Loading...
19-1015_RIVER STREET SJC, LLC_Agenda Report_D1_Attachment_11TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM DATE TO CONTACT FROM SUBJECT September 19, 2019 City of San Juan Capistrano David Contreras, Principal Planner William Halligan, Esq., Principal Yliana Ortega, Project Planner Nicole Morse, Esq., Principal (T&B Planning) Technical Memorandum: Environmental Compliance of the Project Modification to the River Street Marketplace EIR PROJECT NUMBER SJC-11 Introduction and Purpose of Memo The project applicant is seeking to make modifications the Proposed Project as analyzed in the River Street Marketplace Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”). This memorandum analyzes these changes and concludes that the potential impacts associated with such changes are equal to or less than the impacts disclosed in the EIR. The Original Proposed Project The originally proposed River Street Marketplace Project (“Proposed Project”), as analyzed in the River Street Marketplace Project EIR, included the demolition of the existing single-story sales office, sheds, and various hardscape improvements associated with Ito Nursery, a commercial nursery operating onsite. The Proposed Project also included removal of several trees, shrubs, and other landscape improvements throughout the project site, as well as removal of the existing chain-link fence that runs along the entire project boundary. Upon clearing, the 5.86-acre project site would be developed with a neighborhood-scale commercial and office development that highlights the agrarian history of the area. The development included 64,900 square feet of commercial and retail space in five buildings: Marketplace, Mercantile, Greenhouse, Red Barn, and Farmstead. The overall design concept for the project depicts a pedestrian-oriented development, with outdoor seating and dining areas that incorporate a California-native landscape palette. The Marketplace building was the largest of the proposed buildings with a 20,200-square-foot main floor and a 2,900-square-foot basement. The Marketplace would provide patrons with a variety of unique boutique retail shopping offerings, Tenants may include a juice bar, artisanal baked goods, farm fresh produce, gourmet food stalls, and craft beer and wine. The two-story Mercantile building would provide retail, restaurant, and fitness offerings on the ground floor (10,800 square feet), and office space on the second floor (8,000 square feet). The single-story Greenhouse would house approximately 10,900 square feet of restaurant and retail uses along the eastern portion of the site. The single-story, 7,500-square-foot Red Barn would house restaurant and/or brewery/winery uses in the northeast corner of the site. Along River Street, the single-story, 4,500-square-foot Farmstead would house restaurant uses I the northern portion of the site. September 19, 2019 | Page 2 Entitlements In addition to the Amendment to the Los Rios Specific Plan (“Specific Plan Amendment”), implementation of the Proposed Project requires approval of the following entitlement applications: General Plan Amendment, Code Amendment, Architectural Control, Grading Plan Modification, Flood Plain Land Use Permit, Tree Removal Permit, Site Plan Review, Sign Program, and Development Agreement, as detailed in the EIR. These entitlements would be considered concurrently with the Specific Plan Amendment and would be approved with the overall approval of the Specific Plan Amendment. Changes to the Proposed Project During the last several months, the project applicant has had several conversations with a previous opponent of the original proposed project. As a result of those conversations, and in response to the requests of the previous opponent, the project applicant is proposing to revise the Proposed Project (the modification described herein as “Modified Project”) to shift buildings further west, reduce building heights, and reduce overall square footage by 5,833 square feet (from 64,900 to 59,067 square feet). The revised site plan, dated September 13, 2019, prepared by Bickel Group Architecture is included as Appendix A of this memo. The Modified Project proposes a smaller Marketplace building of 9,100 square feet with a proposed tenant mix of 1,274 square feet of storage, 2,366 square feet of market uses, 2,366 square feet of retail shop use, and 3,094 square feet of quickserve/food uses. The 2-story Mercantile building now totals 22,443 square feet with uses that would consist of a 5,225 square feet of fitness/health club uses, 5,100 square feet of retail shops, and 2,425 square feet of quick-serve/food uses on the 1st level and 9,693 square feet of office/commercial space on the 2nd level. The Greenhouse multi-tenant building has a proposed floor area of 7,040 square feet, which would be occupied with 2,957 square feet of retail shops, 3,238 square feet quality restaurant space and 845 square feet of quick-serve/food uses. The single-story Red Barn is now 8,080 square feet and is now proposed to include 2,828 square feet of quality restaurant, 4,040 square feet of quick-serve/food uses, and 1,212 square feet of storage space, whereas the Farmstead building is a 4,500 square feet of quality restaurant space. The Modified Project also adds two (2) new buildings to the project that were not originally proposed–4,000 square feet Workshop and 3,904 square feet Hay Loft/Restroom building, which include two quality restaurants. In total, the Modified Project tenant mix is proposed to include 3,390 square feet of storage (includes restroom building), 5,225 square feet of fitness space, 9,693 square