -4 DOIG 63 63 0 Intermediate School 69 0 69 69 0 70 70 0 62 0 62 62 0 62 62 0 s0 0 50 50 0 50 50 0 63 0 63 63 0 63 63 0 ST -5 Park Glen S9 58 -1 S8 -1 59 58 -1 60 58 -2 Apartment Complex 1811 Fairview Street As shown above in Table 3 -17, the project's traffic noise contribution would result in a zero to -2 dBA traffic increase. The reduction in traffic - related noise at ST -5 would result from the inclusion of project - related structures erected on the project site that would shield traffic noise from Fairview Street. Therefore, offsite noise impacts associated with project - related traffic would be less than significant. Operation Traffic ( Onsite Land Uses) Project- Related Traffic Noise. The project TIA prepared by Fehr & Peers (Appendix C) and the TNM noise model were used to determine potential traffic impacts to onsite portions of the project, as described above for offsite traffic impacts. The proposed project would construct onsite residences and classrooms which could be impacted by traffic noise on Fairview Street. The Academy Charter Nigh School 3-76 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 31 B -154 C €ty of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Table 3 -18 provides the modeled noise levels for modeled receivers for opening year (2013) plus Phase 1, and opening year (2019) plus Phase Il scenarios for onsite receivers. Existing noise levels were not calculated because there are no existing onsite noise - sensitive receivers in the existing vacant condition. Table 3 -18. Exterior Modeled Noise levels from Fairview Street on Project Facilities Receivers M -1 through M -3 are the proposed residential patio locations that would be developed as part of the project. The residential patio locations are directed toward the central portion of the project site, and will receive noise shielding from the proposed building structures between the patios and Fairview Street. As shown in Table 3 -17, the noise model confirms that the proposed exterior residential uses would not exceed the City's 65 dBA exterior CNEL threshold. As a result, Fairview Street - related traffic noise impacts to the exterior residential areas would be less than significant. However, the building elevations that face Fairview Street will likely exceed the exterior threshold of 65 dBA CNEL, and this will likely cause the interior standard of 45 dBA CNEL to be exceeded. Similarly, Receiver M -4 is the location of Building G that is proposed to be used for classrooms. The modeled noise level at the far ade of the classroom building is approximately 73 dBA CNEL. Because no outside uses are planned at this location on the project site, the 65 dBA CNEL exterior threshold would not apply. However, assuming a 20 dBA insertion loss between exterior and interior environments, the interior noise level within the classrooms would be approximately 53 dBA CNEL, which exceeds the City's General Plan 45 dBA CNEL interior threshold. As a result of this threshold exceedance, Mitigation Measure N01 -2 is included to reduce the interior noise levels to a less -than- significant level. Mitigation Measure N01 -2: All residential and classroom /library units that face Fairview Street will be fitted with acoustically rated windows (minimum Sound Transmission Class rating of 35) to reduce exterior /interior noise transmission. Additionally, any residential doors with a direct exposure to Fairview Street will meet a minimum STC rating of 35 and be fitted with tight seals, and vents and ventilation openings will be designed to ensure that the interior noise levels of the habitable rooms do not exceed 45 dBA CNEL. Operational Noise ( Onsite Uses) Project Site Equipment Noise. The project site is currently vacant and undeveloped, and no noise is generated from its existing condition. As part of the operation of the project, heating, ventilation, I ne Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /M €tigated Negative Declaration 3 -77 ICF 00914.11 31 B -155 Modeled Opening Modeled Opening Year (2013) plus Year (2019) plus Project Noise Level Project Noise Receiver Receiver Location (dBA CNEL) Level (dBA CNEL) M -1 Building B outside family patio 59 60 M -2 Building A outside family patio 59 59 M -3 Building D outside family patio 55 55 M -4 Building 6 classrooms 73 73 Receivers M -1 through M -3 are the proposed residential patio locations that would be developed as part of the project. The residential patio locations are directed toward the central portion of the project site, and will receive noise shielding from the proposed building structures between the patios and Fairview Street. As shown in Table 3 -17, the noise model confirms that the proposed exterior residential uses would not exceed the City's 65 dBA exterior CNEL threshold. As a result, Fairview Street - related traffic noise impacts to the exterior residential areas would be less than significant. However, the building elevations that face Fairview Street will likely exceed the exterior threshold of 65 dBA CNEL, and this will likely cause the interior standard of 45 dBA CNEL to be exceeded. Similarly, Receiver M -4 is the location of Building G that is proposed to be used for classrooms. The modeled noise level at the far ade of the classroom building is approximately 73 dBA CNEL. Because no outside uses are planned at this location on the project site, the 65 dBA CNEL exterior threshold would not apply. However, assuming a 20 dBA insertion loss between exterior and interior environments, the interior noise level within the classrooms would be approximately 53 dBA CNEL, which exceeds the City's General Plan 45 dBA CNEL interior threshold. As a result of this threshold exceedance, Mitigation Measure N01 -2 is included to reduce the interior noise levels to a less -than- significant level. Mitigation Measure N01 -2: All residential and classroom /library units that face Fairview Street will be fitted with acoustically rated windows (minimum Sound Transmission Class rating of 35) to reduce exterior /interior noise transmission. Additionally, any residential doors with a direct exposure to Fairview Street will meet a minimum STC rating of 35 and be fitted with tight seals, and vents and ventilation openings will be designed to ensure that the interior noise levels of the habitable rooms do not exceed 45 dBA CNEL. Operational Noise ( Onsite Uses) Project Site Equipment Noise. The project site is currently vacant and undeveloped, and no noise is generated from its existing condition. As part of the operation of the project, heating, ventilation, I ne Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /M €tigated Negative Declaration 3 -77 ICF 00914.11 31 B -155 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment would be used to ensure that the interior spaces of the facility are comfortable for the occupants. The closest existing noise - sensitive land uses are the multi- family residential residences located to the south of the project site and the medical facility located to the north of the project site. HVAC units are expected to be located on the roof structures throughout the project site. HVAC units could be located as close as 100 feet from the closest existing noise- sensitive land use, The specific manufacturer and model of tile HVAC units have not yet been determined. However, these units will be selected with the relevant City and building standards as part of the performance specifications (i.e., acoustically engineered and tested by the manufacturer to ensure that the noise standards would not be exceeded). In addition, the direct view of the HVAC units will be screened by solid rooftop parapets (low walls), which would also provide effective acoustical as well as visual screening. As a result, noise from the project's HVAC equipment would be a less- than - significant impact. Parking Lot Activity Noise. Parking lot activity will contribute to onsite ambient noise levels through conversations, vehicle engines, car alarms, and doors slamming. The parking facilities will be located on the perimeter of the project site, as shown on Figure 2 -5, which is bound by an existing 6 -Foot wall that will remain. The existing wall will hinder the parking lot noise from traveling to the adjacent sensitive land uses. In addition, parking lot noise is short -term in duration. As a result, noise related to operation of the parking facilities is less than significant. Onsite Stationary Noise. Stationary onsite noise associated with the project will also include basketball courts that will be outside in the location of Building F during operation of Phase I of the project, The gymnasium (Building F) will be constructed during Phase It of the project. Noise from typical school basketball court activities are estimated to be 60 dBA Leq at a distance of 50 feet (ESA 2005)5. The closest sensitive receiver is approximately 150 feet from the basketball courts and will be screened visually and acoustically by the existing 6- foot -high concrete block wall. A noise level of 60 dBA would attenuate to 51 dBA Leq at a distance of 150 feet provided the receiver had direct line of site, which would be below the City's daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) noise standard for stationary sources. However, with the inclusion of a 6- foot -high block wall, noise levels would be further reduced a minimum of 5 decibels, to approximately 46 dBA Leq. Therefore, noise from the proposed basketball court will result in less- than - significant impacts. b. Exposure of persons to orgeneration of excessivegroundborne vibration orgr-oundborne noise levels? Less - than - Significant Impact. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has compiled typical vibration levels generated by construction equipment, which are commonly used as a reference for construction vibration level analysis. The vibration levels produced by construction equipment are outlined in Table 3 -19. Vibration levels from construction equipment attenuate as they radiate from the source. The equation to determine vibration levels at a specific distance states that PPVeQ„ tp = PPV,f x (25/D) ^1.5 where PPVrefis the Peak Particle Velocity at a reference distance of 25 feet, and D is the distance from the equipment to the sensitive receptor (Jones & Stokes 2004). 5 Environmental Science Associates. 2005, Noise Monitoring. January 18. The Academy Charter High School 3 78 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitlgated Negative Declaration tCf 00914.11 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Groundborne vibration typically decreases rapidly with distance. Based on the FTA data (Table 3- 19), vibration velocities from typical heavy construction equipment operation that would be used during project construction range from 0.076 to 0.089 inches per second peak particle velocity (PPV) at 25 feet from the source of activity. At 50 feet from the source activity (closest sensitive receiver ST -5), PPV ranges from 0.027 to 0.032 inch per second. Because neither the state nor the local municipalities maintain regulatory standards for vibration sources, potential structural damage and human annoyance associated with vibration from construction activities were evaluated against California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) vibration limits (Table 3 -20). A vibration level of 0.10 inches per second PPV was used to evaluate impacts on nearby receivers because this level represents the boundary between barely perceptible and distinctly perceptible vibration as recognized by Caltrans and others. Because the predicted vibration levels from project construction would be well below applicable vibration thresholds, impacts from groundborne vibration or groundborne noise would be less than significant. Table 3 -19. Typical Vibration Levels for Construction Equipment Approximate peak particle Approximate peak particle velocity at 25 feet velocity at 50 feet Equipment (inches /second) (inches /second) Large bulldozer 0.089 0.032 Loaded trucks 0.076 0.027 Notes: Peak particle velocity measured at 25 feet unless noted otherwise. Root mean square amplitude ground velocity in decibels (VdB) referenced to 1 micro- inch/second. Source: Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Guidelines, May 2006. Table 3 -20. Reaction of People and Damage to Buildings at Various Continuous Vibration Levels Peak Particle Velocity (PPV) (in /sec) Human Reaction Effect on Buildings 0.006 -0.019 Threshold of perception; possibility of Vibrations unlikely to cause damage of intrusion. any type. 0.08 Vibrations readily perceptible. 0.10 Level at which continuous vibrations begin to annoy people. 0.20 Vibrations annoying to people in buildings (this agrees with the levels established for people standing on bridges and subjected to relative short periods of vibration). Recommended upper level of the vibration to which ruins and ancient monuments should be subjected. Virtually no risk of "architectural" damage to normal buildings. Threshold at which there is a risk of "architectural' damage to normal dwelling - houses with plastered wails and ceilings; special types of finish such as lining of walls, flexible ceiling treatment, etc., would minimize "architectural" damage. The Academy Charter High School 3 79 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF00914.11 31 B -157 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Peale Particle Velocity (PPV) (in /sec) Human Reaction Effect on Buildings 0.4 -0.6 Vibrations considered unpleasant by Vibrations at a greater level than people subjected to continuous. normally expected from traffic, but vibrations and unacceptable to some would cause "architectural" damage and _ people walking on bridges. possibly minor structural damage. Source: California Department of Transportation, Transportation- and Construction- Induced Vibration Guidance Manual, 2004. c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less - than - Significant Impact. As described in XILa, the proposed project would result in an increase in traffic along the local roadway system and increases in noise related to project - related HVAC equipment and exterior activities, such as parking lot and basketball court noise. As described previously, the anticipated noise increase from these onsite noise sources would be minimal and would not result in a significant increase in ambient noise levels. As a result, impacts are less than significant. d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less - than - Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. As described in XILa, construction - related activities and equipment used during construction of the proposed project would result in a temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels above existing levels. The City's municipal code exempts construction related noise provided that it occurs between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays and Saturday. However, the short -term noise from construction would be loud at times at the nearby noise- sensitive land uses and could be disruptive. Therefore, Mitigation Measure N01 -1, which implements noise control measures, is provided to reduce construction noise levels to a less- than - significant level. The proposed project would include new HVAC units, parking areas, and outdoor basketball courts during operation of Phase 1, which would produce periodic increases in noise at sensitive receivers surrounding the project site. The HVAC units would be acoustically engineered by the manufacturer to ensure that the City's noise standards would not be exceeded. The noise generated from the parking area located around the perimeter of the project site and the noise generated by the outside basketball courts will be buffered by the existing 6 -foot wall that bounds the project site. In addition, these noise sources would not exceed the City noise thresholds. Therefore, operational noise impacts would be less than significant. e. For a project located within an airport land use land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 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? No Impact. John Wayne Airport is located about 8 miles to the southeast of the project site, and the Fullerton Municipal Airport is located approximately 11 miles to the northwest (Google Earth 2012) The project site is not located within any airport land use plan and not within 2 miles of any public or private airport or airstrip. As a result, the proposed project site will not receive airport - related The Academy Charter High School 3 So June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICFOO914.11 •�, City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist noises, and the project would not expose people residing or working within the project area to excessive noise levels. f For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. The proposed project is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip. No impact would occur. i ne AOC[emy charter High school 3 $1 tune 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Iff 00914.11 � � J City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Less -than- Significant Potentially Impact with Less -than- Significant Mitigation Significant No XIII. Population and Housing Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Would the project: a. Induce substantial population growth in an ❑ ❑ ® ❑ area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b. Displace a substantial number of existing ❑ ❑ ❑ housing units, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c. Displace a substantial number of people, ❑ ❑ ❑ necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Discussion Would the project: a Induce substantial population growth in an area, eitherdirectly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g, through extension of roads or other infrastructure? Less - than - Significant Impact. The Orangewood Children's Foundation has identified a long -term need for special educational programs for Orange County foster youth and educationally at -risk students to help them graduate high school. The proposed project is focused on meeting the needs of these foster youth and educationally at -risk students in grades 9 -12. The proposed project would construct a residential charter high school that would consist of three education buildings, three residential buildings, and one administrative /library building. In its first year of operation, the proposed project is planned to serve approximately 80 students in grade nine. Each subsequent year, an additional 80 9th grade students would be added until total enrollment in Phase I reaches 320 students. Phase 11 facilities could accommodate an additional 130 daytime students over the facilities planned for Phase 1. At full enrollment, the proposed project would enroll approximately 450 students originating from Orange County communities, 80 of which would reside in onsite housing. The proposed residential buildings will provide housing for foster youth that reside within Orange County. Each floor of the three Family Unit Buildings (e.g., Buildings A, B, and D) would include five student bedrooms (accommodating 10 students), a guardian suite, a kitchen, dining room, living room, laundry, and a social worker resident office. The housing provided by the project would not increase the overall number of housing units in the City because the project would only provide group housing for eligible minors that are students at the school. The project will not develop single - or multi- family residential units. Additionally, the proposed project would not induce substantial population growth because the 80 students that will reside onsite are current residents within Orange County. The project is focused on Orange County fosteryouth and would not introduce families or students to the area from outside of Orange County. The Academy Charter High School 3 82 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF00914.11 l = 0C City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Furthermore, the proposed project would employ approximately 72 staff at full operational capacity of Phase II. Key personnel include 41 educational staff for Phase 1, 7 additional education staff for Phase 11,15 non - education staff, and 9 residential program staff to provide 24 -hour supervision in the residences. Additionally, the proposed project would hire a local security company to perform periodic nighttime patrols and monitor the onsite security system. Because the unemployment rate within Orange County is substantial -9.0% in December 2010 and 7.8% in December 20116 — employees are expected to come from the surrounding community. The need for employees to be relocated from distant areas is not anticipated. Therefore, the project would not necessitate the need for construction of new housing or result in inducing substantial population growth. Furthermore, the proposed project would be constructed on a vacant lot surrounded by existing development and served by existing infrastructure. No roads or infrastructure would be extended to serve the proposed project. As such, impacts would not be considered substantially growth - inducing either directly or indirectly, and impacts are less than significant. b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. The proposed project is located on a vacant lot void of any existing development. As such, the proposed project would not displace any existing housing and would not result in the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. No impact would occur. c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. As stated in XIII.b, the proposed project would not displace existing housing. The proposed project would not displace any people and would not require the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. No impact would occur. 6 Source: State of California Employment Development Department, January 20, 2012. http://www.calmis.ca.gov/file/ifmontli/oran$pds.pdf The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -83 1CF00914.11 31 B -161 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist XIV. Public Services Potentially Significant Impact Less -than- Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less -than- Significant Impact No impact Would the project: a. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities or a need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the following public services: 1. Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ 2. Police protection? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ 3. Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑ IK 4. Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ S. Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ Discussion Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with: a1. Fire protection? Less - than - Significant Impact. Fire protection services within the proposed project area are provided by the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA). Fire Stations Nos. 1 and 8 would be the primary responders to the project site; however, other fire stations would also respond in the event that additional support is needed. Fire Station #1 is the nearest station to the proposed project site, located about 1.8 miles east of the project site at 1029 W. 17th Street, and currently contains a staff of two captains, two engineers, two firefighters, and two paramedics at each shift. Current equipment at Station #1 includes one engine, one squad, and one medic van. Fire Station #8, which also would be a primary responder to the project site in the event of an emergency, is located at 501 N. Newhope, about 2.4 miles southwest of the project site. This station maintains a staff of one captain, one engineer, one firefighter, and two paramedics. Station #8 is classified as a station equipped to respond to structure fire emergencies and medical aids with one engine and one medic unit. Current response times to the project area are estimated at 5 minutes or less from the time a call is placed until the first responder arrives at the emergency, which meets the emergency service goal (Smith pers. comm.). The City's existing personnel -to- population ratio is 1.1 firefighters per 1,000 population. As a result of the project's proximity to existing fire stations and the existing service level provided by the fire department, the proposed project would receive sufficient OCFA service in the event of an emergency, and impacts related to fire protection services and facilities would be less than significant. The Academy Charter High School 3-84 Jane 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist In conversation with OCFA analyst Lori Smith (January 10, 2012), existing fire hydrant flow adjacent to the project site is adequate to serve the proposed project, and the needed fire hydrant flow to serve the proposed project would be less than the maximum allowed, which is 5,500 gallons /minute. In addition, fire facility fees pursuant to City Municipal Code (Resolution No. 6461) would be assessed prior to commencement of the project. The proposed project is also required to meet all access, water, and fire protection systems per the California Building Code and Fire Code, as well as all other applicable City Municipal Codes, which would reduce potential fire - related impacts of the project. As such, the proposed project would have a less - than - significant impact on fire services. a2. Police protection? Less - than - Significant Impact. Law enforcement services are provided by the City of Santa Ana Police Department (SAPD), headquartered at 60 Civic Center Plaza in Santa Ana, about 3 miles southeast of the project site. The SAPD provides police protection within four districts: Northeast, Southcoast, Southeast, and Westend. The project site is located within the Westend District. Current response times for police services in the City average 6.20 minutes for emergency calls (McCoy pers. comm.), As the main police building at 60 Civic Center Plaza is approximately 3 miles from the site, it provides the primary police protection services to the project area. As of January 2012, the SAPD had 337 police officers (McCoy pens, comm.). With a current population of approximately 324,528, the City's current officer -to- population ratio is 1.08 officers per 1,000 population, which is considered an acceptable SAPD ratio. In addition, average SAPD response times range from 6.20 to 26.12 minutes (McCoy pers. comm.). The proposed project would result in the addition of approximately 450 students, 80 of which would reside on the project site at full occupancy in Phase II. These additional students and residents are not expected to substantially affect the level of police protection and response times of the SAPD. Furthermore, as part of project review by the SAPD, the project would be required to comply with the City's Building Security Ordinance, CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) principles, and the National Infrastructure Protection Plan guidelines to the satisfaction of the SAPD, which would prevent criminal activity (McCoy pers. comm.). Additionally, the proposed project would implement a security plan focusing on three specific areas of security. These include a security camera system, an access control system, and intrusion detection /perimeter alarms. Appropriate security signage would also be present throughout the campus. The security camera system would provide full coverage both inside and outside of the campus buildings with the exception of inside the family unit residences. The focus of the cameras would be campus entry points, student gathering areas, classrooms, and some administrative support areas. Classroom and administrative buildings and the family unit residences would have exterior cameras around the perimeter with a focus on entrances. The classroom and administrative buildings will have some interior cameras in hallways, classrooms, lunch rooms, gymnasiums, student gathering areas, and select areas with direct student /staff interaction such as registration offices. Outdoor cameras will fill the gaps that building cameras do not cover, focusing on- campus vehicular and pedestrian points, public areas on campus, loading docks, and perimeter fencing. One security station would be built where camera footage may be viewed with monitors positioned so they are out of the general public's view. A campus -wide access control (key fob) system would be used to control access to all doors or gates on the campus. Key fobs will be individually programmed to each employee and student, allowing The Academy Charter High School 12 3 85 June 20 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration IcF ooB201 l : *6 1, City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist them access to specific buildings and classrooms based on their employee responsibilities or student status. The access control system will be integrated into the camera system so in the event of an alarm on the access control system, such as when a locked door is forced open, a camera monitoring that door would appear on the security station monitor to alert administrators. The ability to perform a lock -down of the campus or an individual building in the event of an emergency will be a requirement of the system. Most buildings will contain intrusion detection systems. This system will be monitored by a contracted security company who will also be responsible for periodic nighttime patrols. A perimeter alarm system would also be installed to alert security personnel if someone has crossed a security boundary such as a fence or a wall. in summary, the proposed project would comply with City principles and SAPD guidelines, as well as implernent a project - specific safety and security plan. As a result, the proposed project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for police protection services. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less- than - significant impact on police protection services. a3. Schools? No Impact. The proposed project would not result in adverse impacts to schools. The Orangewood Children's Foundation has identified a long -term need for special educational programs for Orange County foster children and educationally at -risk high school students. To meet this need the proposed project would construct a residential charter high school that would consist of four education buildings, three residential buildings, and one adrninistrative support building to accommodate 450 students (at full occupancy of Phase 11), 80 of which would reside onsite. As discussed in Section X111, "Population and Housing," the proposed project would not stimulate population growth. As a result, the proposed project would have no adverse impact on schools. In contrast, the proposed project could have a beneficial impact on school services by providing additional capacity for high school students. Therefore, no impact would occur. a4. Parks? No Impact. The proposed project would not result in adverse impacts to parks. Physical impacts to parks are usually associated with population in- migration and growth, which increase the demand for public services and facilities. As discussed in Section X111, "Population and Housing," the proposed project would not increase the local population. Furthermore, as part of the proposed project, a gymnasium, theater, and fitness area would be constructed for use by the project. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in an increased demand requiring the need for new or physically altered parks and no impact would occur. a5. Other public facilities? No Impact. The proposed project would not result in adverse impacts to other public facilities. As discussed above, physical impacts to public services are usually associated with population in- migration and growth, which increase the demand for public services and facilities. As discussed in Section XiI1, "Population and Housing," the proposed project would not increase the local population. Furthermore, as part of the proposed project, a gymnasium, theater, and fitness area would be constructed for community use. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in an The Academy Charter High School 3-86 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF00914.11 MWNITO City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist increased demand requiring the need for new or physically altered public facilities and no impact would occur. The Academy Charter High School 01 22 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 3_87 June ne 2 12 31 B -165 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Discussion Would the project: a. Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of thefacility would occur or be accelerated? Less - than - Significant Impact. The City of Santa Ana Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Agency provides about 322 acres of parkland within 35 city parks, which is equivalent to nearly an acre of parkland per 1,000 residents. City parks range from 0.1 acre to 23 acres in size. The City also includes four joint -use parks and 19 recreational facilities available to the public. Four of the City's 35 parks are located within 1 mile of the proposed project site, including Edna Park (2 acres), Cesar Chavez Campesino Park (6.4 acres), Spurgeon Park (2.1 acres), and El Salvador Park (11 acres). An increase in the use of existing parks and recreational facilities typically results from an increase in housing or population in an area. The proposed project would develop a residential charter high school that would consist of four education buildings, three residential buildings, and one administrative support building to accommodate 450 students (at maximum occupancy of Phase 11), 80 of which would reside onsite. These students are current members of the community; thus an increase in population using the existing community recreation facilities would not occur. As provided in the project description, the proposed project includes a gymnasium, theater, and fitness area for onsite recreational uses. Because students and residents of the project would use the onsite recreation facilities, the project is not anticipated to increase the use of existing recreation facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of recreation facilities would occur, nor would the project require construction of new recreation facilities. Thus, impacts to recreation are less than significant. h. Include recreational facillties or require the construction of or expansion of recreational facilities that ►night have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Less- than - Significant Impact. The proposed project would include the development of a gymnasium, theater, and a fitness center, which would be constructed as part of the proposed residential charter high school. The impacts of development of the proposed recreation amenities are part of the impacts of the proposed project as a whole, which are analyzed throughout the various sections of this MND. For example, activities such as excavation, grading, and construction The Academy Charter High School 3-88 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 Less -than- Significant Potentially Impactwith Less -than- Significant Mitigation Significant No XV. Recreation Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Would the project: a. 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. Include recreational facilities or require the ❑ ❑ ® ❑ construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Discussion Would the project: a. Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of thefacility would occur or be accelerated? Less - than - Significant Impact. The City of Santa Ana Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Agency provides about 322 acres of parkland within 35 city parks, which is equivalent to nearly an acre of parkland per 1,000 residents. City parks range from 0.1 acre to 23 acres in size. The City also includes four joint -use parks and 19 recreational facilities available to the public. Four of the City's 35 parks are located within 1 mile of the proposed project site, including Edna Park (2 acres), Cesar Chavez Campesino Park (6.4 acres), Spurgeon Park (2.1 acres), and El Salvador Park (11 acres). An increase in the use of existing parks and recreational facilities typically results from an increase in housing or population in an area. The proposed project would develop a residential charter high school that would consist of four education buildings, three residential buildings, and one administrative support building to accommodate 450 students (at maximum occupancy of Phase 11), 80 of which would reside onsite. These students are current members of the community; thus an increase in population using the existing community recreation facilities would not occur. As provided in the project description, the proposed project includes a gymnasium, theater, and fitness area for onsite recreational uses. Because students and residents of the project would use the onsite recreation facilities, the project is not anticipated to increase the use of existing recreation facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of recreation facilities would occur, nor would the project require construction of new recreation facilities. Thus, impacts to recreation are less than significant. h. Include recreational facillties or require the construction of or expansion of recreational facilities that ►night have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Less- than - Significant Impact. The proposed project would include the development of a gymnasium, theater, and a fitness center, which would be constructed as part of the proposed residential charter high school. The impacts of development of the proposed recreation amenities are part of the impacts of the proposed project as a whole, which are analyzed throughout the various sections of this MND. For example, activities such as excavation, grading, and construction The Academy Charter High School 3-88 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist would result in impacts that are analyzed in the following sections of this MND including Section III, "Air Quality;" Section VII, "Greenhouse Gas Emissions;" Section XII, "Noise;" and Section XVI, "Transportation and Traffic." Development of the aforementioned recreation amenities would not have significant impacts other than those identified in other sections of this MND. The proposed project would not require the construction or expansion of other recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. As a result, impacts related to recreation are less than significant. The Academy Charter High School Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-89 ItK 00914 June e 2(1 2012 11 31 B -167 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Less -than- Significant Potentially Impact with Less -than- Significant Mitigation Significant No XVI. Transportation /Traffic Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Would the project: a. Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or ❑ ® ❑ ❑ policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non - motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and Freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b. Conflict with an applicable congestion ❑ ❑ ❑ management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards 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 because of a ❑ ❑ ® ❑ design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e. Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ f. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or ❑ ❑ ❑ programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? Discussion Would the project: a. Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the pen formance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non- motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? Less - than - Significant Impactwith Mitigation Incorporated. The following analysis is based on a project - specific Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by Fehr and Peers (included as Appendix C). The TIA includes an evaluation of roadways and intersections that would serve the project within the City of Santa Ana. The TIA evaluates the existing operating traffic conditions in 2012 (baseline The Academy Charter High School 3-90 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICf 00914.11 li : 0 00� City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist conditions), and projected operating traffic conditions with Phase I and Phase II of the project. The TIA also evaluates operating conditions with the project in the near -term for Phase 1(2013), the near -term for Phase 11(2019), and the long -term (2035). Year 2013, 2019, and 2035 traffic impacts are discussed in the cumulative impact analysis in Section XVII, "Mandatory Findings of Significance" and assume annual growth rate factors in the near -term and forecasted traffic conditions from the Orange County Transportation Analysis Model (OCTAM) in the long -term. A description of impacts related to project construction, operation, and parking is provided below. Construction impacts Construction activities are expected to occur within both phases of the project. Construction activities in Phase I would occur for 13 months and for 12 months in Phase 11. Both Phases are expected to generate a short -term, temporary increase in construction related traffic. The estimated number of daily truck trips and number of construction workers needed for construction of the project is provided in Table 2 -3. However, Mitigation Measure AQ -1 limits the number of truck trips per day to 90 trips during the 4 -day excavation and export of soils effort. While specific impacts are not quantified for the project, the number of ADT and peak hour trips associated with project construction would be less than the estimated 463 ADT from operation of Phase I. However, potential morning and afternoon traffic delays related to construction vehicles and could create a temporary /short -term impact to roadways adjacent to the project site. As such, implementation of a construction management plan as described in Mitigation Measure TR -1 would be required to reduce short -term construction traffic impacts to a less - than - significant level. Mitigation Measure TR -1: Prior to issuance of construction permits, the project applicant will develop a Construction Management Plan to be approved by the City of Santa Ana Traffic Engineering Division that will include the following measures: • Designate traffic control for any street closure, detour, or other disruption to traffic circulation. • Identify the routes that construction vehicles will utilize for the delivery of construction materials (i.e., lumber, tiles, piping, windows), site access, traffic controls and detours, and proposed construction phasing plan for the project. • Specify the hours during which transport activities can occur and methods to mitigate construction- related impacts to adjacent streets. • Require the contractor to keep all haul routes clean and free of debris including, but not limited to, gravel and dirt as a result of its operations. The applicant will clean adjacent streets, as directed by the City Traffic Engineering Division, of any material which may have been spilled, tracked, or blown onto adjacent sheets or areas. • Allow hauling or transport of oversize loads between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., only, Monday through Friday, unless approved otherwise by the City Traffic Engineering Division. No hauling or transport will be allowed during nighttime hours, weekends, or federal holidays. Operational Impacts The TIA evaluated the operational impacts for each of the project's two phases and compared the increase to existing baseline conditions as they occurred in January 2012. As such, project traffic generation was developed for each phase, with the second phase including traffic generated by the first phase. The project trip generation was estimated using ITE Land Use 530: High School trip rates and land Use 221: Low -Rise Apartment trip rates, which provides a generation factor of 1.71 and The Academy Charter High School 12 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-91 June 20 iCF 009202 J City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist 6.59 trips per unit per day, respectively. As shown in Table 3 -21 below, operation of Phase I with 320 students, 80 residents, and eight housing units would generate approximately 463 daily trips with 104 (69 inbound, 35 outbound) occurring during the AM peak hour and 37 trips (17 inbound, 20 outbound) during the PM peak horn'. Operation of Phase II would generate approximately 223 additional daily trips with 55 (38 inbound, 18 outbound) occurring during the AM peak hour and 17 trips (eight inbound, nine outbound) occurring during the PM peak hour. Table 3 -21. Project Traffic Generation Forecast ITE Land Use Code / AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Project Description ADT In Out Total In Out Total Generation Factors 530: High School 1.71 0.68 0.32 0.42 0.47 0.53 0.13 221: Low Rise Apartment 6.59 0.21 0.79 0.46 0.35 0.65 0.58 Phase I Generation Forecast: Academy Charter High School 547 91 43 134 20 22 42 (320 Students) Academy Charter High School -137 -23 -11 -34 -5 -5 -10 (80 Residents) On- Campus Housing 53 1 3 4 2 3 5 (8 Housing Units) ' Phase I Subtotal 463 69 35 104 17 20 37 Phase II Generation Forecast: Academy Charter High School (450 Students) 770 129 60 189 28 31 59 Academy Charter High School -137 -23 -11 -34 -5 -5 -10 (80 Residents) On- Campus Housing 53 1 3 4 2 3 5 (8 Housing Units) PROJECTTOTAL 686 107 53 159 25 29 54 Source: Fehr & Peers, 2012. The traffic distribution patterns for the project related trips traveling to and from the project site have been identified based on the site's proximity to the existing roadways, existing traffic now patterns, ingress /egress of the project site and adjacent area, and existing and future turn restrictions. The project trip distribution methodology is provided on page 23 of the TIA (Appendix C). The analysis below provides current operating conditions for intersections within the vicinity of the proposed project and includes a projection of their operating conditions for each phase. Intersections All five study area intersections are located within the City of Santa Ana, which maintains an acceptable level of service (LOS) standard of D or better for signalized intersections. While the City of Santa Ana also permits LOS E or better for intersections within "major development areas," the proposed project is not located within a "major development area" and project area intersection and The Academy Charter High School 3-92 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF00914.11 31 B -170 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist roadways must maintain an LOS D or better to comply with the City of Santa Ana General Plan, Circulation Element Measure M. The City of Santa Ana does not maintain standards for unsignalized intersection operations; however, acceptable conditions, per the HCM Unsignalized methodology, include LOS C or better. The study area intersections analyzed in the TIA are shown in Figure 3 -9. Existing intersection operations were determined by using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology for signalized intersections and the Highway Capacity Manual 2000 (HCM 2000) for unsignalized intersections. As shown in Table 3 -22, existing signalized intersection operations within the study area operate at acceptable conditions (LOS D or better) during the AM and PM peak hour, except for the intersection of Fairview Street at 17th Street /Westminster Avenue in the PM peak hour, which operates at LOS E. The City determines that a significant impact occurs at an unsignalized intersection when both the worst -case movement delay causes the intersection to operate at LOS E or worse, and the intersection meets a peak hour traffic signal warrant. In the existing condition, all of the unsignalized intersections operate at LOS F under worst -case conditions, as shown in Table 3 -22. Table 3 -22. Existing Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis Key Intersection Minimum Acceptable LOS Control Type Peak Hour V/C or Delay (seconds)3 LOS4 Fairview Street at D Traffic Signal AM 0.667 B Trask Avenue' PM 0.661 B Fairview Sheet at C Side - Street Stop AM >50.0 (4.4) F (A) Edna Drivel PM >50.0 (10.1) F (B) Fairview Street at C Side - Street Stop AM >50.0 (0.7) F (A) Huckleberry Roadz PM >50.0 (0.6) F (A) Fairview Street at C Side - Street Stop AM >50.0 (0.7) F (A) Strawberry Lane2 PM >50.0 (1.2) F (A) Fairview Street at D Traffic Signal AM 0.693 B 17th Street /Westminster PM 0.904 E Avenue' Notes: I. Signalized Intersection. V/C for intersections based on application of intersection Capacity Utilization methodology using Traffix software. V/C = Volume / Capacity Ratio. 2. Side - street stop - controlled intersection. Worst case movement delay and average delay for intersections based on application of 2000 HCM Unsignalized methodology. Delay, In seconds, was calculated using Traffix software. 3. V/C is reported for signalized intersections. Worst case movement delay followed by average intersection delay 1n parentheses is reported for unsignalized intersections. 