feet of office, a 2,366 square feet market, 13,251 square feet of retail shops, 14,738 square feet of quality restaurant, and 10,404 square feet of quick- serve/high-turnover (sit-down) restaurant, totaling 59,067 square feet within seven (7) buildings. The Modified Project would include 5,833 square feet less of floor area and 50 fewer on-site parking spaces. Appendix B, shows a project comparison table between the Proposed Project and Modified Project. CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088.5: Recirculation of an EIR Prior to Certification CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5(a) states, A lead agency is required to recirculate an EIR when significant new information is added to the EIR after public notice is given of the availability of the draft EIR for public review under Section 15087 but before certification. As used in this section, the term “information” can include changes in the project or environmental setting as well as additional data or other information. New information added to an EIR is not “significant” unless the EIR is changed in a way that deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of the project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect (including a feasible project alternative) that the project’s proponents have declined to implement. “Significant new information” requiring September 19, 2019 | Page 3 recirculation, include, for example, a disclosure showing that: (1) A new significant environmental impact would result from the project or from a new mitigation measures proposed to be implemented. (2) A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result unless mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of insignificance. (3) A feasible project alternative or mitigation measures considerably different from others previously analyzed would clearly lessen the environmental impacts of the project, but the project’s proponents decline to adopt it. (4) The draft EIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comment were precluded. Based on the analysis below, the proposed modifications would not result in new significant impacts that would require circulation. The analysis below, which discusses environmental topic areas listed in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, demonstrates that no substantial changes are proposed and no major revisions of the River Street Marketplace Project EIR would be required due to the project modifications. Analysis of Environmental Impacts Aesthetics. Section 5.1 of the EIR discusses the potential impacts to the visual character of the project site and its surroundings associated with implementation of the Proposed Project. The Modified Project still proposes a neighborhood-scale commercial and office development that highlights the agrarian history of the area. The type and scale of development on of the Modified Project does not differ substantially from that analyzed in the River Street Marketplace Project EIR. The overall square footage of the Modified Project would result in a reduction of 5,833 square feet. For buildings already analyzed in the Draft EIR, all heights remain the same or reduced than previously analyzed, and new buildings on site are 30 feet or below which remains within or under the 25 to 35-foot range that was proposed for all River Street Marketplace buildings on site in the EIR. See the table below for a height comparison. Table 1. Comparison of Building Height BUILDING PREVIOUSLY ANALYZED HEIGHT MODIFIED HEIGHT Red Barn 30 30 Greenhouse 25 24 Farmstead 31 31 Mercantile 35 35 Marketplace 35 35 Hay Loft/Restrooms* -- 28 Workshop* -- 30 *Buildings represent new buildings proposed on site. »EIR View Simulation A. The view of the Modified Project from the northeast corner of the project site would be similar to the Proposed Project. Although the Red Barn would be modified to slightly increase building square footage by 580 square feet, the height and building placement would be the same. River Street and access would still be improved and would restrict automobile access. Landscaping and pedestrian amenities would be the same and would still highlight the project’s efforts to eschew September 19, 2019 | Page 4 contemporary building typologies and materials in favor of those that appear rustic, pedestrian-scaled and informal. As previously analyzed and disclosed, the Red Barn would remain visible from the northeast corner, but the proposed modifications would not result in any new significant aesthetic impacts. »EIR View Simulation B. The view from the northwest corner of the project site would still include tree screening the rear elevations of the Farmstead, Mercantile, and Marketplace. The Modified Project would move the Mercantile building further west towards an area where surface parking was originally located. The Marketplace building moved from the south lot to the north end of the project site. Views from the northwest corner of the site would change from foreground views of a parking lot and mid- ground views of buildings to foreground views of the Mercantile and Marketplace buildings. Although the Mercantile and Marketplace buildings would be the same height (35 feet) they would appear taller due to proximity to the western site boundary. However, this view does not provide existing views of the Los Rios Historic District. Similar to the Proposed Project, the Modified Project would obstruct existing views of distant ridgelines. As stated in the EIR, these views are already fragmented under existing conditions and do not currently provide panoramic views. Therefore, impacts would be similar to the Proposed Project and less than significant. »EIR View Simulation C. The view from the southeast corner would remain largely the same as the originally Proposed Project, save the fact that the introduction of trees in the project’s parking area would screen views of the Farmstead building whereas originally it screened the Marketplace building. Therefore, impacts would be the same as the Proposed Project. »EIR View Simulation D. The vantage point looking north from the southern boundary of the project site would not differ substantially from what was previously analyzed. The foreground view would remain dominated by trees and surface parking. The mid-ground view would be of the Farmstead building (31 feet in height), and the side of the Mercantile building (35 feet in height) versus the Marketplace building. As with the originally Proposed Project, this view would be dominated by trees within the proposed parking lot. The Modified Project would not result in degradation of existing views and impacts would be less than significant. Site layout remains largely similar, with buildings all centered around a central green area, maintaining themed buildings and an earth-toned palette. The addition of the “Hay Loft/Restrooms” structure would be between the Red Barn and the “Greenhouse” and would not obstruct views more so than what was previously analyzed. The “Workshop,” another new building proposed, would be adjacent to the relocated Mercantile building (west towards Paseo Adelanto) and the relocated Farmstead building (south towards the surface parking lot). Since the Workshop building is 30 feet in height and is shorter than both the Mercantile and Farmstead building, it would be blocked by surrounding buildings and would not obstruct views previously analyzed. The Marketplace would be relocated to the northern portion of the site where the Farmstead building previously was proposed. Like the Proposed Project, the Modified Project would be required to comply with applicable regulations and provisions identified in the River Street Marketplace Project EIR related to aesthetics to assure that impacts would remain less than significant, This includes compliance with the California Building Code: Building Energy Efficiency Standards, City of San Juan Capistrano Municipal Code and General Plan, Citywide Architectural Design Guidelines, and the Los Rios Specific Plan. No mitigation was identified in the circulated EIR and no new mitigation would be required as a result of the Modified Project. Therefore, no new impacts or substantially greater impacts than previously analyzed would occur. September 19, 2019 | Page 5 Air Quality. Section 5.2 of the EIR evaluates the potential for the proposed project to impact air quality in a local and regional context. Although implementation of the project modifications could adversely impact air quality from construction and operation activities, the type and scale of development does not differ from that analyzed in the River Street Marketplace Project EIR. The decrease in square footage by 5,833 square feet would result in a reduction in construction emissions. The project modifications would result in a slight increase of fill from 19,500 cubic yards (cy) of fill to 20,276 cy of fill and a reduction in cut from 2,684 cy to 647 cy of cut, resulting in an overall reduction of 1,261 cy of earth movement. The reduction in square footage and earth movement would result in slightly less impacts to construction-related air quality and does not change any of the conclusions in the River Street Marketplace Project EIR. The Modified Project would place a neighborhood-scale commercial and office development on the project site. As described in the Trip Generation Analysis prepared by LLG dated September 13, 2019, the Modified Project would generate 2,382 daily trips, of which 132 would occur in the a.m. peak hour and 150 would occur in the p.m. peak hour. This would result in a reduction of 329 trips and associated air emissions compared to the originally Proposed Project. Like the Proposed Project, the Modified Project could result in the use of standard onsite mechanical equipment such as heating, ventilation, and air conditioning units in addition to occasional use of landscaping equipment for project site maintenance, but air pollutant emissions generated from these activities would be nominal. The Modified Project would be required to implement Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-3, as with the Proposed Project, to assure that impacts would be less than significant. No new impacts or substantially greater impacts than previously analyzed would occur. Biological Resources. Section 5.3 of the EIR describes the biological resources present within the City of San Juan Capistrano. Biological resource impacts would be similar to that analyzed in the River Street Marketplace Project EIR because the development area would remain the same. The Modified Project would not result in development on previously designated sensitive habitat or areas set aside for preservation. The same mitigation measure (see BIO-1) would be required to reduce impacts from tree removal to less than significant. As a result, no new significant environmental impacts would occur and no revisions to the EIR analysis is required. Cultural Resources. Section 5.4 of the EIR evaluates the potential for the Proposed Project to impact cultural resources in the City of San Juan Capistrano. The project site contains one historical resource, River Street, and is bordered by the Los Rios Historic District to the north and east. Additionally, the