4. LOS based on V/C reported for signalized intersections. LOS for worst case movement delay followed by LOS for average intersection delay in parentheses is reported for unsignalized intersections. Source: Fehr & Peers, TrafJrc Impact Analysfs, 2012, The traffic impacts of the proposed project during the AM and PM peak hours were evaluated in the TIA based on the existing plus project traffic conditions at the five study area intersections for both project phases. Table 3 -23 shows the changes in the performance of the intersections during each project phase compared to existing conditions. As shown, both signalized and unsignalized intersections within the study area would continue to operate at acceptable levels with operation of both phases of the proposed project in the near -term. The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -93 ICF 00914.11 31 B -171 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Under both Phase I and Phase 11, the signalized intersections would continue to operate at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hour, with exception of the intersection of Fairview Street at 17th Street /Westminster Avenue, which currently operates at an unacceptable LOS E in the PM peak hour. The addition of project traffic at this intersection would result in an increase in V/C during the PM peak hour by 0.004 and 0.006 under Phase I and Phase II conditions, respectively. Because the City considers an impact to be significant if an intersection currently operating at LOS E or F and would experience an increase in V/C of 0.010 or greater, impacts associated with an increase of 0.004 and 0.006 V/C at the intersection of Fairview Street at 17th Street /Westminster Avenue under Phase I and Phase 11, respectively, would be less than significant. As such, impacts related to operation of the proposed project (existing plus project conditions during Phase I and Phase 11) would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. The Academy Charter High School 3-94 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF0091411 31 B -172 Source: Fehr +Peers F-] 31 B -173 Figure 3 -9 Traffic Study Area Intersections The Academy, City of Santa Ana Bolivar cir LEGEND O Study Intersection � Drivevrey Project Site 1, \( TreskAve `N) Not to Scale b Edna Di Huckleberry Rd Suewbenyln 4r F W*%tM1nA*rAve W17thit W 16th St Source: Fehr +Peers F-] 31 B -173 Figure 3 -9 Traffic Study Area Intersections The Academy, City of Santa Ana 31 B -174 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Table 3 -23. Existing Plus Project (Phases I and II) - Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis Fairview Street at C AM >50.0 (0.7) F (A) Existing Plus F (A) Significant No Huckleberry Roadz Existing >50.0 (0.6) Project >50.0 (0.6) Impact 0 No Minimum C V/C or >50.0 (0.7) V/C or >50.0 (0.7) F (A) 0 No Acceptable Peak Delay >50.0 (1.2) Delay >50.0 (1.2) F (A) Yes/ Key Intersection LOS Hour (seconds)3 LOS4 (seconds)3 LOS4 A No Phase I 17th Street/ PM 0.904 E 0.908 E 0.004 Fairview Street at D AM 0.667 B 0.673 B 0.006 No Trask Avenue' Phase It PM 0.661 B 0.664 B 0.003 No Fairview Street at C AM >50.0 (4.4) F (A) >50.0 (5.5) F (A) 1.1 No Edna Driven Trask Avenue' PM >50.0 (10.1) F (g) >50.0 (11.1) F (B) 1.0 No Fairview Street at C AM >50.0 (0.7) F (A) >50.0 (0.7) F (A) 0 No Huckleberry Roadz PM >50.0 (0.6) F (A) >50.0 (0.6) F (A) 0 No Fairview Street at C AM >50.0 (0.7) F (A) >50.0 (0.7) F (A) 0 No Strawberry Lane2 PM >50.0 (1.2) F (A) >50.0 (1.2) F (A) 0 No Fairview Street at D AM 0.693 B 0.699 B 0.006 No 17th Street/ PM 0.904 E 0.908 E 0.004 No Westminster Avenue' Phase It Fairview Street at D AM 0.667 B 0.675 B 0.008 No Trask Avenue' PM 0.661 B 0.665 B 0.004 No Fairview Street at C AM >50.0 (4.4) F (A) >50.0 (6.0) F (A) 1.6 No Edna Drivel PM >50.0 (10.1) F (B) >50.0 (11.6) F (B) 1.5 No Fait-view Street at C AM >50.0 (03) F (A) >50.0 (0.8) F (A) 0.1 No Huckleberry Road2 PM >50.0 (0.6) F (A) >50.0 (0.6) F (A) 0 No Fairview Street at C AM >50.0 (0.7) F (A) >50.0 (0.8) F (A) 0.1 No Strawberry Lane2 PM >50.0 (1.2) F (A) >50.0 (1.3) F (A) 0.1 No Fairview Street at D AM 0.693 B 0.701 C 0.008 No 17th Street/ PM 0.904 E 0.910 E 0.006 No Westminster Avenue' Notes: 1. Signalized Intersection. V/C for intersections based on application of Intersection Capacity Utilization methodology using Traffix software. V/C = Volume / Capacity Ratio. 2. Side-s treet stop- controlled intersection. Worst case movement delay and average delay for intersections based on application of 2000 HCM Unsignalized methodology. Delay, in seconds, was calculated using Traffix software. 3. V/C is reported for signalized intersections. Worst case movement delay followed by average intersection delay in parentheses is reported for unsignalized intersections. 4. LOS based on V/C reported for signalized intersections. LOS for worst case movement delay followed by LOS for average intersection delay in parentheses is reported for unsignalized intersections. A = Project change Source: Fehr& Peers, Traffic Impact Analysis, 2012. t ne Academy Charter High school 3 95 tune 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 31 B -175 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Signal Warrants The TIA also evaluated estimated future trips at two unsignalized intersections in the project study area (Fairview at Huckleberry Road and Fairview at Strawberry Lane) to determine if additional traffic would necessitate the installment of a traffic signal at either location. The analysis is based on the criteria established in the 2010 California Supplement to the 2003 Edition of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). As shown in Table 3 -24, with Phase I and Phase 11 of the proposed project, the TIA determined that signal warrants would not be met at either Fairview Street and Huckleberry Road or Fairview Street and Strawberry Lane. Table 3 -24. Existing Plus Project (Phases I and 11) -- Peak Hour Traffic Signal Warrant Results Neighborhood Impacts A neighborhood impacts analysis was prepared for the proposed project to evaluate potential impacts to the adjacent residential areas due to a potential increase in trips through the adjacent residential neighborhood streets, including Huckleberry Road, Strawberry Lane, and Sydney Street by vehicles using these streets to avoid potentially congested intersections, such as Fairview Street at 17th Street /Westminster Avenue. Since the circulation pattern of the pick -up and drop -off route starts at the southwest driveway south of Strawberry Lane, exits the northwest driveway, and is limited to a right -turn out north of Huckleberry Road, this route is a feasible option for outbound traffic traveling west on Westminster Avenue. However, inbound traffic will most likely avoid this route because the entrance driveway would be more difficult to access through Huckleberry Road or Strawberry Lane due to the heavy vehicle volume along Fairview Street. The more desirable inbound route from the west would be to make the left at Fairview Street and 17th Street /Westminster Avenue instead of at Sydney Street. Outbound traffic heading west on Westminster is forced north from the exit driveway and is required to make a U -turn to head south towards Westminster Avenue. The TIA assumed that some of these vehicles would use Huckleberry Road or Strawberry Lane to Sydney Street in order to access Westminster Avenue. However, the speed bumps along Sydney Avenue serve as a deterrent The Academy Charter High School 3 -96 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 1 l W eJ June 2012 ICG 00914.11 Major Street Minor Street Approach Traffic Approach Traffic Warrant Intersection Lanes Volume Lanes Volume Met Phase 1 Fairview Street AM 2,772 AM 27 at Huckleberry 2 1 No Road PM 3,149 PM 15 Fairview Street AM 2,778 AM 26 at Strawberry 2 1 No Lane PM 3,136 PM 34 Phase 11 Fairview Street AM 2,799 AM 27 at Huckleberry 2 1 No Road PM 3,156 PM 15 Fairview Street AM 2,804 AM 26 at Strawberry 2 1 No Lane PM 3,143 PM 34 Source: California Manual of Uniform Transportation Control Devices (MUTCD), 2012. Neighborhood Impacts A neighborhood impacts analysis was prepared for the proposed project to evaluate potential impacts to the adjacent residential areas due to a potential increase in trips through the adjacent residential neighborhood streets, including Huckleberry Road, Strawberry Lane, and Sydney Street by vehicles using these streets to avoid potentially congested intersections, such as Fairview Street at 17th Street /Westminster Avenue. Since the circulation pattern of the pick -up and drop -off route starts at the southwest driveway south of Strawberry Lane, exits the northwest driveway, and is limited to a right -turn out north of Huckleberry Road, this route is a feasible option for outbound traffic traveling west on Westminster Avenue. However, inbound traffic will most likely avoid this route because the entrance driveway would be more difficult to access through Huckleberry Road or Strawberry Lane due to the heavy vehicle volume along Fairview Street. The more desirable inbound route from the west would be to make the left at Fairview Street and 17th Street /Westminster Avenue instead of at Sydney Street. Outbound traffic heading west on Westminster is forced north from the exit driveway and is required to make a U -turn to head south towards Westminster Avenue. The TIA assumed that some of these vehicles would use Huckleberry Road or Strawberry Lane to Sydney Street in order to access Westminster Avenue. However, the speed bumps along Sydney Avenue serve as a deterrent The Academy Charter High School 3 -96 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 1 l W eJ June 2012 ICG 00914.11 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist from vehicles attempting to shorten their trip through the neighborhood, and the majority of trips ultimately heading west on Westminster Avenue are anticipated to use the intersection of Fairview Street at 17th Street /Westminster Avenue. Based on the Phase 11 project trip assignment and shown in Table 3 -25, the project cut - through trips would not result in a significant impact on Huckleberry Road, Strawberry Lane, and Sydney Street because the daily volume increase would be less than 16 %. Table 3 -25. Neighborhood Daily Volume Change Notes: 1. These values represent the one -way outbound daily project generated trips based on a 50% reduction rate of the daily project trip estimates from the Trip Generation, 8th Edition (1TE 2008). Source: Felir & Peers, 2012 Additionally, to provide a conservative worst -case analysis, Phase II -only peak hour volumes were added to existing peak hour volumes to compare the percent change. Table 3 -26 summarizes the percent change in peak hour volumes from existing conditions with the addition of Phase 11 only traffic volumes. As shown in Table 3 -26, the project cut - through trips would have a less -than- significant impact on Huckleberry Road, Strawberry Lane, and Sydney Street because the increase in daily volumes is less than 6% in the AM peak hour and less than 3% in the PM peak hour along each roadway. Table 3 -26. Neighborhood Peak Hour Volume Change Daily Project Percent Neighborhood Generated Change Street ADT Trips' in ADT Huckleberry Road 495 11 2.2% Strawberry Lane 739 it 1.5% Sydney Street 762 22 2.8% Notes: 1. These values represent the one -way outbound daily project generated trips based on a 50% reduction rate of the daily project trip estimates from the Trip Generation, 8th Edition (1TE 2008). Source: Felir & Peers, 2012 Additionally, to provide a conservative worst -case analysis, Phase II -only peak hour volumes were added to existing peak hour volumes to compare the percent change. Table 3 -26 summarizes the percent change in peak hour volumes from existing conditions with the addition of Phase 11 only traffic volumes. As shown in Table 3 -26, the project cut - through trips would have a less -than- significant impact on Huckleberry Road, Strawberry Lane, and Sydney Street because the increase in daily volumes is less than 6% in the AM peak hour and less than 3% in the PM peak hour along each roadway. Table 3 -26. Neighborhood Peak Hour Volume Change The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -97 ICF 00914.11 31 B -177 PM AM Percent Peak Percent AM Peak Hour Change in PM Hour Change in Peak Project AM Peak Peak Project PM Peak Neighborhood Hour Generated Hour Hour Generated Hour Street Volume Trips Volume Volume Trips Volume Huckleberry Road 34 2 5.6% 54 1 1.8% Strawberry Lane S9 2 3.3% 68 1 1.4% Sydney Street 64 4 5.9% 84 2 2.3% Source: Fehr & Peers, 2012 The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -97 ICF 00914.11 31 B -177 City of Santa Ana Parking Impacts Environmental Checklist The proposed project would provide for adequate parking to serve the proposed project. The project proposes to provide 146 onsite parking spaces. The City of Santa Ana Municipal Code (Sections 41- 1401 and 41 -1327) provides the City's parking requirements for individual land uses, The code requirements related to the project include: • High school: one space per 150 sf of classroom floor area, plus one space for each 333 sf of office floor area. • Fraternity and sorority houses and dormitories: one space for two beds or one space for each 80 sf of sleeping area, whichever is greater. Pursuant to the municipal code, the project would require a total of 211 parking spaces, which equals 0.47 spaces per student. However, based on field observations and studies at neighboring schools as described in the TIA, 211 spaces would oversupply the school by a ratio of nearly 2 :1. The TIA determined that the parking demand to student ratio did not exceed 0.22 spaces per student during any of the field studies. To provide a conservative parking estimate for the proposed project, an additional 25% was added to the 0.22 spaces per student ratio to provide a generation rate of 0.28 spaces per student. Based on this generation rate, operation of Phase 11 would result in a demand of 126 parking spaces for students of the proposed project. The dormitory parking generation rate listed above is typically applied to college campuses in which all residents are licensed drivers and half of which have personal vehicles. Because the high school would serve foster youth, who have less access to personal vehicles, the realistic parking needs of tite project's resident students is anticipated to be much less, and personal vehicles are likely limited to the 16 guardians that would reside onsite. Therefore, the City's municipal code requirement (that would provide 30 spaces) is not consistent with the needs of the project. Given the nature of the project, a rate of 2.5 spaces per residential unit, equaling 20 spaces would appropriately serve the residential portion of the project. These 20 residential parking spaces, when combined with the 126 parking spaces serving the school facilities totals 146 parking spaces, as shown in Table 3 -27. Given the nature of the users of the institution, 146 parking spaced is deemed adequate to supply parking to the Academy. However, because this adequacy differs from the parking requirements in the City's Municipal Code, the project will require approval of a parking variance. Table 3 -27. Project Parking Requirements per Parking Needs Assessment Project Amount Parking Requirement Required Component Proposed Per Unit Spaces High School 450 students 0.28 spaces per student 126 Guardian 8 units 2.5 spaces per unit 20 Housing Total Required Parking Spaces 146 Proposed Parking Spaces w/ Project 146 Parking Surplus /Deficiency ( + / -) 0 Source: Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers, Parking Needs Assessment and Special Event Parking Management Plan, 2012. The Academy Charter High School 3 98 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Icf 00914.11 lki 1:9 •� City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist During special events, it is anticipated that the proposed project would need an additional 126 parking spaces to accommodate additional visitors. The Wintersburg Presbyterian Church is located across the street from the project site, and as a church and school the two uses have complimentary use patterns that provide for a reciprocal parking arrangement where each site could make use of parking spaces on the other during peak periods of parking demand. Currently, the Wintersburg Presbyterian Church and the Orangewood Foundation are working together to finalize a parking agreement. However, to ensure that impacts related to event parking are less than significant, implementation of an Event Parking agreement is required by Mitigation Measure TR -2. Implementation of Mitigation Measure TR -2 will reduce impacts related to special event parking to a less - than - significant level. Mitigation Measure TR -2: Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, the project applicant will develop and enter into an Event Parking Management Plan that integrates available off - street parking spaces from other available nearby land uses, providing an additional 126 parking spaces. These spaces would be secured for as- needed use by the Academy per agreement between the Academy and parties of the Event Parking Management Plan. Under this plan, Academy special events would be strategically scheduled in order to coincide with periods of low- parking demand for those able to provide additional off - street parking, thus integrating local, underutilized parking spaces into Academy event parking.. b. Conflict with an applicable congestion rrranagernent program, including, but not limited to level ofservice standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? No Impact. The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) is the Congestion Management Agency (CMA) responsible for the creation and implementation of the Orange County Congestion Management Program (CMP), which was last updated in 2011. The CMP establishes a Highway System, which includes a series of intersections and highways throughout Orange County, also known as OCTA's Smart Street network, and establishes minimum performance thresholds for these CMP facilities. The nearest CMP Highway System is located about 1.5 miles northwest of the project site at SR -22 WB Ramps /Harbor Boulevard in the neighboring City of Garden Grove. Other CMP facilities near the proposed project include Harbor Boulevard /1st Street and i -5 SB Ramps /1st Street Projects must demonstrate consistency with the OCTA's performance thresholds on the Highway System if the project is estimated to either generate 2,400 or more ADT or contribute 1,600 or more ADT directly onto the Highway System. As shown above under response a., the proposed project would generate a total of 686 ADT during project operations of Phase i1, which is less than the minimum CMP threshold of 2,400 ADT. Additionally, the project site is located approximately 1.5 miles from the CMP Highway System and would not contribute 1,600 or more ADT directly onto the Highway System. As such, the proposed project would not trigger a CMP analysis, and no impact would occur. c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? No Impact. John Wayne Airport is located about 8 miles to the southeast of the project site, and the Fullerton Municipal Airport is located approximately 11 miles to the northwest (Google Earth 2012). The project is not located within any of the Airport Impact Zones or AELUPs for either airport. Furthermore, the proposed project would develop three -story structures, which would not extend into airspace or be tall enough to result in a change in air traffic patterns or a change in location. The Academy Charter High School 3 99 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration iCF 00914.11 �1 J City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Therefore, the project would not result in a change in air traffic patterns or otherwise result in a safety risk, and impacts would not occur. d. Substantially increase hazards because of a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible rises (eg., farrn equipment)? Less - than - Significant Impact. The evaluation of potential increases in hazards because of a design feature typically involve determining if any project- related features would result in changes to the circulation system that could result in physical impacts to automobile traffic or pedestrians. Some examples include poor sight - distance at intersections, sharp roadway curves, and placement of a driveway /site - access road along a high -speed roadway. Primary vehicular access to the project site would be available from three proposed driveways along Fairview Street south of Strawberry Lane (south driveway), near Huckleberry Road (center driveway), and north of Huckleberry Road (north driveway). The driveways would be full - access, side - street stop - controlled intersections with one entrance and one exit lane. During non -peak hours and non -drop off howl, the south and center driveways would allow entrance and exit, left -in and right -in, and right -out only. The north driveway would allow entrance and exist, right -in only and right -out only. During school pick -up and drop -off hours, the south driveway would serve as the only entrance (allowing right -in and left -in turns) onto a 520 -foot long lane on the east side of the site and would exit at the north driveway (allowing right -out turn only). Access to or from the project site would be restricted at the central driveway during pick -up and drop -off hours. The counterclockwise loop pattern would result in students exiting directly onto the sidewalk and those in the passenger -side seats exiting vehicles adjacent to the flow of traffic to reach the sidewalk. Due to the average age of students, expected low speeds of vehicles, and school administration supervision, impacts related to a substantial increase in hazards because of a design feature, such as the proposed 520 -foot long lane, will be less than significant and no mitigation measures are be required. e. Result in inadequate emergency access? Less - than - Significant Impact. Emergency access to the site would be from the proposed access points along North Fairview Street at the project driveways. In addition, emergency access would be available to the site from the parking facilities, which circle the perimeter of the project. Emergency access to and within the project site will be designed to meet the SAPD and SAFD requirements, including the provision of an appropriate turning radius for fire trucks and other emergency vehicles within the project parking lot. Prior to site plan approval, the SAFD and SAFD would review the proposed project plans and evaluate their consistency with the California Fire Code, California Building Code, and the Santa Ana Municipal Code. As a result, impacts related to emergency access on the project site would be less than significant. f. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? No Impact. The OCTA provides transit services and bus stops within the immediate vicinity of the project site. OCTA bus route 47 provides service along North Fairview Road. The closest bus stop to the project is located along North Fairview Road at 17th Street, which is three blocks south of the project site. In addition, bus route 47 provides direct service to three schools, including Leroy L. Doig Intermediate School, Santiago High School, and Spurgeon Intermediate School. There are four other bus stops within 0.25 mile of the project site. These include OCTA Bus Routes 60, 57, 43, and The Academy Charter High School 3 lob June 2012 Initial Study /Mltigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914,11 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist 56, which provide bus service to the cities of Santa Ana, Orange, Garden Grove, and Anaheim. The proximity of the project site to five bits stops within 0.25 mile would allow students, residents, and employees convenient access to alternative transportation. The OCTA also offers the OCTA ACCESS program and other training programs to assist eligible transit users in learning how to navigate the standard transit system. The project would not alter or conflict with existing bus stops and schedules, and impacts related to OCTA transit services would not occur, There are no identified bicycle routes along North Fairview Street in the project vicinity, however, sidewalks exist along both sides of the street. The nearest bicycle facilities are Class I bike paths along 17th Street (three blocks south of the project site) and along the Santa Ana River trail (approximately 500 feet east of the project site). The project will include onsite bicycle facilities pursuant to the City's Bicycle Support Facilities Guidelines, and would not involve any offsite improvements or result in any identified offsite impacts to bicycle or pedestrian routes. Therefore, no conflicts will occur to any bicycle facilities. Lastly, existing sidewalks would be maintained along North Fairview Street upon implementation of the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities and would not decrease the performance or safety of any facilities. The Academy Charter High School 12 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-101 June 20 iCF 0092012 isi � City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Discussion Would the project: a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Less- than - Significant Impact. Wastewater generated from the project site would be transported from the project site via an existing 12 -inch city sewer line in North Fairview Street that flows southerly to the intersection of Westminster Avenue and 17th Street. The sewer line turns westerly on Westminster. The wastewater is transported and treated at the Orange County Sanitation District's (OCSD) Reclamation Plant No. 1, in the City of Fountain Valley. This wastewater treatment facility is currently undergoing an expansion project, which will increase secondary treatment to a total design capacity of 180 million gallons per day (mgd) (OCSD 2012). The new facilities at the wastewater treatment plant include six aeration basins, six circular clarifiers, and a new blower The Academy Charter High School 3-102 June 2012 Initial Study /Mltigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 31 B -182 Less -than- Significant Potentially Impactwith Less -than- Significant Mitigation Significant No XVIL Utilities and Service Systems Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Would the project: 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 ❑ ❑ ® ❑ stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies available to ❑ ❑ ® ❑ serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or would new or expanded entitlements be needed? e. Result in a determination by the wastewater ❑ ❑ ® ❑ treatment provider that 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? f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient ❑ ❑ ® ❑ permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes ❑ ❑ ® ❑ and reEulations related to solid waste? Discussion Would the project: a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Less- than - Significant Impact. Wastewater generated from the project site would be transported from the project site via an existing 12 -inch city sewer line in North Fairview Street that flows southerly to the intersection of Westminster Avenue and 17th Street. The sewer line turns westerly on Westminster. The wastewater is transported and treated at the Orange County Sanitation District's (OCSD) Reclamation Plant No. 1, in the City of Fountain Valley. This wastewater treatment facility is currently undergoing an expansion project, which will increase secondary treatment to a total design capacity of 180 million gallons per day (mgd) (OCSD 2012). The new facilities at the wastewater treatment plant include six aeration basins, six circular clarifiers, and a new blower The Academy Charter High School 3-102 June 2012 Initial Study /Mltigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 31 B -182 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist building. These ongoing improvements began in 2007 and are estimated to be completed prior to commencement of the proposed project. OCSD facilities are required to comply with the Santa Ana RWQCB wastewater treatment requirements, and to maintain and follow the MS4 permit, which is the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) NPDES permit that regulates discharge of treated effluent into receiving waters (e.g., the Santa Ana River Basin). In 2002, the OCSD adopted an 18 -year Capital Improvement Program (CIP), which identified 125 projects related to upgrading and repairing wastewater facilities in accordance with the wastewater treatment requirements of the Santa Ana RWQCB. These projects are intended to assure that facilities continue to meet or exceed the wastewater treatment requirements established by the Santa Ana RWQCB. As part of the project approval process, the project applicant would be required to provide all onsite sewer infrastructure and pay appropriate sewer system connection fees. Existing City Public Works Department requirements would ensure that wastewater treatment requirements of the RWQCB are not to be exceeded. Therefore, wastewater generated by the proposed project would not cause OCSD to exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the Santa Ana RWQQB. As such, project impacts to wastewater treatment requirements would be less than significant. b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the constriction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less - than - Significant Impact. Water Facilities. The City of Santa Ana obtains water froth two sources: groundwater and imported water. Approximately 62% of the City's water supply is derived from groundwater that is pumped to the surface from 20 City- operated wells. The other 38% of water is imported from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan; City of Santa Ana 2010). The Metropolitan water is treated at either the Robert B. Diemer Filtration Plant located in Yorba Linda or the Weymouth Filtration Plant in La Verne before being delivered to the city. There are a total of seven Metropolitan connections located in the city (City of Santa Ana 2005). There is an existing 12 -inch water supply pipeline in North Fairview Street, which has supplied water to the project site. The proposed project includes development of connections to the existing water supply line pursuant to City requirements. As described in Chapter 2, "Project Description," the project site is currently vacant, but was previously used for hospital and medical facility uses since 1964. Therefore, existing water infrastructure is developed to serve the project site. Table 3 -28 provides a comparison of the historic water demand from the medical uses and the anticipated water demand for the proposed project uses. The Academy Charter High School 12 3 -103 June 20 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration iCf 0092011 ;197 City of Santa Ana Table 3 -28. Historic and Projected Water Demand from the Project Site Environmental Checklist Source: Fuscoe Sewer Report, 2012. Appendix D. As shown on Table 3 -28, the proposed project is anticipated to utilize 25,992 gallons per day (gpd) of water, which is 43.4% less than the amount of water that was used daily by the previous medical uses on the site. Likewise, the anticipated peak flow, which is the amount of water that would need to be transmitted at one time through the infrastructure and to the project site, would also be 43.4% less than what was delivered at peak flow under the previous land uses. Tire school's estimated water use includes the use of current state - mandated water conservation measures, including low- flow toilets, urinals, faucets, and other required water conservation measures. Likewise, all plumbing on site would be installed pursuant to Title 24 requirements to conserve water. Because the proposed project would demand less water than the previous medical uses, the existing water infrastructure serving the project site is adequate and has the capacity to serve the proposed project. Therefore, no improvements to the existing infrastructure are required to service the project, and impacts to water conveyance infrastructure would be less than significant. Furthermore, the project's contribution to water demand within the water service area would be less than significant and the proposed project would not result in the construction or expansion of existing water facilities. Wastewater. As described above under the water discussion, the project vicinity is improved with existing infrastructure, which includes sewer conveyance pipelines. Wastewater from the project site will be transported via an existing 12 -inch city sewer line in North Fairview Street that flows southerly to the intersection of Westminster Avenue and 17th Street. The sewer line turns westerly on Westminster. The wastewater is then to be transported to and treated at OCSD's reclamation plant in Fountain Valley. This wastewater treatment facility is currently undergoing capacity enhancement projects in order to comply with secondary treatment standards required by the EPA under a Federal Consent Decree. The facility currently treats an average of 97 mgd of wastewater and is upgrading to a total design capacity of 180 mgd (OCSD 2010). A Sewer Capacity Report was prepared for the proposed project and attached as Appendix D. The report provides estimated sewer flows from the proposed project by utilizing Los Angeles County generation rates that estimate sewer generation by number of students, bedrooms and by square The Academy Charter High School 3 -104 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration [CF00914.11 I en Generation Factor Size Flow (gpd) Average Flow (gprn) Peak Flow (gpm) Previous Medical Use Medical Office 300 gal /1,000 sf 38,000 sf 11,400 7.92 19.8 Hospital 500 gal /bed 69 beds 34,500 23.96 59.9 Totals 45,900 31.875 79.7 Proposed School Use High School 15 gal /student 450 students 6,750 4.69 11.7 Dorm 2 Bedroom 250 gal /unit 6 units 1,500 1.04 2.6 Dorm 1 Bedroom 200 gal /unit 82 units 16,400 11.39 28.5 Office 200 gal /1,000 sf 6.71 sf 1,342 0.93 2.3 Totals 25,992 18.05 45.1 Source: Fuscoe Sewer Report, 2012. Appendix D. As shown on Table 3 -28, the proposed project is anticipated to utilize 25,992 gallons per day (gpd) of water, which is 43.4% less than the amount of water that was used daily by the previous medical uses on the site. Likewise, the anticipated peak flow, which is the amount of water that would need to be transmitted at one time through the infrastructure and to the project site, would also be 43.4% less than what was delivered at peak flow under the previous land uses. Tire school's estimated water use includes the use of current state - mandated water conservation measures, including low- flow toilets, urinals, faucets, and other required water conservation measures. Likewise, all plumbing on site would be installed pursuant to Title 24 requirements to conserve water. Because the proposed project would demand less water than the previous medical uses, the existing water infrastructure serving the project site is adequate and has the capacity to serve the proposed project. Therefore, no improvements to the existing infrastructure are required to service the project, and impacts to water conveyance infrastructure would be less than significant. Furthermore, the project's contribution to water demand within the water service area would be less than significant and the proposed project would not result in the construction or expansion of existing water facilities. Wastewater. As described above under the water discussion, the project vicinity is improved with existing infrastructure, which includes sewer conveyance pipelines. Wastewater from the project site will be transported via an existing 12 -inch city sewer line in North Fairview Street that flows southerly to the intersection of Westminster Avenue and 17th Street. The sewer line turns westerly on Westminster. The wastewater is then to be transported to and treated at OCSD's reclamation plant in Fountain Valley. This wastewater treatment facility is currently undergoing capacity enhancement projects in order to comply with secondary treatment standards required by the EPA under a Federal Consent Decree. The facility currently treats an average of 97 mgd of wastewater and is upgrading to a total design capacity of 180 mgd (OCSD 2010). A Sewer Capacity Report was prepared for the proposed project and attached as Appendix D. The report provides estimated sewer flows from the proposed project by utilizing Los Angeles County generation rates that estimate sewer generation by number of students, bedrooms and by square The Academy Charter High School 3 -104 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration [CF00914.11 I en City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist footage. This methodology determined that the project would generate a wastewater demand of 25,992 gallons daily or 0.0260 mgd at full operating capacity of Phase H. Sewer flow monitoring was conducted for 7 days In March 2012 to determine the existing wastewater flows within the reach identified in the City's Sewer Master Plan as MH F05 -004 to MH FOS -005, which is the reach with the highest depth of flow to pipe diameter Cd /D) ratio of the system sewing the site, and is identified as being planned for capacity enhancements in the Sewer Master Plan. As described above, the proposed project is expected to generate a wastewater demand of 25,992 gallons daily or 0.0260 mgd at full capacity of Phase 1I. This wastewater treatment need is already accounted for by OCSD. The project will be served by the existing Fountain Valley Wastewater Facility. The anticipated flows from the project at full capacity of Phase It of 0.0260 mgd, is approximately 0.00029% of the 97 mgd that is currently treated daily at the Fountain Valley facility. In comparison to the upgraded plant design capacity of 180 mgd, the project would represent 0.00014% of daily flows. As described in XVIi.a., the treatment plant design capacity can accommodate the proposed project, and the project would not result or require the construction of new wastewater treatment facilities. However, after reviewing the sewer flow monitoring data and the City's Sewer Master Plan, the City of Santa Ana Water Engineering Division has concluded that the existing 12" sewer main in Westminster Avenue, (between Clinton Street, and Harbor Boulevard) is at capacity, and cannot meet the sewer discharge need of the proposed project. Subsequently, and pursuant to the City's Sewer Master Plan, the City is beginning to design, bid, and construct a new upgraded replacement for the said sewer main in Westminster Avenue, The City's sewer improvement is anticipated to be completed by December 2012. Because the proposed project is not scheduled to connect to the sewer until January 2013 and will not commence school activities until August 2013, impacts related to sewer infrastructure is not anticipated to occur. To ensure that impacts to sewer services and facilities do not occur, Mitigation Measure UTL -1 has been included, which restricts operations of the project until it can connect to the City Sewer System after completion of the construction of the replacement sewer main in Westminster Avenue. With implementation of ULT -1, the project would result in less- than - significant impacts to wastewater facilities. Mitigation Measure UTL -1: The City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency shall not issue a certificate of occupancy to the proposed project prior to completion of the City's sewer main replacement and improvement project located in Westminster Avenue, between Clinton Street and Harbor Boulevard. c. Require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less -than- Significant Impact. The proposed project site is currently covered with large areas of impervious surfaces that consist of building pads, parking lot pavement, and concrete walkways. Smaller areas of landscaping exist along North Fairview and within the parking area. The proposed project would redevelop the site with school uses, which would result in 2% less impervious surfaces on the project site, and likewise result in a slight decrease in surface water runoff when compared to existing conditions. The proposed project is surrounded by urban and built -up uses that currently rely on existing stormwater drainage facilities. The current drainage pattern of the site includes sheet flow across the site to the curb along North Fait-view Street that directs flow to n mLduemy a fidreer mgn acnooi June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3.105 ICF00914.11 OOR City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist gutter drainages on 17th Street, which empties into a concrete -lined portion of the Santa Ana River channel and levee located south -east of the project site. The project's planned operational stormwater drainage for the central portion of the project site will direct surface flow to drain into a bioretention system that will treat stormwater. The treated stormwater will be discharged at four locations along North Fairview Street and join the existing drainage pattern of the street that will transport flows into the existing storm drain system in 17th Street. The remainder of the stormwater from the site will infiltrate into permeable pavers, with any overflow going to the existing curb and gutter. The project does not include changes to the existing offsite drainage patterns as a result of the proposed project. The project would not Because of the project would slightly reduce impervious surfaces and add the bioretention system, the existing stormwater infrastructure will be able to continue to accommodate stormwater flows from the project site. As a result, new or expanded drainage facilities beyond those included onsite as part of the project would not be required to accommodate the proposed project, and impacts are less than significant. d. Have sufficient water- supplies available to serve the project fi-orn existing entitlements and resources, or would new or expanded entitlements be needed? Less - than - Significant impact. Domestic water for the proposed project would be provided by the Water Resources Division of the City of Santa Ana Public Works Agency. In 2010, the City of Santa Ana received 62% of its water from the Orange County Groundwater Basin, which is delivered to the City by the OCWD. The remaining 38% is imported water that was purchased from Metropolitan (City of Santa Ana 2010). The City also receives recycled water after advanced treatment from the OCW D facility, Green Acres Project. These recycled supplies can offset the demand for potable water supplies. Water use and availability is detailed in Urban Water Management Plans (UWMPs), which are required to be updated every 5 years to provide estimates of current water usage and typically project water use over a 25- to 30 -year period. Santa Ana's most recent UWMP was prepared and adopted in November 2005. At that time, the City maintained 444 miles of transmission and distribution mains, 8 reservoirs with a storage capacity of 49.3 million gallons, 7 pumping stations, 19 wells, and 7 import connections. Also, the amount of annual water use for the 2005 fiscal year was 44,920 acre -feet a year (afy), which was below the available 48,722 afy of supply for that year. Table 3 -29 shows the UWMP's projected supply and demand until 2030 for normal and single -dry water years, as well as multiple dry years for the following five year periods: 2011 -2015, 2016- 2020, 2021 -2025, and 2025 -2030. As shown in Table 3 -29, the City of Santa Ana is projected to have a water surplus each reporting year. The smallest surplus for the City is projected to occur during a single dry water year for 2030, which is estimated at 2,460 afy. As shown above in Table 3 -28, the proposed project will require 25,992 gallons per day (gpd) of water at full operating capacity of Phase 11, which is 43.4% less than the amount of water that was used daily by the previous medical uses on the site. Further, the project could only utilize this maximum water flow on school days. As provided in the project description, the school is anticipated to operate on a traditional school calendar of 184, generally operating from September through mid -June. As a result, the annual demand for water supplies by the school facilities would be further reduced, in comparison to annual demands by the previous land use. The Academy Charter High School 3 -106 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF00914.11 96111 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Because the project would utilize less water daily and annually than the previous site use, and because the City projected to have an annual water surplus with the previous greater water demanding land use, the proposed project would not require new or expanded water entitlements. Sufficient water supplies would be available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, and no new or expanded entitlements be needed to serve the project. Therefore, project impacts related to water resource entitlements are less than significant. Table 3 -29. City of Santa Ana Projected Water Supply and Demand (AFY) 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Normal Water Year Demand 52,950 56,100 59,050 Supply 54,810 Demand 50,190 Difference 4,620 57,410 53,180 4,230 61,560 55,970 5,590 63,800 59,280 4,520 62,750 59,540 3,210 Single Dry Water Year 3,560 2,460 Multiple Dry Water Years (2011 -2015) Supply 55,710 60,290 63,880 66,100 65,270 Demand 52,950 56,100 59,050 62,540 62,810 Difference 2,760 4,190 4,830 3,560 2,460 Multiple Dry Water Years (2011 -2015) Supply 62,010 62,460 66,160 Supply 55,330 55,850 60,160 59,620 60,830 Demand 50,790 51,390 55,460 54,530 56,100 Difference 4,540 4,460 4,700 5,090 4,730 Multiple Dry Water Years (2016 -2020) Supply 58,240 59,080 63,180 62,890 64,460 Demand 53,740 54,300 58,520 57,460 59,050 Difference 4,500 4,780 4,660 5,430 5,410 Multiple Dry Water Years (2021 -2025) Supply 62,010 62,460 66,160 65,410 66,610 Demand 56,630 57,290 61,840 60,790 62,540 Difference 5,380 5,170 4,320 4,620 4,070 Multiple Dry Water Years (2026 -2030) Supply 63,590 63,380 66,480 65,020 65,540 Demand 59.330 59,380 63,420 61,690 62,810 Difference 4,260 4,000 3,060 3,330 2,730 Source: City of Santa Ana 2005 Urban Water Management Plan. e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that 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? Less - than - Significant Impact, The OCSD provides for the collection, treatment, and disposal of wastewater for a 479 square -mile area in central and northwestern Orange County, including the proposed project site. The OCSD treats about 207 million gallons on a daily basis at the Fountain Valley and Huntington Beach Wastewater Treatment Plants, combined (OCSD 2012). As described The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -107 ICF 00914.11 eeh City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist under response XVII.b, wastewater from the project site would be treated at the wastewater treatment plant in Fountain Valley. The facility currently treats an average of 97 mgd of wastewater and is upgrading to a total design capacity of 180 mgd (OCSD 2012). As described above, the proposed project is expected to result in less flow than the previous uses on the project site. The project would generate a wastewater demand of 25,992 gallons daily or 0.0260 mgd at full capacity of Phase 11. This wastewater treatment need is already accounted for by OCSD, as it has long been serving previous larger flows from the project site. Compared to the existing 97 mgd of wastewater treatment at the Fountain Valley wastewater treatment facility, the project's maximum demand of 0.0260 would represent about 0.00029% of capacity. In comparison to the upgraded plant design capacity of 180 mgd, the project increase would represent 0.00014% of capacity. Because the wastewater flow from the project site is anticipated through previous land uses and because flows would not be substantial in comparison to the treatment plant design capacity, the proposed project would result in less -than- significant impacts related to wastewater treatment plant capacity. f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the projects solid waste disposal needs? Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project would be served by three landfills operated by the Orange County Integrated Waste Management Department (OCIWMD), including the Frank R Bowerman Landfill in Irvine, the Olinda Alpha Landfill in Brea, and the Prima Deshecha Landfill in San Juan Capistrano. Table 3 -30 provides an overview of each landfill with its current permitted capacity and remaining capacity. As shown, all three landfills have about half of their remaining capacity. Table 3 -30. Existing Landfill Conditions The proposed project could contribute solid waste to any of the three available landfills in Orange County; however, the majority of waste from Santa Ana, about 75 %, is sent to the Bowerman Landfill. In 2009, a total of 297,402 tons of solid waste was delivered to these three landfills, which is an average of about 814.8 tons /day (CalRecycle 2012). As described in the project description, the project would operate a residential charter school that would contain three residential buildings. Each floor of the residential buildings would be considered one family unit and include five student bedrooms (accommodating 10 students), a guardian suite, a kitchen, dining room, living room, laundry, and a social worker resident office. Second and third story units would also include a front porch. The parent suites include two bedrooms, a living area, kitchen, and full bathroom. Because each floor functions as one large family unit, this analysis uses a single family solid waste generation factor of 7 pounds per day per unit. The Academy Charter High School 3 -108 June 2012 initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 • •�, Size Operating Permitted Daily Capacity Remaining Landfill (acres) Years (tons /day) Capacity Frank R. Bowerman 725 1990 -2053 8,500 59.4cy (46.8 %) Olinda Alpha 420 1960 -2021 8,000 38.6cy (51.5 %) Prima Deshecha 699 1976 -2067 4,000 87.4cy (50.5%) Source: http: / /www.cali-ecycle.ca.gov /profiles /Facility/Landfill /. January 31, 2012. The proposed project could contribute solid waste to any of the three available landfills in Orange County; however, the majority of waste from Santa Ana, about 75 %, is sent to the Bowerman Landfill. In 2009, a total of 297,402 tons of solid waste was delivered to these three landfills, which is an average of about 814.8 tons /day (CalRecycle 2012). As described in the project description, the project would operate a residential charter school that would contain three residential buildings. Each floor of the residential buildings would be considered one family unit and include five student bedrooms (accommodating 10 students), a guardian suite, a kitchen, dining room, living room, laundry, and a social worker resident office. Second and third story units would also include a front porch. The parent suites include two bedrooms, a living area, kitchen, and full bathroom. Because each floor functions as one large family unit, this analysis uses a single family solid waste generation factor of 7 pounds per day per unit. The Academy Charter High School 3 -108 June 2012 initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 • •�, City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist As provided in Table 3 -31, the project would generate 97, 240 pounds (48.62 tons) per year of solid waste at full occupancy of Phase I and 128,440 pounds (64.22 tons) per year at full occupancy of Phase II. Table 3 -31, Estimated Solid Waste Generation Use Generation Rate Annual Total School Phase 1- 320 students 240 lbsr /year /student 76,800 lbs Residential Component - 8 units 7 lbsz /unit /day 20,440 Ibs3 Subtotal 97,240 lbs School Phase 11 -130 Students 240 lbs' /year /student 31,200 lbs Annual Total 128,440 lbs 'Source: CalRecycle School District Profile for Garden Grove Unified. http: / /wivw.ca l recycle.ca.gov /Profiles /Sch ool s/ Distr lct /wastetypes.asp?DISTRiCTI D- 629 20btained from the Town and Country Manor FEiR (2009) and the City Place FEIR (2005). 3Assumes living onsite 365 days per year. Compared to the estimated 814.8 tons per day that the City currently disposes of, the proposed project would increase solid waste generation by approximately 351.89 pounds per day (0.176 tons), which is about 0.022% compared to existing city disposal totals. Based on the permitted daily capacity of the three landfills, the increase of an average of 0.1768 tons per day at any of the landfills would represent less than 0.1% of the existing permitted capacity which ranges from 4,000 to 8,500 tons per day. Solid waste from construction activities, which would be largely existing site vegetation (green waste), asphalt and cement from site grading activities, and building materials from building construction activities that would be generated during the 13 -month construction period for Phase 1 and the 12 month construction period for Phase II. This waste would also be delivered to, and accommodated by, the three landfills identified above. As a result, the proposed project's impacts related to solid waste disposal and landfill capacity is less than significant. g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Less - than - Significant Impact. The proposed project is a residential charter school use. Solid waste generated by the project would consist primarily of the standard organic and inorganic waste normally associated with school and residential uses. Substantial hazardous wastes are not anticipated. The project would provide facilities for solid waste recycling. As noted above, the site is adequately served by local landfills. The project would comply with all applicable federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste handling, transport, and disposal during both construction and long -term operation. Additionally, per the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939), the City has implemented a recycling program to divert at least 50% of all solid waste by January 1, 2000. As such, the proposed project would be required to comply with a Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) program, which was submitted and approved by CalRecycle to divert solid waste. Compliance with the SRRE program would ensure that the proposed project would remain in compliance with AB 939 and impacts would be less than significant. The Academy Charter High School 1 202 3 -109 June Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration icF ne 20 2 IL, City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Less -than- Significant Potentially Impact with Less -than- Significant Mitigation Significant No XVIII. Mandatory Findings of Significance Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 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, substantially 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 tine effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Discussion Would the project: ❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Less - than - Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The project site currently consists of an undeveloped disturbed redevelopment parcel surrounded by a roadway, a convalescent hospital, and residential development. The site consists of large areas of asphalt, cement, building pads, and scattered areas of ornamental landscaping. No sensitive plant or animal species exist onsite, and habitat to support sensitive species also does not exist. Further, there are no wetland areas or migration routes on the project site. However, the existing trees onsite have the ability to host nesting birds, and as a result, a mitigation measure is included in Section IV, "Biological Resources," to reduce potential impacts to nesting birds to a less- than - significant level. Impacts to nesting birds would be reduced to a less -than- significant impact with the incorporation of pre - construction survey (MM- BIO -1). With the incorporation of the mitigation measure identified in Section IV, 'Biological Resources; impacts to the quality of the environment related to biological resources would be reduced to a less -than- significant level. The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 110 ICF06914.11 •III City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Regarding California history or prehistory, the project site is vacant, undeveloped, and graded, and does not contain any known historical resources or any documented paleontological resources, and no potentially significant impacts were identified in Section V, "Cultural Resources." Therefore, project impacts to the quality of the environment related to cultural resources is less than significant. 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, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) Less -than- Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. A cumulative impact could occur if the project would result in an incrementally considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact in consideration of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects for each resource area. The cumulative study area is generally confined to the areas shown on Figure 3 -10, and includes the cumulative projects listed in Table 3 -32, which are located within two miles of the project site. Although for some resources, cumulative impacts are considered over a greater area, and are addressed accordingly, Table 3 -32. Cumulative Projects List No. Project Anticipated Opening Year Description 1 Wintersburg Presbyterian Church 2012 24,348 sf Church Expansion 2 Vista del Rio - Affordable Disabled 2013 41 Residential Units Housing 3 Torres Medical Office 2012 6,000 sf Medial Office 4 Rite Aid /Walgreens 2014 15,836 sf Retail 5 Compassion Meditation Center 2014 8,000 sf Meditation Center 6 One Broadway Plaza -Office Tower 2016 518,000 sf Office Tower One Broadway Plaza - Restaurant 2016 6,000 sf Retail/ Restaurant 7 Discovery Science Center Ph. 11 2014 275 Seat WAX Theater 8 Block at Orange Expansion 2014 70,000 sf Retail A cumulative evaluation for each environmental resource areas is provided below, which describes the project's potential to contribute considerably to a cumulative impact. Aesthetics The cumulative aesthetics study area for the proposed project is the viewshed that the project site lies within. The Wintersburg Presbyterian Church expansion (listed in Table 3 -32) is the only project located within the same viewshed of the project site. Implementation of the proposed project would develop a new charter residential high school within an existing urban residential and mixed use and area. As described in the aesthetics section of this MND, the proposed project will enhance the quality and character of the project site over the existing vacant degraded condition. The proposed charter high school project and church expansion project will reinforce the existing urban and developed character of the viewshed. Project impacts related to the scale and mass of the me Acartemy Charter High School Lune 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -111 ICF 00914.11 31 B -191 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist proposed buildings adjacent to Blueberry Lane would be less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure AES -1, which will provide landscaping along the eastern boundary of the project site, including a mixture of tall vertical trees (such as tall fan and feather palms) that are a minimum of 36- inches in box size and complement the proposed exterior facade of the buildings. With inclusion of the proposed project, the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects would not degrade or detract from the urban built -out nature of the City of Santa Ana and project vicinity. Therefore, any less- than - significant impact the proposed project has on aesthetics would not represent a considerable degree when combined with the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable cumulative project list and would not contribute to a cumulative impact. Impacts would be less - than - cumulatively considerable. Agriculture and Forest Resources The proposed project is located in a fully developed urban environment and would develop a residential charter school project on an infill redevelopment parcel. The City of Santa Ana, including the proposed project site, is classified as "urban and built -up land" and does not contain any agricultural uses or forest resources. Therefore, the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects in the City of Santa Ana would not have the potential to cumulatively contribute to impacts related to agriculture or forest resources. Air Quality The cumulative study area for air quality is the entire South Coast Air Basin. As the Basin is currently in nonattainment for ozone, 03, PM10, and PM2.5, cumulative development could violate an air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation. The SCAQMD recommends that individual projects that exceed the SCAQMD recommended daily thresholds for project - specific impacts be considered to cause a cumulatively considerable increase in emissions for those pollutants for which the Basin is in nonattainment. As discussed previously in Section IiI, "Air Quality," Mitigation Measures have been included to ensure that cumulative construction would not exceed the ROG, NOx, and PM2.5 thresholds of significance recommended by the SCAQMD. With implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ -1 through AQ -3, construction impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, cumulative impacts would also be considered less than significant by the SCAQMD. Biological Resources The cumulative study area for biological resources includes the areas shown on Figure 3 -3. The proposed project setting is highly urbanized and few biological resources remain in the surrounding areas. The related projects listed in Table 3 -32, are infill or expansion of existing uses within the urban area. Substantial existing biological resources do not exist within these related project areas. Present and future projects would comply with requirements of the META to avoid and /or mitigation potential impacts to protected nests and pursuant to existing federal and state regulations would be required to implement restoration and replacement efforts for any impacts to special status plants and wildlife. Changes from the proposed project in combination with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects will not contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact to biological resources. After the incorporation of mitigation measures provided herein that will reduce impacts to biological resources to a level below significant, the project's incremental contribution would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact. The Academy Charter High School 3 -112 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICr 00914.11 LOVA LEGEND mil. f, 1 1 Development Project (Year) W Chapman Ave Project $110 of o hc. Bark. wnya pan 1 111 XX) Not to Scale 1 � c E I , I LampsonAve � f i I ' W Garden Grove Blvd YisaDelRioApartma • nt5(101]I I , l -�! Trask Ave WoHersbury Presbyirrian fhurdl(2012) j Plsrusry y'Sciencc• Ur U 1� �+ Edna Cr i \\ � N w:fx�nst Y I I WestminiterAVe. W 17th SS I WYhsh�n9tonAve iOnc tlwadv:ay Plaza (20161 j Clvk Center Dr W lunesr.1edicalDlli(C12012) ® W Santa Ana Blvd ' Flit Ail (20 14) I W1stSt �I i W Camille St Co+iyrauirm ldcdilotion (molar (2 014) ' f ' I ; ' i • I - ' W M1Fadden Ave i Source: Fehr +Peers ICF •"ca Figure 3 -14 Cumulative Projects The Academy, City of Santa Ana I : pn City of Santa Ana Cultural Resources Environmental Checklist The proposed project is located in a fully developed urban environment and would develop a residential charter school project on an infill redevelopment parcel. The project site is underlain by 3 -5 feet of fill materials. The project would require minimal grading and excavations that would be a maximum of 5 -feet deep. further, the project vicinity has been surveyed and the project area is identified as having a low potential for unidentified resources. As a result, the project is not expected to impact cultural resources, and also is not anticipated to have any cumulative impacts on historic, archaeological, or paleontological resources. Geology and Soils The cumulative setting for geology and soils includes all the development and infrastructure that has occurred in the City of Santa Ana in the past and would be expected to occur in the future, including the projects listed in Table 3 -32. Past, present, and future development could be affected by existing widespread southern California geologic conditions and result in ground shaking, landsliding, and soils movement, which ultimately could result in significant impacts on the environment. However, similar to the proposed project, past, present, and future projects have been and would continue to comply with the California Building Code and to implement specific building techniques to minimize seismic damage. As described in Section VI, "Geology and Soils," impacts of the proposed project would be reduced by implementing mitigation to ensure appropriate geotechnical engineering reduces effects of potential seismic events and the potential impacts related to the existing geologic and soils environment on site. Thus, geologic and soils impacts related to the project would be less than significant after mitigation and would not be cumulatively considerable. Greenhouse Gasses As described in Section VII, the proposed project's annual GHG emissions under BAU conditions are estimated to be 2,058 metric tons CO2e. To put this number into perspective, statewide CO2e emissions for year 2009 were estimated to be 456.8 million metric tons. Project- specific Mitigation Measures GHG -1 through GHG -3 have been included to reduce greenhouse gases generated by the project and reduce impacts to a less- than - significant level. GHG emissions would be further reduced with implementation of AB 32 scoping measures such as Pavley emissions standards, low- carbon fuel standard, and renewables portfolio standard, among other standards. Implementation of Mitigation Measures GHG -1 through GHG -3, along with state implementation of AB 32 Scoping Measures, would reduce the incremental GHG emissions associated with the proposed project by approximately 29 %. As this level of reduction would exceed the AB 32 target reduction goal of 28.5 %, and both project -level and cumulative impacts would be less than significant. Hazards and Hazardous Materials The scope of analysis for cumulative impacts associated with accidental spills, releases, or explosions of hazardous materials encompasses the project vicinity, including adjacent jurisdictions. Implementation of the proposed project has the potential to contribute to cumulative impacts on hazards and hazardous materials through the transport, storage, use, or handling of hazardous materials. Most of the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects in the area surrounding the project site include religious, residential, commercial, and medical land uses. Many The Academy Charter High School 012 3 -113 June 2 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration IcF 0042011 31 B -195 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist of these may use, handle, store, and /or transport hazardous materials. However, past, present, and foreseeable future projects trust comply with all existing hazardous material regulations in place through the local, state, and federal government. Furthermore, since the proposed project involves development of a school, present and foreseeable future projects within 0.25 mile of the project site would be required per CEQA Guidelines to consider the impacts of emitting hazardous emissions or handling hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances or waste near a proposed or existing school. These regulations are in place to reduce the potential of accidental releases, spill, or explosions of hazardous materials and to minimize the environmental and public health impact should one occur. Although projects cannot completely eliminate the probability associated with an accidental release, explosion, or spill, the existing regulations reduce the overall probability and minimize the impacts during a release. Therefore, past, present, and foreseeable future project are not cumulatively considerable. Some types of hazardous materials would be used during construction of the proposed project and hazardous materials would be needed for fueling and servicing construction equipment on the site on a temporary basis. Operation of the proposed residential and school activities generally use hazardous materials including solvents, cleaning agents, paints, pesticides, batteries, and aerosol cans. Although the project would utilize common types of hazardous materials, normal routine use of these products would not result in a significant hazard to residents or workers in the vicinity of the project. As discussed in Section Vill, "Hazards and Hazardous Materials," all impacts resulting from the proposed project related to hazards and hazardous materials would be less than significant. Thus, hazards and hazardous materials impacts related to the proposed project would be less than significant and would not be cumulatively considerable. Hydrology and Water Quality The geographic scope for cumulative impacts on hydrology and water quality includes the Santa Ana River watershed and the Coastal Plain of Orange County Groundwater Basin. The cumulative setting for hydrology and water quality includes all the development and infrastructure that have occurred in the City of Santa Ana in the past and would be expected to occur in the future, including the projects listed in Table 3 -32. Implementation of the proposed project has the potential to contribute to cumulative impacts on hydrology and water quality through the generation of stormwater runoff during construction and operation. The majority of the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects would have associated construction impacts with the potential to result in discharge of stormwater to surface waters, either directly or, more commonly, via a local stormwater collection system. All of these projects have been and would be required to comply with construction stormwater requirements of the local jurisdiction and compliance with the general NPDES permit for construction stormwater discharges. Furthermore, the BMPs and project design features identified in Response IX(a) would minimize runoff and erosion impacts to hydrology and water quality resulting from development of the proposed project. As discussed in Section IX, "Hydrology and Water Quality," all impacts resulting from the proposed project related to hydrology and water quality would be less than significant. Thus, hydrology and water quality impacts related to the proposed project would be less than significant and would not be cumulatively considerable. Noise The cumulative study area for noise includes all the projects listed on the cumulative projects list (Table 3 -32). Increases in noise in the vicinity of sensitive uses would occur during construction of the proposed project. Simultaneous construction of the proposed projects and related projects in the The Academy Charter High School 3 -114 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF 00914.11 l : eI1 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist vicinity of the proposed project area is not anticipated. As shown on Figure 3 -10, the closest project is the Wintersburg Presbyterian Church expansion project, which is approximately 350 feet away from the project site, and across North Fairview Street. The opening year for the Wintersburg Presbyterian Church project is 2012, and construction would be completed prior to construction of the proposed project. Thus, a cumulative construction noise impact related to these two projects would not occur. All other cumulative projects are located beyond hearing distance from the project site. Thus, noise from the proposed project would not create a cumulatively considerable impact if construction time frames overlapped with the other projects shown on Figure 3 -10. Therefore, construction noise from the project is not anticipated to combine with construction noise from other projects, and construction noise from the proposed project would not be cumulatively considerable. Further, as described in Section XII, "Noise," the City Municipal Code limits construction activities to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, and also prohibits construction activities on Sundays and public holidays. Because compliance with this construction time limit is required by the City Municipal Code, the proposed project and all other cumulative development would be exempt, and the cumulative impact associated with construction noise in the Santa Ana area would be considered less than significant. Lastly, because construction - related noise generated by the proposed project would be mitigated by implementation of the noise control measures provided in NOI -1, construction of the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact. Cumulative traffic noise impacts are considered for the buildout year 2035. The TIA was used to determine potential traffic- related noise impacts from the proposed project. The future roadway network surrounding the project site was modeled using the TNM noise model with the buildout year traffic volumes with and without the project. Table 3 -33 below shows the project's contribution to the buildout year. Table 3 -33, Cumulative Traffic Noise Modeledl Buildout Year (2035) Noise Receiver Receiver Location Level (dBA CNEL) Modeledl Buildout Year (2035) plus Project Noise Level (dBA CNEL) ST -1 Wintersberg Presbyterian Church 2000 71 71 Fairview Street ST -2 2229 Cotter Street 63 63 ST -3 2706 Strawberry Corner of Strawberry 51 51 and Sidney ST -4 DOiG Intermediate School 64 64 ST -5 Park Glen Apartment Complex 61 60 As shown, the project's traffic noise contribution would result in a zero to -1 dBA cumulative noise increase at sensitive receivers surrounding the project site. Thus, traffic noise generated from the The Academy Charter High School 1 202 initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration i[r 3-115 June ne 20 2 31 B -197 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist project would not increase noise levels and cumulative noise impacts associated with project - related traffic is less than significant. Likewise, Section X11, "Noise," describes the onsite noise generators of the proposed project, which includes outside activity areas, equipment, and parking lot noise. As described in Section X11, proposed activities on the project site would not result in significant noise impacts, and no mitigation measures are required. Similarly, the noise generated on the project site is not anticipated to substantially increase the ambient noise environment and would not be cumulatively considerable when combined with other foreseeable projects. Population and housing The cumulative study area for population and housing includes all of Orange County because the project is intended to serve youth currently residing throughout the County. Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects are not anticipated to result in a cumulative population and housing impact in conjunction with the proposed project. The housing provided by the project would not increase the overall number of housing units in the City because the project would only provide group housing for students at the school. The project will not develop single- or multi- family residential units. Additionally, the proposed project would not induce substantial population growth because the 80 students that will reside onsite are current residents within Orange County. The project is focused on Orange County foster youth and would not introduce families or students to the area from outside of Orange County. As a result the project would not result in cumulative impacts related to housing. Additionally, because of the current job market, unemployment rate, and recent budget cuts that have affected school employees throughout California, the project is not anticipated to result in the need for employees to be relocated from distant areas. The project would not necessitate the need for construction of new housing or result in substantial population growth. Furthermore, the proposed project's impacts related to cumulative population and housing are less than significant. Public Services and Recreation The geographic setting for cumulative impacts to public services includes all areas within each public service provider's service area, or within the service areas of the SAFD, SAPD, Garden Grove USD, and the City of Santa Ana for parks and recreation services. Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects have and would continue to be required to comply with existing regulations and existing fee structures regarding public services and impacts within the service areas for each of the City's public services are less than significant, and also not cumulatively considerable. The City's Municipal Code includes provisions for providing appropriate public services for development and residents throughout the City. The proposed project would be required to contribute a fair -share contribution to fire protection fees, pursuant to City Municipal Code (Resolution No. 6461), the City's Building Security Ordinance and CPTED principles for police protection services. As such, the proposed project's incremental contribution to public services impacts would not contribute to a cumulative impact. Utilities and Service Systems Cumulative impacts on utilities can result from the combined demand of the proposed project with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects on any of the utilities for which the proposed project may have impacts. The geographic scope of the cumulative effect analysis of The Academy Charter High School 3 -116 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF00914.11 li : 5&01111967 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist utilities depends on the service area and capacity of each utility provider and the amount of increased demand for utility services from the proposed project, as well as related projects; and if this combined demand could reduce the availability of utility services. The service areas of the OCSD (wastewater), Santa Ana Public Works Agency (stormwater), Santa Ana Public Works Agency Water Resources Division and Metropolitan (water supply), and OCIWMD (solid waste) encompass the project site and surrounding area. Many of the projects identified in Table 3 -32 involve new or expanded land uses that may result in additional demand on utilities and service systems. These projects would likely require additional utility capacity. The construction of more capacity in various utility lines would be carried out as part of the individual projects or part of the City's infrastructure improvement plans. As discussed in Section XVII, "Utilities and Service Systems," all utility service providers project to have adequate capacity to meet demands resulting from present and reasonably foreseeable future projects. The proposed project would result in less- than - significant cumulative impacts on utilities and service systems. The proposed project would not require expansion or construction of new stormwater drainage facilities. Implementation of the proposed project will include project design features identified in Response IX(a) that will minimize runoff off site flows to existing stormwater facilities. The proposed project would not result in increased water demands requiring new or expanded entitlements of water supply. The proposed project is anticipated to utilize 43.4% less water than what was used daily by the previous medical uses on the site. Likewise, the anticipated peak flow, which is the amount of water that would need to be transmitted at one time through the infrastructure and to the project site, would also be 43.4% less than what was delivered at peak flow under the previous land uses. Because the project would utilize less water daily and annually than the previous site use, impacts to the water utility would not occur and would not result in cumulative impacts. As discussed in Section XVII, "Utilities and Service Systems," the proposed project is expected to be served from an upgraded sewer system that has been previously planned as part of the City's Sewer Master Plan, and is required per Mitigation Measure UTL -1, prior serving the project. Because project flows would be served by the improved sewer system and flows from the site will not be substantial in comparison to the treatment plant design capacity, the proposed project would not result in cumulative impacts to sewer or wastewater treatment facilities. In summary, the project's incremental contribution to the service demands of the utilities serving the project area is less than significant. Further, the project's contribution to utility service needs is not cumulative considerable and the proposed project would not result in significant cumulative utilities and service systems impacts. Transportation and Traffic The cumulative setting for transportation and traffic impacts includes all of the projects listed on Table 3 -32. The traffic generated from the cumulative projects is provided in Table 3 -34. The traffic cumulative analysis was prepared as part of the TIA (Appendix C), and includes the five intersections analyzed for the proposed project that occur within the project vicinity. The traffic implications of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects include two near -term scenarios for the years 2013 and 2019 for Phase I and Phase 11, respectively, and a long -term scenario for the year 2035. Thresholds for impacts are determined in the same method as the The Academy Charter Nigh School 3 317 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICE 0092012 •T0J City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist project -level analysis using ICU increase of 0.010 or greater at a signalized intersection currently operating at LOS E or F. For unsignalized intersections, acceptable conditions include LOS C or better, per the HCM unsignalized methodology. Phase 1 Near -Term Cumulative Traffic Conditions —2013 Baseline traffic conditions in the Phase 1 near -term 2013 scenario comprise existing traffic conditions, ambient growth, foreseeable future roadway improvements, and traffic generated by cumulative projects numbers 1, 2, and 3 (listed in Table 3 -34 within the cumulative study area). Roadway improvements expected to occur by 2013 include the signalization of the intersection of Fairview Avenue and Edna Drive and would include protected turning phases in the north -south direction and a southbound left -turn pocket and a northbound U -turn pocket. As shown in Table 3- 35, intersection operations would not exceed the minimum acceptable LOS without the project in the year 2013, except for the signalized intersection of Fairview Street at 17th Street /Westminster Avenue, which would operate at LOS E in 2013 without the proposed project. As shown in Table 3 -35, the addition of project traffic would not result in an ICU increase of 0.010 or greater, indicating that the project will not significantly impact any of the signalized study intersections during either the AM or PM peak hour. Although the analyzed unsignalized intersections operate at LOS E or worse, the TIA determined that a traffic signal is not warranted. Thus, operation of Phase i will not significantly impact any of the analyzed unsignalized intersections during either the AM or PM peak hour. Further, the proposed project would not contribute to any cumulative impacts to intersections in the Phase I near -term 2013 condition. Phase 11 Near -Term Cumulative Traffic Conditions —2019 Baseline traffic conditions in the Phase 11 near -term 2019 scenario comprise existing traffic conditions, ambient growth of 1% per year over the seven -year period between the existing and opening year, and traffic generated by all cumulative projects (listed in Table 3 -32) within the cumulative study area. As shown in Table 3 -36, intersection operations would not exceed the minimum acceptable LOS without the project in the year 2019, except for the signalized intersection of Fairview Street at 17th Street /Westminster Avenue, which would operate at LOS E in 2019 without the proposed project. As shown in Table 3 -36, the addition of project traffic would not result in an ICU increase of 0.010 or greater, indicating that the project will not significantly impact any of the signalized study intersections during either the AM or PM peak hour. Although the analyzed unsignalized intersections operate at LOS E or worse, the TIA determined that a traffic signal is not warranted. Thus, operation of Phase II will not significantly impact any of the analyzed unsignalized intersections during either the AM or PM peak hour. Further, the proposed project would not contribute to any cumulative impacts to intersections or roadway segments in the Phase 11 near - term 2019 condition. Long -Term Cumulative Traffic Conditions —2035 Similar to near -term cumulative traffic conditions, baseline traffic conditions in the year 2035 comprise existing traffic conditions, ambient growth based on traffic forecasts from the OCTAM, and traffic generated by the cumulative projects as provided in Table 3 -32. As shown in Table 3 -37, the intersections of Fairview Street and Trask Avenue and Fairview Street and 17th Street /Westminster Avenue are anticipated to operate below the City's acceptable LOS The Academy Charter High School 3 118 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration I f 00914.11 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist threshold of LOS D during both the AM and PM peak hours without project traffic in 2035. Table 3- 37 indicates that the addition of project trips would increase traffic at the intersection of Fairview Street and 17th Street /Westminster Avenue in the AM peak hour by a V/C ratio of 0.025, which is above the threshold of 0.010. As a result, the proposed project would contribute to a cumulatively significant impact at the intersection of Fairview Street at 17th Street/Westminster Avenue during the AM peak hour. The City of Santa Ana requires project impacts to be mitigated to an acceptable LOS, which is LOS D or better at the intersection of Fairview Street and 17th Street /Westminster Avenue. The TIA identified an intersection improvement that would add a dedicated westbound right -turn lane and a signal phasing modification at the intersection. Modifying the westbound approach from a left -turn lane, two through -lanes and a shared through right -turn lane; to a left -turn lane, three through -lanes and a dedicated right -turn lane along with a westbound right -turn overlap phase to the signal phasing would decrease the V/C ratio to an acceptable level. The V/C is projected to be 0.926 under Future Buildout Year (2035) Plus Project Conditions. However, implementation of the intersection improvements would reduce the V/C ratio to 0.898, which is within the City's standard acceptable threshold of LOS D. To mitigate the proposed project's contribution to the future cumulative traffic condition, the T1A provided a fair share calculation at the impacted intersection for the AM peak hour to determine the project's fair -share contribution to the proposed mitigation measure. The percentage was developed by taking the total project -only traffic volume and dividing it by the total increase in traffic volume between Existing (2012) and Future Buildout Year (2035) with Phase 11. The project's fair -share contribution percentage was calculated to be 4.5 %, and is implemented through Mitigation Measure TR -1 to complete intersection improvements at the intersection of Fairview Street at 17th Sheet/ Westminster Avenue. Incorporation of this mitigation would reduce the project's cumulatively considerable impacts to a less - than - significant level and with incorporation of Mitigation Measure TR -3, the intersection of Fairview Street at 17th Street /Westminster Avenue would operate at LOS D, which is an acceptable level. Traffic warrants would not be met under cumulative conditions in the long -term 2035 condition. Mitigation Measure TR -3: Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, the applicant shall pay a fair - share contribution toward the Fairview Street at 17th Street /Westminster Avenue intersection improvements that involve modifying the westbound approach from a left -turn lane, two through - lanes and a shared through right -turn lane; to a left -turn lane, three through lanes and a dedicated right -turn lane along with a westbound right -turn overlap phase to the signal phasing. This fair - share contribution shall be 4.5% of the improvement cost. The City would be responsible for implementing the intersection improvements in the future prior to year 2035. The Academy Charter High School 3 119 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration ICF0092012 31 B -201 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Table 3 -34. Cumulative Projects Traffic Generation Forecast Source: Fehr & Peers 2012. Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Related Project Description 2 -Way Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total 1. Wintersburg Presbyterian Church 557 24 15 39 13 22 35 2, Vista del Rio - Affordable Disabled Housing 109 4 2 6 4 5 9 3. Torres MedicalOffice 217 11 3 14 6 15 21 4. Rite Aid /Walgreens 1,396 24 18 42 82 82 164 5. Compassion Meditation Center 686 30 19 49 16 28 44 6. One Broadway Plaza - Office Tower 5,703 707 96 803 131 641 772 One Broadway Plaza - Restaurant 2,034 96 88 184 105 73 178 7. Discovery Science Center Ph. 11 n/a n/a n/a n/a 7 12 19 8. Block at Orange Expansion 3,064 85 57 142 101 152 253 Source: Fehr & Peers 2012. Table 3 -35. Year 2013 Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis N O Without Project With Project Significant Impact V/C Or V/C Or Key Time R W Delay Delay Intersection Period (seconds) LOS (seconds) LOS increase Yes /No Fairview Street at AM D 0.676 B 0.681 B 0.005 No Trask Avenue PM 0.670 B B 0.003 No 0.673 Fairview Street at AM C 0.506 A 0.531 A 0.025 No Edna Drive PM 0.623 B B 0.004 No 0.627 Fairview Street at AM C >50.0 (0.7) F (A) >50.0 (0.8) F fA) 0.100 No Huckleberry Road PM >50.0 (0.6) F (A) >50.0 (0.7) F (A) 0.100 No Fairview Street at AM C >50.0 (0.7) F (A) >50.0 (0.8) F (A) 0.100 No Strawberry Lane PM >50.0 (1.3) F (A) F (A) 0.000 No >50.0 (1.3 ) Fairview Street at . AM D 0.703 C 0.708 C 0.005 No 171h Street/ PM 0.918 E 0.923 E 0.005 No Westminster Avenue Source: Fehr & Peers, Traffic Impact Analysis, 2012. The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -120 ICF00914.11 ,i - 1Y City of Santa Ana Table 3 -36. Year 2019 Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis Environmental Checklist i ne ncaaemy t.narter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -121 ICF 00914.11 31 B -203 N a a Without Project With Project Significant Impact V/C or V/C or Key Time Delay Delay Intersection Period (seconds) LOS (seconds) LOS Increase Yes /No Fairview Street at AM D 0.716 C 0.724 C No Trask Avenue PM 0.008 No 0.717 C 0.722 C 0.005 Fairview Street at AM C 0.553 A 0.581 A No Edna Drive PM 0.028 No 0.670 B 0.676 B 0.006 Fairview Street at AM C >50.0 (1.0) F (A) >50.0 (1.2) F (A) No Huckleberry Road PM 0.200 No >50.0(1.0) F(A) >50.0(1.0) F(A) 0.000 Fairview Street at AM C >50.0 (1.1) F(A) >50.0 (1.2 ) F(A) No Strawberry Lane PM 0.100 No >50.0(2.1) F(A) >50.0(2.2) F(A) 0.100 Fairview Street at AM D 0.765 C 0.773 C 0.008 No 17w Street/ PM 0.006 No Westminster 0.993 E 0.999 E Avenue Source: Fehr & Peers, Traffic Impact Analysis, 2012. i ne ncaaemy t.narter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -121 ICF 00914.11 31 B -203 City of Santa Ana Environmental Checklist Table 3 -37. Year 2035 Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis 0 a ! Without Project With Project Significant Impact E= .o n. V/C or V/C or Key Time v Delay Delay Intersection Period '-e' (seconds) LOS (seconds) LOS Increase Yes /No Fairview Street at AM D 0.906 E 0.914 E 0.008 No Trask Avenue PM 0.005 No 0.919 E 0.924 E Fairview Street at AM C 0.673 B 0.701 C 0.028 No Edna Drive PM 0.006 No 0.876 D 0.882 D Fairview Street at AM C >50.0 (4.1) F (A) >50.0 [ 4.8 ) F (A) No 0.7 Huckleberry Road PM 0.3 No >50.0 (6.9) F (A) >50.0 ( 7.2 ) F(A) Fairview Street at AM C >50.0 (4.3) F (A) >50.0 ( 5.0) F (A) No 0.7 Strawberry Lane PM 0.4 No >50.0 (11.2) F (B) >50.0 ( 11.6) F(B) Fairview Sheet at AM D 0.901 E 0.926 E 0.025 yes 17th Street/ PM 0.006 No Westminster 1.214 F 1.220 F Avenue Source: Fehr & Peers, Traffic Impact Analysis, 2012. c. Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less - than - Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Based on the analysis of the above - listed topics, the proposed project would have potentially significant environmental effects on aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, greenhouse gasses, geology and soils, noise, traffic, and utilities that could cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. However, implementation of mitigation measures as provided within each of these resource topic sections of this environmental checklist would reduce project- related potentially significant impacts to a less- than - significant level. Therefore, after implementation of mitigation measures, the proposed project would result in a less- than - significant environmental impact to human beings. The Academy Charter High School Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 -122 1� June 2012 ICF 00914.11 I Chapter 4 References Aesthetics Caltrans, 2011. Officially Designated State Scenic Highways and Historic Parkways. Available: <http: / /www. dot. ca. gov/ hq/ LandArch /scenic_Iligliways /index.htm >. Accessed: January 2012. Agriculture California Department of Conservation. 2008. Orange County Important Farmland 2008. Available: <ftp: / /ftp.consrv.ca.gov/ pub /dlrp /FMMP /pdf /2008 /ora08.pdf >. Accessed: January 22, 2012. Air Quality California Air Resources Board (CARE). 2011. Federal and State ArnbientAir Quality Standards. February 18, 2011. Available:< http:// www .arb.ca.gov /html /lawsregs,htm >. Accessed: March 15, 2012. California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2011. Top 4 Measurements and Days above the Standard. Available: < http: / /www.arb.ca. gov /adain /topfoui-/topfourl.php >. Accessed: March 15, 2012. Garza, Vicente J., Peter Graney, Daniel Sperling (1997) Transportation Project -Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol. Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis, Research Report UCD- ITS- RR- 96 -01. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2011. The Green Book NonattainmentAreas for Criteria Pollutants. 30 August 2011. Available:< http: / /www.epa.gov /oagps001 /greenbk / >. Accessed: March 5, 2012. Felrr & Peers. 2012. The Academy Charter High School Traffic InrpactAnalysis, Draft. Irvine CA. Prepared by Fehr & Peers, Irvine, CA. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 1993. CEQAAir Quality Handbook. November. Available: < http : / /www.agmd.gov /cega /lidbk.html >. Accessed: March 5, 2012, South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 1993. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. Revised November. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2003. Localized Significance Threshold Methodology for CEQA Evaluations. June 2003, South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2006. Particulate Matter (PM) 2.5 Significance Thresholds and Calculation Methodology. October 2006. Available:< http: / /www.agmd.gov /cega /handbook /PM2_5 /finalineth.doc >. Accessed: March 5, 2012. The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 4 -1 ICF 00914.11 31 B -205 City of Santa Ana References South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2007. Air Quality Management Plans. Available: < Iittp:// www. agmd.gov /agnip /AQMPintro.htni >. Accessed: March 5, 2012 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2008. Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study (MATES Ill). September. Available: http:// www. agmd. gov/ prdas/ iiiateslll/ MATES1i ]FinalReportSept2008.litinl >. Accessed: March 5, 2012. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2009. Localized Significance Threshold Methodology for CEQA Evaluations: Appendix C. Last revised: 21 October 2009 Available:< http: / /www.agmd.gov /cega /handbook /LST /appC.pdf >. Accessed: March 5, 2012. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2011. Meteorological Sites. Available: http: / /www.agmd.gov/ smog /nietdata /AERMOD- Tablel.htm]. Accessed: March 5, 2012 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2011. Meteorological Data for ISCST3 for Anaheim. Last revised: 21 May 2009 Available:< lrttp: / /www.agmd.gov/ smog / metdata / datafiles /metdata /ANAHEIM.ASC >. Accessed: March 5, 2012. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2011. Carbon Monoxide Concentrations - Projected Future Year 1 -Hour Concentration (ppm). Available http: / /www.agmd.gov /cega /handbook /CO /co- tableZ,doc. Accessed: March 5, 2012. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2011. Carbon Monoxide Concentrations - Projected Future Year 8-Hour Concentration (ppm). Availab le:http: / /www.agmd.gov /cega/ handbook /CO /co_table3.doc.Accessed: March 5, 2012. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2012. Air Quality Management Plans. Available: < http:// www. agmd .gov /agmp /2012agmp /index.htm >. Accessed: March 5, 2012 Western Regional Climate Center (WRCC). 2012. Los Angeles Area, California Climate Summaries. Santa Ana Fire Station, California (047888). Available: < littp://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi- bin /cliMAIN.pl ?ca7888 >. Accessed: March 5, 2012. Cultural Resources Dice, Michael. 2002. An Archaeological Resources Assessment of the Fairview Street Resurface Project (17th Street to North City Limit), City of Santa Ana, California. Filed under Survey No.2457 at the South Central Coastal Information Center, Fullerton. jertberg, Patricia and Jane Rosenthal. 1997. Prehistoric and Historic Resource Assessment for the Fairview Street Improvement Initial Study /Environmental Assessment, Located in Garden Grove, Santa Ana and unincorporated Orange County. Filed under Survey No. 1639 at the South Central Coastal Information Center, Fullerton. Dice1997 Prehistoric and Historic Resource Assessment for the Fairview Street Improvement Initial Study /ErrvirorrmentalAssessment, Located in Garden Grove, Santa Ana and unincorporated Orange County. Filed under Survey No.1639 at the South Central Coastal Information Center, Fullerton. The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration a 2 ICF 00914.11 II: City of Santa Ana References McLeod, Samuel A. Vertebrate Paleontologist. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, CA. January 17, 2012 — Personal Communication. 2012 Vertebrate Paleontology Records Check for the Proposed Orangewood Academy Charter High School, in the City of Santa Ana, Orange County, California. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, CA. January 17, 2012, Geology California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, 1998. State of California Seismic Hazard Zones Anaheim Quadrangle. Released: April 15, 1998. Available: < Irttp: / /gmw.consrv.ca.gov /shnip /download /pdf /ozn_anah,pdf >. Accessed: January 30, 2012. City of Santa Ana. 1982. City of Santa Ana General Plan Seismic Safety Element. Adopted September 20, 1982, Reformatted January 2010. Santa Ana, California. Greenhouse Gas Emissions California Air Resources Board (CARB), 2011. Trends in California Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 2000 to 2000. December. Available: http: / /www. arb.ca. gov /cc /inventory /pubs /repo its /glig_inven tory_0 0- 09_trends.pdf California Climate Action Registry (CCAR). 2009. General Reporting Protocol, Reporting Entity-Wide Greenhouse Gas Emissions, version 3.1. Available: http : / /www.climatei,egistry.org /. January. California Climate Change Center (CCCC). 2006. Our Changing Climate: Assessing the Risks to California. July. California Energy Commission (CEC). 2006. Inventory of California Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks 1990 to 2004. December. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis: Summary for Policyrnakers. February. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Athanor. 2011a. Phase I Environmental Site Investigation, May 10, 2011. Prepared by Athanor Environmental Services, Inc. Athanor. 2011b. Environmental Site Assessment Soil and Groundwater Investigation, June 7, 2011. Prepared by Athanor Environmental Services, Inc. County of Orange Health Care Agency Environmental Health Services. 2011. Certified Unified Program Agency. Available: <http: / /www.occupainfo.com >. Accessed: January 2011. The Academy Charter High School June 20f2 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 4 -3 ICF 00914.11 31 B -207 City of Santa Ana References County of Orange. n.d. Wildland Fire. Available: < http: / /www,ocgov.com /vgnfiles /ocgov /EOC /Doc /WILDLAND %20FIRE.pdf >. Accessed: January 27, 2012. Hydrology and Water Quality City of Santa Ana. 2010. City of Santa Ana General Plan. Reformatted January 2010. Santa Ana, California. Coast Community Colleges Hazard Mitigation Plan (CCCD), 2011. Available: >Iittp: / /www.cccd.edu /hazardmitigation / http:// www .cccd.edu /hazard_mitigation /. Accessed: February 16, 2012. County of Orange. 2005. Orange County and Operation Area Emergency Operations Plans, Tsunami Annex. Available: <http: / /egov.ocgov.com /vgnfiles /ocgov /EOC /Doc /TsutianiiAnnex- CountyPlanModification.pdf >. Accessed: June 22, 2011. Orange County Flood Control District ( OCFCD). 2008. Base Map of Drainage Facilities in Orange County. Sheet No. 29. DWG No. MAPS - 113 -3. Last revised: July 22, 2008. Available: <http: / /www.ocflood.com/ Documents/ DrainageMaps /DrainageFacilitiesBaselndexMap .pdf >. Accessed: December 30, 2011. Orange County Flood Control District. 2011a. OC Flood Santa Ana River Project. Available: < http : / /www.ocflood.com /SARP.aspx >. Accessed: September 20, 2011. Orange County Flood Control District. 2011b. OCFCD Drainage System. Available: <http: / /www.ocflood.coin /Documents/ pdf /OCFCD_facilities _ o_map,pdf >. Accessed: September 20, 2011. Orange County Water District. 2009. Groundwater Management Plan. Available: http : / /www.ocwd.com /fv- 769.aspx. Accessed: August 19, 2011. Orange County Water District. 2012. Groundwater Recharge Operations. Available: <http: / /www.ocwd.com/ Groundwater - Recharge /ca- 34.aspx >. Accessed: January 3, 2012. Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (Santa Ana RWQCB). 2003. General Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges to Surface Waters that Pose and Insignificant (De Minimus) Threat to Water Quality. Available: < http: / /www.swi-cb.ca.gov /rwgcbB/ board_ decisions /adopted_orders /orders /2003/03_061, ge n_wdr 08222003.pdf >. Accessed: September 20, 2011. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 2006.2006 CWA Section 303(d) List of Water Quality Limited Segments with the three categories: Requiring TMDLs, Being Addressed by USEPA Approved TMDLs, and Being Addressed by Actions Other Than TMDLs. Available: <http: / /www.watei•boards.ca.gov /water issues/ programs/ tindl /303d_lists2006_approved.stit ml >. Accessed: January 3, 2012. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 2011. Available: <http: / /www.wate rboards.ca.gov /water_issties /programs /tmdl /integrated 2010.shtml >. Accessed: September 20, 2011. The Academy Charter High School 4-4 June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration [CF 00914. 11 li : d:� City of Santa Ana Noise References Federal Transit Administration. 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration irnpactAssessment. May. Available: http: / /www.fta. dot. gov / documents /FTA_Noise_and_Vibi-ation_Manual /pdf. Accessed: April 2012. Jones & Stokes. 2004. Transportation- and construction- induced vibration guidance manual. June. (J &S 02 -039.) Sacramento, CA. Prepared for California Department of Transportation, Noise, Vibration, and Hazardous Waste Management Office, Sacramento, CA. LSA. 2008. Noise hnpactAnalysisAlton & Milikan Apartments Final. TCC0602. Irvine CA. Prepared by LSA Associated, Irvine, CA. Public Services Smith, Lori. Administrative Chief /Fire Marshal, Santa Ana Fire Department, Santa Ana, CA. January 10, 2012 — Email. Transportation /Traffic Fehr & Peers. 2012. The Academy Charter High School Traffic hnpactAnalysis Draft. Irvine CA. Prepared by Felir & Peers Irvine CA. Linscott, Law, & Greenspan. 2012. Pal king Needs Assessment and Special Event Parking Management Plan, Draft. Santa Ana CA. Prepared by Linscott, Law, & Greenspan. Santa Ana CA. Utilities and Service Systems California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB). Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates by California integrated Waste Management Board. Available: http; / /www.ciwmb.ca. gov /wastechar /wastegenrates /. Accessed January 31, 2012. City of Santa Ana. 2005. Urban Water Management Plan. November. Also available: <http: / /www,scag.ca.gov /rcp /pdf /uwinp/ Orange /CityofSantaAna200SUWMP.pdf >. City of Santa Ana. 2009. Citywide Design Guidelines. Available: < littp://www.santa- ana.org /pba /planning/ documents / Chapter _16_BicycleFacilities.pdf >. Accessed: February 2012. Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). California Waste Stream Profiles: Facilities. Available: littp: / /www.cah'ecycle.ca.gov /profiles /Facility/Landfill /. Accessed: January 31, 2012. Orange County Flood Control District. 2000. Basenlap of Drainage Facilities in Orange County, Section 38. Available: <http: / /www.ocflood.com/ documents /DrainageMaps /ocfd38.pdf >. Accessed: January 31, 2012. The Academy Charter High School tune 2Q12 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 4 -5 ICF00914.11 li : 1P% City of Santa Ana References Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD). 2010. Capital Improvement Program, Fiscal Year 2009- 2010 Update. Available: www. ocsd. cons/ civica /filebank /blobdioad.asp ?BloblD =7983. Accessed: February 2012. Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD). 2012. Fountain Valley Wastewater Reclamation Facility. Available: <http: / /www. ocsd .com /construction /fountai»_val ley_wastewater_reclamation_faci city /default. asp>. Accessed: February 2012. The Academy Charter High School June 2012 initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 4 -6 ICF 00914.11 'J Chapter 5 List of Preparers City of Santa Ana Lucy Linnaus Senior Planner Vince Fregoso Principal Planner ICF International Chad Beckstrom Project Director Renee Escario Project Manager Aaron Brownwood CEQA Analyst Tanya Jones CEQA Analyst Keith Cooper Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Specialist Nick Dreves Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Specialist Peter Lagenfeld Aesthetics Tim Messick Aesthetics Mark Robinson Cultural Resources Mike Greene Noise Specialist Peter Hardie Noise Specialist David Duncan GIS /Graphics Nathan Woodside Editor Fehr & Peers Jason D Pack, P.E. Traffic Study Rafael Cobian, P.E., LEED GA Traffic Study The Academy Charter High School Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 5 -1 31B -211 June 2012 ICF 00914. 11 City of Santa Ana Fuscoe Engineering Ian Adam, CPSWQ /LEER AP /QSD, Principal Bob Strong, PE Puneet Comar, P.E. Sewer Study Sewer Study Sewer Study List of Preparers The Academy Charter High School June 2012 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 5 -2 ICF 00914.11 31B -212 Appendix Appendices A -D are provided on the attached CD. 31B -213 31 B -214 MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN THE ACADEMY CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL PREPARED FOR: City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency 20 Civic Center Plaza, M -20 Santa Ana, CA 92701 Contact: Vince Fregoso PREPARED BY: ICF International 1 Ada, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92618 Contact: Chad Beckstrom, AICP 949/333 -6600 August 2012 11111....- INTERNATIONAL EXHIBIT 9 31B -215 City of Santa Ana Introduction Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program The California Public Resources Code, Section 21081.6(a)(1), requires that a lead or responsible agency adopt a mitigation monitoring plan when approving or carrying out a project when an IS /MND identifies measures to reduce potential adverse environmental impacts. As lead agency for the proposed project, the City is responsible for adoption and implementation of the mitigation monitoring plan. An IS /MND for the project has been prepared to address the potential environmental impacts and, where appropriate, recommend measures to mitigate these impacts. As such, a mitigation monitoring plan is required to ensure that the adopted mitigation measures are successfully implemented. This plan lists each mitigation measure, describes the methods for implementation and verification, and identifies the responsible party or parties. Project Overview The proposed project consists of development and operation of a residential private charter high school on an approximately 7.2 -acre project site located at 1901 -1919 North Fairview Street in the northwestern portion of the City of Santa Ana. Orangewood Children's Foundation is proposing to construct and operate a new charter high school on the former Santa Ana Hospital Medical Center site in the City of Santa Ana. The project will consist of two new education buildings, one administrative /library building, and a gymnasium to accommodate 450 students. Ancillary to the school, the applicant is also proposing three residential buildings and one administrative /support building to accommodate 80 students that would reside onsite. The proposed project requires a CUP to allow a school, a variance to deviate from building and garden wall height limit requirements, a lot merger, and a variance to reduce the amount of required parking spaces. Additional details may be found in the Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project (June 2012). Monitoring and Reporting Procedures The mitigation monitoring plan for the proposed project will be in place through all phases of the project, including design, construction, and operation. The City will be responsible for administering the mitigation monitoring plan and ensuring that all parties comply with its provisions. 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 deficiencies are promptly corrected. The designated environmental monitor will track and document compliance with mitigation measures, note any problems that may result, and take appropriate action to rectify problems. The Academy Charter High School Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration August 2012 ICF 914.11 City of Santa Ana Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Implementation Table 1 lists each mitigation measure included in the draft MND. Certain inspections and reports may require preparation by qualified individuals and these are specified as needed. The timing and method of verification for each measure are also specified. The Academy Charter High School Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration 31B -217 August 2012 ICF 414.11 .q 0 H a W O 'b a, a 0 o � [� r ai 0 o ra 00. oaooa � oao.� fli 'Lf a) O fo 'C1 N A %, to 'd a) O ice¢ coo�c°�c°� vQ coo <c°�v �¢° cook° 43 4-1 o a, 4.1 O 1.. y c0 41 O <0 O to O 0 0 ni 0 o !° O -.0 j O 'p O O O O O O t3 ' • N i1. ,n � O v f�0 t� a) y 0 ry y p v N 0 0 O CN7 ��aa O O O v d O o tom - o�°�E°u F '5 5�u °u u° to- V.uE bn bA o O ko•La o a�obo a�000 moaoo o o � o.. b " (z a�au a..s�u aynAu b a, o w X v ^� �j� o o qj ftf Z y 4J m j . N o �w O 4v-+ 0 .° s q ° w D co ° y o ai co N � c� •� 3 m O bA O y+ ,0 a U V Q x o W'O d bin a) $ A' z? o a' G A o 3 �, 4, b0 vi O O O y c.j .p a H C V t ry vi ° Y �, M cU C y CI a O pq ° O y v Lf O a� y td y O CY to 0) eC�o oo °loo b) cCCyoEi QU � e,�°a Q icdC. 's °ybona� o °��cacoS,•o y ° INO oi> o+�i�oo C] v d C O H °' y .o a� v q — � � �Y � '� v°i w q .G y u o- c�o y a, � .s �u„ Q v ° 3 N y o v a s� Q c o ,o �. �, � o � 0 0 0 � 0 .Ei � 3� a� S9 >, bn a� � o i� .° C! y w of 0 o a H cu ro ° o q Do� +.+ r-+ o aoi d �' ;E; o o q .° � a .14 u 77 0 o r m m 0 u o a) >, o 0 d W b4 v 0B pH°���aGGovv ,�¢aawb °Wioqf o ., O v b o .a au O C v' u ,. 0 5 '� O V s}o.� t� a fC.IS `R io v coy voi ou w vpi vQi cn R. Q o v u v aa� N ti 011 cQC c�v ao v �n O C � N ✓ cd '.1' • f :. G w A� v O U p y v .n y x O O C jq bap ° O U_ ii d SZ, tom+ ,y O O to •� N o� N LL �u a m 0 0, �i O � O W y A t to Z S a C1 N �m U T a Q m d r F c �L 00 O 0. m 0 m C O .b b 0 bo a 0 d O N a O 'b N F? Q O O N b Aa E-* ., H 2 cta a }y 0 s V ° p 11. O O u u O NN+ rN/1 (i w y.3 � •� F •,ry ,� 'C3 � bA .�i ° O °' y bA 0 a V) a A y Q.� O f. 0 cd 6 U N 22..�v W a W G7 0 O as i.' p bA bA tn CO a 0. 0ai:go M O O O O p N u -- F. El Ei�•Eu o ° ^°'a�flpa`i � f1. al O 4..r Q cu rn 4, Nib F, O.�°� % N -O G O O N t1 N O L" O IV 0 bb bA O a O a LOS � M ' o r - a ° y '� O o 0 41 a s z o . o .� va°i O N yO.i N O '� a s. C� O ti 6A F. u rn N N N N 1.- -0-0 � ct1 [ � N C '0 bn � C's a j bA a p 5 O ij N o a. , '° iv ° N G �bA 0 0 0-0 4 0 '�� o° 0 Nn d r.— O LN.• O 100 G o 0" N � a N biD •� U •R. "d fA � '� R{ F. *' f.+ � ,�.� RS r�li f O O bn N q 3 •J a yo a rj Cd 0 N U N U N N O a 0 0 0 fd �.• N y. � 4O y O O U 'tt 'O ti w N u tcf 0 a V •� bA _ a 'ZI ca N x S: 44 4-J O 0 13 a. s N d O N b0 0 0 0 N 'S A-, d) •O y fy0 a " n N di a o P a b N N .N � � ' �j S t0 0 . Q• � O P. � � � 0 0-5 I W a 0 0 w cti U co On G a¢ owl y � bb cd is r 0'•� � b o r. bNio _ h anon. � 10 o 0 N y 0 n N v h O 0 i 0 4N h (3 Ca V..i O v •+`3 a bA O bD 0 O a �n �N N ^ � o v O bA i� a W n wr o 0 C7 w d 0 0 a S. b0 G. N y O H •� fS4 0 f-. n, O W o ° CIS N N (A u 44 to 0 o COQ OCJ zs mss, N pn O X 0 U CL) 0 G cu 0 co o �" m o O azb° N •°, y .� 0 '� N a� 7 V m- a a 0 a t > E 3z u •�s m � = z v A� v a m F- 0 4 e 0 n a C A C O 0 2 A e c w N w O a� a O 'O O 0 H co. v O Y7 cd Fa m z Q3 G � v 4 G p G 'C b00 v ' � ii o v N y., O U N is G O y +' O¢ O O 6-A V V V G G w N E •T} • O O O w° O U bb G v V ° 'O � ao ° o y d v 3 "yyf o b4 v o sx. y tip M 0 R v C a.+ O 'd G v �+ y (2 y� ►-v,y a 3 �v a q:j LL 0) y� � G bA G O ai G w • • • O b � � ry y O O cti co F '3 O. o. °C F y s0. f.L H x 0 w H O ►"k v [ t�- •{p. LLQ O0. Q,` _ v O v C a+ \ O y N tw O, d y CO KI o o v a� a•p,v aria (U M N 4 IS � O � w O G ,fi t 'o ctl cV +5+ in u - 'o °'o ^ovb�v°'v'i� _ ., ° ° v ►. d 'ty H &w N O H O P. �� V ^G N� G k O Vl U V V f�l G to y N u d O v n. G y `� O cn= co Y v'd t)b CD c0 R O O O[U w w V) 5 a o w ° G •a O 3 cn a 0 O � H 'O O ' O H � O � o" �� .f" C. CO V) C O Oa.pOq � �?' «S p N U C' rd -< h v � � 5aw�,w Fv 0 o U UO N W � � w UG N �p' bz bb v s G F-oF w-u 4 Ei o v v by � C � 0 f{f CS a v � � b4 O V Q G 'F, O s7. y d ¢ p U Kk � bA bq O 0i p c R. co OA td t s. y C's C 0 u cn (D . N N 070 — a Ln 0 12 m 4) 00 s> n i0 s d � Z S ,p m ai rnto _ .4p L) E w u N Q N rz 00 d 00 a a a c m .o c O 0 A Q C 10 N O U Q7 q 0...� y Obi 4. O .O O q O b a F � a� .; o U O G O xs v w o �' s y 0 o 4 M bn " C G S a, �iD pn r G 'd C G bo G VG tr N 'S fd P. y G aNi 0 0 h uo v 0 'CS Yr W. N N F O A F0 00 -Cj O O O Ctl 'n - ' y ° G C O Y G 1 N' a y W v C N 0 , In 19 o �0 cn a .n +0+ 0 biD s. pB q a� '0 vYi G U ' G 0 o N jg +, G G 'G -0 C,3 N x -5 ' v d 31 B -221 bZ bi ° Qw ai CJ� NCB' ti Y N 1� w 10 w (u 0 O 0. •� ffl O O 30-. G F a R 0 o Q, v pip o cov ai o Y O C13 d 0 a o'n b ° c Y G [o A, o 0 S Y q b. O0 J q oG. 4., 41, p U Q W O N 0 4, 2 y v .� V) a) a C G G O �j V G N No co 41 ca Y Y G 0 0 v or f. O a� ti 0 V0i U 'd 0 OU rvPi V N 6 n 3 tD 0 so >v AZ a � Y f9 3 00 T a 7 7 3 N ip 'c E ro 0 a c a K m O c O iy ro c d V) 0 'v f� a H zz cn o •� Oro �, P. pqq C U Q f S t Q 0 0 rT0 O 00 N •� n N (U O U f. o Q y •- �A U • is t6 54) [".. N 00 0 c� N "V" o o p vi to o"° o 0 V CU 0 V _ b O fd O t0 OV 0 0 Eol W G O I1 M O 'a i+ 4 Y o .5 co y ai o C O fd V a ° oj co ° o q p ate) o O O V x y c. ,4; p - is � 4 �� orb °� P4 ID3 L5o4+,��Uo�, V) W o a�i :° `° ,c5 y, $ .� 'a m r d a'O ^o ° a banes ss 0 V W A 5 O N G ca N ON N • • • OV R -B E (0 N O 'b O a) o o V ��' N LZ O O O O '030 a 0 0 0 d 31 B -222 C~ ffl � O cis 3 (u c°aoaa GM ,, a i>, N C's Nw N O f~0 d f� V O � O O > Q CL bvU ° as. °p co ov O b.0 vi N d ,+ ,.o C o � o y m a "c3 d rl c O ro N O c r � °-D z z � a d t c a U E d a 9 y V N d b v •� g '_c A b O H aC a q O 0 q o � b � O y A. q O G1 w q O d O a ) V) � N bID O b co U cis V RO. Y 0 O 3 w cn d�G N y o � o u�_� °•� q O o � V (x x O tj vN f� a H zz cn o •� Oro �, P. pqq C U Q f S t Q 0 0 rT0 O 00 N •� n N (U O U f. o Q y •- �A U • is t6 54) [".. N 00 0 c� N "V" o o p vi to o"° o 0 V CU 0 V _ b O fd O t0 OV 0 0 Eol W G O I1 M O 'a i+ 4 Y o .5 co y ai o C O fd V a ° oj co ° o q p ate) o O O V x y c. ,4; p - is � 4 �� orb °� P4 ID3 L5o4+,��Uo�, V) W o a�i :° `° ,c5 y, $ .� 'a m r d a'O ^o ° a banes ss 0 V W A 5 O N G ca N ON N • • • OV R -B E (0 N O 'b O a) o o V ��' N LZ O O O O '030 a 0 0 0 d 31 B -222 C~ ffl � O cis 3 (u c°aoaa GM ,, a i>, N C's Nw N O f~0 d f� V O � O O > Q CL bvU ° as. °p co ov O b.0 vi N d ,+ ,.o C o � o y m a "c3 d rl c O ro N O c r � °-D z z � a d t c a U E d a 9 y V N d b v •� g '_c 0 a c 0 CL a e m tb c 0 0 2 a N 1� d A V o N a � O b O Ci O o � cn � s H � a� h d E 0 V 0 ag o 4) W cu " .S] y = .--s 0 L: F, O -19 y •1^° o U,o �' O N •� bp� 0 +� 0 N C .N N o n 0 aoti�,� Ij 4 z o •e . o � y '� 0 0 .�... O CO u u o 5° c0 W � Q. w ,4i G N u 40. o 'o V 'o IC03 00 O Gtii O •.V. 0 � u 0n.pOq r: 0aO (U 9 0 M .d G 5a ".s. al�ao'co O Cj c4 o 0-0 r 4. bA O O c0.. C R L 0 0 to '5 . l U 0 .0 a o y E-• .o CL .� � F•� � U C1. s0. 'o � V 0 O p u s. A. p Q, F ' . 0 � ° oo�� ccs y 0 pi pi 0 A�.tQo a� °v o. _ G v C 0 u O p O tU � y O V 'O 0 M R .� O +� 'y t0. o 0 o + N W�0�� °,GF� ° °n�rowpmo<U � �boa0�b> V) o'o 5-V 00� ��, 0 aFa . i Q b ° . •� ayr' o u u .y d sa: i L) p N w O� � p N vs p i � ca -, 'r. 0. o u w o 0 70 y O o w O 0 0� Z O O ° 0 > pw o N S. w p O c v b w 0° v a' y q au r, O v cad O cCK L0. U V ^! d' C d' tom. v N V G ' y in. o N j, y 0 3r o b 3 v a"'i G d pv"',3 �a �co�v,�x o �El AHb�,> 1� ca N 'o V '�° 0 .o 0 o N 2 4 co bop o r u o aoi -0 �. o F CaD w . CO • • cu �w �vcn, Q cs ru o b c.� o cad o y U .O o Q t •� ya N O (lei u gyp�•.+ feu cmi 76 D O CU 0 u iO. o U I[ V y G b Sd lv O u b 0 (Yi 0 G5: 0 w bpd N +i V an d cis O vii V y a� 'O E+ t� s0, y 'COC V > v T3 0,0 `o d� [dn m O V c" L. O cd m:l C A ai v o 0 ° 4. O ° 0 C ° � � a N ` co x z1 v - '� lu p d 1. a� y Y m o 3 s0 3 'cn cn v .O a4 tC T3 (0 O 'f� qOC 0 t+ °r^l N .-'-r. 'U:".. N C1. N 1-. OO 'b r E 31 B -223 E Lo O a c CD ro c A ao c 0 N 'e O c 0 b°u cM G m a C m w 0 v d n-t O o Q O 4. M Ir 1�1 'p w � o d 000 F � 0-0 m a w O O o a 44 �? w A ) p Lf N , O N° w ,°c d j z f0 SG .y Y O to .13 o �°�„ �, 3 "7 °b e0 S w>,.n CL o y o b O Co O O v cH o o o M CU 4 o y 'G vi v p i ca a.� ^,G aa'i m o o o {1 '49 a" 3- IlU bb N 6�i W O tv t; O O Ts tt s°)� O �' p W iv a O d) �' too o s�Qcnib °: E -bE �°n��¢ oar CIZ, o too 0 c� 31 B -224 �a V .ti G LL �v a Q rn 0 a m m u d j O G) °z i b°o T �ro � a i� 'c m D a e 0 d ac c m to c zi Z O 0 bo .d 0 U N tkO bD b0 N .a-1 a' O C1. co 4 N Lam. 0¢ poq C a 16 a U� A. CJQ mQ Ei •� '° co 7w. N v ° ° of ,`� o a o aV)i cv v O q c M ro v o j" a o° p cy 0 0 c A ; CIS o tot -r- 't a �•vb °bny �'�voc�ycav� a ca.��ooty u cu w�icaoo a H� �QMOMp Hy 0 y0 0�o a 0 0 4 v w v0i 41 0 y Q 0 a E''i o Lk o to°. y o 0 0 H� a o 4. U 41 cu 0 o Q n m-5 0 d o a 0 o i� °' 'cc on a� -° v m 1. d >, a ob �r �' a�i a�i o p p. N >m N y °' a� P. C 0 V. bb V bD o. � a-+ o > w • 5 H o v q� y A. a t o a v v o° o o a, a°i co 0 w .� oD C) v ° o U o " b a 41 b,0 co u -0 a - y o � a>i O o a a04 x� M¢ Cl. 300,00c`°,M a vova0. .0 t',c�� ia`di�a a a0� �av3c co a 0 b woo q �'" ,CA eq 0 4) s0+ x CD OD u ca �° N ai bD % A ° p 41 SZ fA ^emu o cu o M 0° i� v v 0 fo o o co m 3 v°, lw 0 fA cn h .o vbi w u p No c. v 3 W v 4 o CL o V Ei a o o d �' N d co > m ro V) N Ts W 4.. a0i ,v ¢ 0 H .o a N r m a 0,0 N ��` �D [0 N ,fit fC yO' 'p p' V yO+ p O o p o N •fII .0 N 'rs .--i � .y '� G! 0 .Lj +'9 '� w,2 g 3 .- d v 0 o Q Y v ^� � -0 o , m r- CU En 0.5 a A. p r on bb 'i bo p, o o cN `�" �D��' nom. o '�" c� E v a�7 o j axi a° u o 0 3 0 04 31 B -225 E ao O OO C C) CL or a m 0 2 0 oro tka Q A L h 1 l � �J �u b a o � i H Q oC a sz 0 xs o a d b � o � s� 0 G 13 o � � F M H Fr h d q O �u � � o' � a a � o ti a oO O N N O y v 17 N � L Ei Y O O v V a cu O co 0 O t ao U Cd .�' Q, N N a V ,o ►p-i U O 'e 1 l � �J ROH - 08/13/12 RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -07 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2012 -17 AS CONDITIONED TO ALLOW A SCHOOL IN THE PROFESSIONAL (P) ZONING DISTRICT AND VARIANCE NO. 2012 -06 AS CONDITIONED TO ALLOW A REDUCTION IN PARKING AND A STRUCTURE AND FENCE THAT EXCEED THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT LIMITS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1901 NORTH FAIRVIEW STREET BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. The applicant is requesting approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2012- 17 to allow the construction of The Academy Charter High School in the Professional (P) zoning district and Variance No. 2012 -06 to allow a parking reduction and structure and fence that both exceed the maximum height limits for the property located at 1901 North Fairview Street. B. Conditional Use Permit No. 2012 -17 and Variance No. 2012 -06 came before the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana for a duly noticed public hearing on August 13, 2012. C. Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41- 313.5(c) allows a school use in the Professional (P) zoning district subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit. D. Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41- 638(a)(1) authorizes the Planning Commission to grant a conditional use permit upon making certain findings. 