portion of Los Rios Street that would be trenched for sewer pipe upsizing, is a historical resource, however, it is outside of the boundary of the Los Rios Historic District. These resources are listed under the IHCL, CRHR, and NRHP. As with the Proposed Project, implementation of the Modified Project would cover the same development area and could uncover cultural resources during grading activities. Historical, archaeological, paleontological resource impacts would be the same as those previously analyzed in the EIR and would remain consistent with the Los Rios Specific Plan. Furthermore, existing regulations and standard conditions would be complied with as identified in the River Street Marketplace Project EIR Additionally, upon implementation of mitigation measures (see CUL-1 and CUL-2), impacts would remain less than significant. As a result, no new significant environmental impacts would occur and no revisions to the EIR analysis are required. September 19, 2019 | Page 6 Geology and Soils. Section 5.5 of the EIR evaluates the potential for implementation of the Proposed Project to impact geological and soil resources in the City of San Juan Capistrano. The Modified Project would not require a change to the geology and soils analysis. Since the Modified Project would occur in the footprint of what was already analyzed, new or more severe impacts would not occur. Like the Proposed Project, existing buildings would be removed and graded. The project would still be required to comply with existing regulations and standard conditions identified as a part of the River Street Marketplace Project EIR. No new impacts or substantially greater impacts than previously analyzed would occur. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Section 5.6 of the EIR evaluates the potential for implementation of the Proposed Project to cumulatively contribute to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions impacts. Implementation of the Modified Project would result in a reduction of vehicle trips, VMT and overall building square footage compared to the Proposed Project. Therefore, the Modified Project would result in a reduction in GHG emissions. Also, the Modified Project would still be required to comply with applicable regulations and standard conditions. As no mitigation was identified for the previously analyzed project, project modifications would not trigger the need for additional mitigation. No new impacts or substantially greater impacts than previously analyzed would occur. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Section 5.7 of the EIR evaluates the potential impacts of the Proposed Project on human health and the environment due to exposure to hazardous materials or conditions associated with the project site, project construction, and project operations. All impacts were determined to be less than significant. Like the Proposed Project, the Modified Project would involve the use of hazardous materials during construction. However, construction materials such as fuels, paints, and solvents would be used in limited quantities and would not pose a significant safety hazard. Use and transport of hazardous materials would be required to comply with the appropriate state standards, guidelines, and responsible agencies. Long-term operation of the project under this alternative would be similar to the Proposed Project, and involve small amounts of hazardous materials, such as cleaners, paints, fertilizers, and pesticides for cleaning and maintenance purposes. However, the proposed land uses are not associated with uses that use, generate, store, or transport large quantities of hazardous materials; such uses generally include manufacturing, industrial, medical (e.g., hospital), and other similar uses. The Modified Project would occur within the footprint of what was previously analyzed, no new impacts related to hazards would occur. No mitigation was identified in the EIR and as the Modified Project would still be required to comply with applicable regulations and standard conditions to assure that impacts would remain less than significant. No new mitigation would be required and no new impacts or substantially greater impacts than previously analyzed would occur. Hydrology and Water Quality. Section 5.8 of the EIR evaluates the potential impacts of the Proposed Project to hydrology and water quality conditions in the City of San Juan Capistrano. The project site is developed with nursery uses and runoff is conveyed by surface streets or local storm drains to regional storm drainage facilities. Like the Proposed Project, the Modified Project would reduce peak flow rates by implementing low- impact development features and providing a treatment/infiltration system that reduces runoff volumes conveyed to the drainage system. Therefore, it is anticipated that the Modified Project would have a beneficial impact on area hydrology and water quality at completion. As the development footprint and amount of impervious surfaces would remain the same, no new impacts or substantially greater impacts than previously analyzed would occur. Furthermore, the project would still be required to comply with applicable regulations and standard conditions to assure that impacts would remain less than significant. September 19, 2019 | Page 7 The EIR did not identify mitigation for impacts related to hydrology and water quality and as the Modified Project would be within the scope of what was already analyzed, no new mitigation would be required. No revisions to the EIR analysis are required. Land Use and Planning. Section 5.9 of the EIR evaluates