1. That the proposed use will provide a service or facility, which will contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood or the community. The project will provide a service or facility which will contribute to the community. The Academy Charter High School is designed to meet the educational needs of foster youth by providing these special young people with a high quality high school education and firm base of support. It will provide County teens and other educationally at -risk youth with a solid foundation for life, instilling in them the skills and confidence needed to live healthy and productive lives. Resolution No. 2012 -07 31 B-227 Page 1 of 8 2. That the proposed use will under the circumstances of the particular case be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity. The Academy will not be detrimental to persons residing or working in the area as the project has been designed to address potential issues such as traffic, parking, noise and lighting. The school has been designed to be separated from the adjacent residential uses by a perimeter block wall, which will minimize the impacts to the persons residing nearby. Additionally, the campus design enables the site to be secured during off hours. 3. That the proposed use will adversely affect the present economic stability or future economic development of properties surrounding the area. The proposed use will not adversely affect the economic stability of the area but will instead identify the site as a viable site to conduct business. The site was previously occupied by medical and hospital uses that vacated the site and left the property in a state of disrepair. The Academy will help revitalize the area by providing a new high school campus on a vacant parcel of land. The reuse of the site, in conjunction with the improvements that will be made to the site, will enhance the economic viability of the area. 4. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in Chapter 41 for such use. The use will be in compliance with all regulations and provisions of Chapter 41 (Zoning Code) of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, with the exception of parking, building height and fence height. An application for variances from these standards is being processed concurrently with the conditional use permit. 5. That the proposed use will adversely affect the General Plan or any specific plan of the City. The proposed use will not adversely affect the General Plan as the school is consistent with several goals of the General Plan. Goal 1 of the Land Use Element encourages uses that promote a balance of land uses that address basic community needs, Goal 3 supports projects that improve the character and integrity of neighborhoods, and Goal 5 ensures that the impacts of development are mitigated. Finally, the project complies with Goal 1 of the Educational Element to provide sufficient educational services and facilities to meet the City's needs. Resolution No. 2012 -07 31 B -228 Page 2 of 8 E. Variance No. 2012 -05 (a) has been filed with the City of Santa Ana seeking to reduce the required parking from 277 parking spaces to 146 parking spaces. Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41 -1401 requires one (1) space per 150 feet of classroom area, one (1) space per 333 square feet of office area, and one (1) space per two (2) beds. F. Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41- 638(a)(2) authorizes the Planning Commission to grant a variance upon making certain findings. 1. That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges not otherwise at variance with the intent and purpose of the provisions of this chapter. The project site has a special circumstance related to its size, shape and location. Due to the location and constraints of the site, which is surrounded by development, the project is unable to provide the code required parking. To determine an alternate parking demand for the school, a parking and special needs assessment was prepared by the traffic engineering firm of Linscott Law & Greenspan. The study concluded that a maximum parking demand of 146 would be required for the school, including all staff and residents. Applying the strict letter of the parking code would, in this particular case, deprive the subject property of attracting a use to the property that is otherwise allowed in the P zone and would deprive the subject property of privileges not otherwise at variance with the intent and purpose of the provisions of this chapter. 2. That the granting of a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. The granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights. Compliance with the parking standards would prohibit the construction of a needed high school campus for at -risk youths on the premises. The strict application of the standards would result in the need to reduce classroom space for the campus, which would impact the ability of the Orangewood Foundation to provide sufficient learning facilities at this location. Therefore, the granting of the variance will preserve the property owners right to develop a vacant property with a use that is allowed in the zoning district. The new use will help to revitalize the area through the reuse of a vacant property, which will preserve the Resolution No. 2012 -07 31 B-229 Page 3 of 8 property owners right to upgrade, develop and lease their property. 3. That the granting of a variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public or surrounding properties as the building and site is proposed to comply with all applicable development standards except for the parking, building height and fence height requirements. The project has been designed to minimize impacts to the adjacent residential properties through site design and conditions of approval. 4. That the granting of a variance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. The project will not adversely affect the General Plan. The Academy Charter High School is consistent with several goals of the General Plan. Goal 1 of the Land Use Element encourages uses that promote a balance of land uses that address basic community needs, Goal 3 supports projects that improve the character and integrity of neighborhoods, and Goal 5 ensures that the impacts of development are mitigated. Further, the project is in compliance with Goal 1 of the Educational Element, which encourages development that provides sufficient educational services and facilities to meet the City's needs. G. Variance No. 2012 -06 (b) has been filed with the City of Santa Ana seeking to construct a three -story, forty -seven (47) foot tall classroom structure, and a thirty -seven (37) foot tall gymnasium within 140 feet of residentially used property. Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41- 314(b) establishes the maximum height of buildings to thirty -five (35) feet in height if located within 140 feet of residentially used property. H. Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41- 638(a)(2) authorizes the Planning Commission to grant a variance upon making certain findings. 1. That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges not otherwise at variance with the intent and purpose of the provisions of this chapter. The project site has a special circumstance related to its size, shape and location. Due to the site being surrounded by development, the applicant is unable to obtain additional land to build structures that are lower in height. And, it is unfeasible to construct a gymnasium facility with a lower Resolution No. 2012 -07 31 B -230 Page 4 of 8 ceiling due to the types of activities occurring in the structure, which require high ceiling. And, the granting of the height variance will allow the construction of a gymnasium use that is typically found on a high school campus. As a result, special circumstances exist that warrant a variance. 2. That the granting of a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. The granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights. Compliance with the building height standard would prohibit the construction of a needed high school campus for at -risk youths on the premises. The strict application of the standards would result in a reduction in square footage for the campus, which would make the school unfeasible at this location. The granting of the variances will preserve the property owners right to develop a vacant property with a use that is allowed in the zoning district and revitalize the area through the reuse of a vacant property, which will preserve the property owners right to upgrade, develop and lease their property. 3. That the granting of a variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public or surrounding properties as the building and site is proposed to comply with all applicable development standards except for the parking, building height and fence height requirements. The project has been designed to minimize impacts to the adjacent residential properties through site design and conditions of approval. 4. That the granting of a variance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. The project will not adversely affect the General Plan. The project is consistent with several goals of the General Plan. Goal 1 of the Land Use Element encourages uses that promote a balance of land uses that address basic community needs, Goal 3 supports projects that improve the character and integrity of neighborhoods, and Goal 5 ensures that the impacts of development are mitigated. Further, the project is consistent with Goal 1 of the Educational Element, which encourages development that provides sufficient educational services and facilities to meet the City's needs. Approval of the variance will allow the construction of a new high school that will serve the needs of at -risk youths in the community. Resolution No. 2012 -07 31 B -231 Page 5 of 8 Variance No. 2012 -05 (c) has been filed with the City of Santa Ana seeking to install a six (6) foot high wall along the property line to separate the site from the residential uses to the east. Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41 -322 limits the height of perimeter walls to 42 inches in height if within twenty (20) feet of a property line abutting a street. J. Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41- 638(a)(2) authorizes the Planning Commission to grant a variance upon making certain findings. 1. That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges not otherwise at variance with the intent and purpose of the provisions of this chapter. The project site has a special circumstance related to its size, shape and location. Due to the location of the site, which is surrounded by residential development, an existing six foot high wall currently exists around the project perimeter. This wall served to separate the former hospital and office uses from the surrounding residences. Due to the location of a street at the east (rear) of the property, the maximum allowable fence height is 42 inches. A variance from the fence height standard will allow the adjacent residences to maintain their privacy and minimize impacts such as light and noise by allowing the existing six foot high fence to remain. 2. That the granting of a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. The granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights. Compliance with the fence height standard would prohibit the operation of a needed high school campus for at -risk youths on the premises and would subject the adjacent residential uses to potential impacts such as noise, light intrusion, parking intrusion and trespassing. Additional, a reduced fence height would result in trespassing onto the high school campus. The granting of the variance will preserve the property owners right to develop a vacant property with a use that is allowed in the zoning district. 3. That the granting of a variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public or surrounding properties as the building and site has been designed to comply with all applicable development Resolution No. 2012 -07 31 B-232 Page 6 of 8 standards except for the parking, building height and fence height requirements. The project has been planned to minimize impacts to the adjacent residential properties through site design and conditions of approval. 4. That the granting of a variance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. The project will not adversely affect the General Plan. The Academy Charter High School is consistent with several goals of the General Plan. Goal 1 of the Land Use Element encourages uses that promote a balance of land uses that address basic community needs, Goal 3 supports projects that improve the character and integrity of neighborhoods, and Goal 5 ensures that the impacts of development are mitigated. In addition, the project is in compliance with Goal 1 of the Educational Element, which encourages development that provides sufficient educational services and facilities to meet the City's needs. Section 2. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2011 -74, has been prepared for this project. The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2011 -74, prepared with respect to this project, and has determined that the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program adequately addresses the expected environmental impacts of the project. On the basis of this review, the Planning Commission 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. Thus, the Planning Commission hereby certifies and approves the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2011 -74. Section 3. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana, after conducting the public hearing, hereby approves for the property located at 1901 North Fairview Street: 1. Conditional Use Permit No. 2012 -17, as conditioned in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein, to allow a school use in the Professional (P) zoning district. 2. Variance No. 2012 -06 (a), as conditioned in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein, to allow a reduction in required parking for the high school. 3. Variance No. 2012 -05 (b), as conditioned in Exhibit "C" attached hereto and incorporated herein, to exceed the allowable building height. 4. Variance No. 2012 -05 (c), as conditioned in Exhibit "D" attached hereto and incorporated herein, to exceed the allowable fence height. Resolution No. 2012 -07 31 B -233 Page 7 of 8 These decisions are based upon the evidence submitted at the above said hearing, which includes, but is not limited to: the Request for Planning Commission Action dated August 13, 2012, and exhibits attached thereto; and the public testimony, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference. ADOPTED this 13th day of August, 2012 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: Acosta, Alderete, Gartner, Mill, Nalle, Yrarrazaval(6) NOES: Commissioners: None (0) ABSENT: Commissioners: Turner (1) ABSTENTIONS: Commissioners: None (0) Eric Alderete Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM: Sonia R. Carvalho, City Attorney By: Ryan O. Hodge Assistant City Attorney CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, MARTHA RAMIREZ, Clerk of the Planning Commission, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2012 -07 to be the original resolution adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana on August 13, 2012 Date: Clerk of the Planning Commission City of Santa Ana Resolution No. 2012 -07 31 B -234 Page 8 of 8 EXHIBIT A Conditions for Conditional Use Permit No 2012 -17 Should the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2012 -17, the approval is subject to compliance, to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Manager, with all applicable sections of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, the California Administrative Code, the California Building Standards Code and all other applicable regulations. The applicant must comply in full with each and every condition listed below prior to exercising the rights conferred by this conditional use permit. The applicant must remain in compliance with all conditions listed below throughout the life of the conditional use permit. Failure to comply with each and every condition may result in the revocation of the conditional use permit. A. Planning Division All proposed improvements must conform to the Site Plan Review approval of DP No. 2011 -31 and the staff report exhibits. 2. Any amendment to this conditional use permit must be submitted to the Planning Division for review. At that time, staff will determine if administrative relief is available or the variance must be amended. 3. The occupancy of the on -site housing units shall be limited to students attending the school, houseparent's of the family units, and the children of the houseparent's. No other occupants are permitted on the premises. 4. Prior to issuance of building permits, a Student Vehicle Registration Program shall be submitted for review and approval. The Program needs to be designed to restrict parking to approximately 80 student drivers commuting to the campus on a regular basis. 5. Prior to issuance of building permits, a Parking Management Plan identifying off -site parking for special events needs to be approved by the Planning Division. Any reciprocal parking agreement associated with the Plan must also be secured prior permit issuance. 6. Prior to issuance of building permits, the lot merger for the project shall be recorded. 31 B -235 AUGUST 13, 2012 PAGE 2OF2 B. Police Department 1. Prior to issuance of building permits, provide a security plan which describes how the students will be supervised while living on campus. The security plan shall include the use of security personnel and cameras. 2. Knox box access for Police personnel shall be provided at all exterior gates and at the entrances to the common areas of the residential units and /or buildings. EXHIBIT B Conditions for Variance No 2012 -06 (a) Should the Planning Commission approve Variance No. 2012 -06 (a), the approval is subject to compliance, to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Manager, with all applicable sections of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, the California Administrative Code, the California Building Standards Code and all other applicable regulations. The applicant must comply in full with each and every condition listed below rip or to exercising the rights conferred by this variance. The applicant must remain in compliance with all conditions listed below throughout the life of the variance. Failure to comply with each and every condition may result in the revocation of the variance. A. Planning Division All proposed improvements must conform to the Site Plan Review approval of DP No. 2011 -31 and the staff report exhibits. 2. Any amendment to this conditional use permit must be submitted to the Planning Division for review. At that time, staff will determine if administrative relief is available or the variance must be amended. 3. The occupancy of the on -site housing units shall be limited to students attending the school, houseparent's of the family units, and the children of the houseparent's. No other occupants are permitted on the premises. 4. Prior to issuance of building permits, a Student Vehicle Registration Program shall be submitted for review and approval. The Program needs to be designed to restrict parking to approximately 80 student drivers commuting to the campus on a regular basis. 5. Prior to issuance of building permits, a Parking Management Plan identifying off -site parking for special events needs to be approved by the Planning Division. Any reciprocal parking agreement associated with the Plan must also be secured prior permit issuance. 6. Prior to issuance of building permits, the lot merger for the project shall be recorded. 31 B -237 AUGUST 13, 2012 PAGE 2OF2 B. Police Department Prior to issuance of building permits, provide a security plan which describes how the students will be supervised while living on campus. The security plan shall include the use of security personnel and cameras. 2. Knox box access for Police personnel shall be provided at all exterior gates and at the entrances to the common areas of the residential units and /or buildings. 41: EXHIBIT C Conditions for Variance No 2012 -06 (b) Should the Planning Commission approve Variance No. 2012 -06 (b), the approval is subject to compliance, to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Manager, with all applicable sections of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, the California Administrative Code, the California Building Standards Code and all other applicable regulations. The applicant must comply in full with each and every condition listed below rip or to exercising the rights conferred by this variance. The applicant must remain in compliance with all conditions listed below throughout the life of the variance. Failure to comply with each and every condition may result in the revocation of the variance. A. Planning Division All proposed improvements must conform to the Site Plan Review approval of DP No. 2011 -31 and the staff report exhibits. 2. Any amendment to this conditional use permit must be submitted to the Planning Division for review. At that time, staff will determine if administrative relief is available or the variance must be amended. 3. The occupancy of the on -site housing units shall be limited to students attending the school, houseparent's of the family units, and the children of the houseparent's. No other occupants are permitted on the premises. 4. Prior to issuance of building permits, a Student Vehicle Registration Program shall be submitted for review and approval. The Program needs to be designed to restrict parking to approximately 80 student drivers commuting to the campus on a regular basis. 5. Prior to issuance of building permits, a Parking Management Plan identifying off -site parking for special events needs to be approved by the Planning Division. Any reciprocal parking agreement associated with the Plan must also be secured prior permit issuance. 6. Prior to issuance of building permits, the lot merger for the project shall be recorded. AUGUST 13, 2012 PAGE 2OF2 B. Police Department Prior to issuance of building permits, provide a security plan which describes how the students will be supervised while living on campus. The security plan shall include the use of security personnel and cameras. 2. Knox box access for Police personnel shall be provided at all exterior gates and at the entrances to the common areas of the residential units and /or buildings. I EXHIBIT D Conditions for Variance No 2012 -06 (c) Should the Planning Commission approve Variance No. 2012 -06 (c), the approval is subject to compliance, to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Manager, with all applicable sections of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, the California Administrative Code, the California Building Standards Code and all other applicable regulations. The applicant must comply in full with each and every condition listed below prior to exercising the rights conferred by this variance. The applicant must remain in compliance with all conditions listed below throughout the life of the variance. Failure to comply with each and every condition may result in the revocation of the variance. A. Planning Division All proposed improvements must conform to the Site Plan Review approval of DP No. 2011 -31 and the staff report exhibits. 2. Any amendment to this conditional use permit must be submitted to the Planning Division for review. At that time, staff will determine if administrative relief is available or the variance must be amended. 3. The occupancy of the on -site housing units shall be limited to students attending the school, houseparent's of the family units, and the children of the houseparent's. No other occupants are permitted on the premises. 4. Prior to issuance of building permits, a Student Vehicle Registration Program shall be submitted for review and approval. The Program needs to be designed to restrict parking to approximately 80 student drivers commuting to the campus on a regular basis. 5. Prior to issuance of building permits, a Parking Management Plan identifying off -site parking for special events needs to be approved by the Planning Division. Any reciprocal parking agreement associated with the Plan must also be secured prior permit issuance. 6. Prior to issuance of building permits, the lot merger for the project shall be recorded. 31 B -241 AUGUST 13, 2012 PAGE 2 OF 2 B. Police Department Prior to issuance of building permits, provide a security plan which describes how the students will be supervised while living on campus. The security plan shall include the use of security personnel and cameras. 2. Knox box access for Police personnel shall be provided at all exterior gates and at the entrances to the common areas of the residential units and /or buildings. I