the potential impacts to land use in the City of San Juan Capistrano from implementation of the Proposed Project. The EIR concluded that the Proposed Project would be consistent with regional and local plans, policies, and regulations, specifically in respect to applicable regional planning guidelines and strategies of SCAG’s RTP/SCS, and local plans including the City of San Juan Capistrano General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, Los Rios Specific Plan, and Historic Town Center Master Plan. The Modified Project results in minor changes to the site plan and reductions in overall square footage. The revised site plan and specific plan amendment would also be consistent with regional and local plans, policies, and regulations. No new or more severe impacts would occur regarding land use and planning due to project modifications. Furthermore, the Modified Project would still have to comply with applicable regulations identified in the EIR. The Modified Project would not result in new impacts or substantially greater impacts, no mitigation would be required. Noise. Section 5.10 of the EIR discusses the fundamentals of sound; examines federal, state, and local noise guidelines, policies, and standards; reviews noise levels at existing receptor locations; evaluates potential noise impacts associated with the Proposed Project; and provides mitigation to reduce noise impacts at sensitive residential locations. The Modified Project would still generate construction-related and operational noise. The highest expected construction-related noise level for the previously analyzed project was found to be up to approximately 79 dBa Leq at residential receptors to the east. For individual equipment items that could be used very near a project site boundary, construction activity noise levels could be potentially higher and exceed an increase of 20 dB above average levels. Even with implementation of mitigation, it was found that construction-related noise levels could be approximately 75 dBa Leq and would therefore exceed the 55 dBa Leq speech interference threshold, resulting in a significant and unavoidable impact. The Modified Project would result in similar peak construction-related noise levels as previously analyzed. Reduction in building development intensity would incrementally reduce the length of project- related construction noise impacts, but not peak construction noise volumes. Due to the peak construction noise volumes and distance to sensitive activities the Modified Project would slightly lessen impacts when compared to the Proposed Project but remain significant and unavoidable. The reduction in vehicle trips would slightly reduce the operational traffic-related noise impacts. Furthermore, the Modified Project would still be required to comply with applicable regulations and Mitigation Measure N-1. No new impacts or substantially greater impacts than previously analyzed would occur. Public Services. Section 5.11 of the EIR addresses the Proposed Project’s impacts to fire and police services. As project modifications would include less square footage, and it is expected that existing services would be adequate to serve the project even with modifications. The same commercial and office uses would be served on site. As part of the Proposed Project, public service providers were contacted to determine whether development would adversely impact existing and future planned levels of service and resources. Fire and police protection service providers determined the project would not result in any adverse impacts to their services and resources. Therefore, since the Modified Project would result in a reduction in square footage, this topic was adequately analyzed by the IR. Furthermore, the project would still be required to comply with the following applicable regulations identified in the EIR to assure that impacts would remain less than significant. Therefore, no new impacts or substantially greater impacts than previously analyzed would occur and no mitigation would be required. Transportation and Traffic. Section 5.12 of the EIR evaluates the potential for implementation of the Proposed Project to result in transportation and traffic impacts in the City of San Juan Capistrano. Revised September 19, 2019 | Page 8 trip generation based on trip modifications would be less than that identified in the EIR. The Proposed Project was forecast to generate 2,711 daily trips (one half arriving and one half departing), with 152 trips (92 inbounds, 60 outbound) in the AM peak hour and 176 trips (106 inbound, 70 outbound) in the PM peak hour. The Modified Project trip generation would be lower than the trip generation analyzed in the Traffic Impact Analysis for the EIR with 2,382 daily trips, of which 132 would occur in the AM peak hour and 150 would occur in the PM peak hour. This would result in a reduction of 329 daily trips, 20 AM peak hour and 25 PM peak hour trips compared to the project analyzed in the Traffic Study. Furthermore, the project would still have to comply with applicable regulations pertaining to transportation. Additionally, mitigation identified in the EIR (see TR-1 and TR-2) would also be implemented. Therefore, no new impacts or substantially greater impacts than previously analyzed would occur. Tribal Cultural Resources. Section 5.13 of the EIR evaluates the potential for the Proposed Project to impact tribal cultural resources in the City of San Juan Capistrano. Tribal cultural resources impacts to landscapes, sacred places, or objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe would be the same as those previously analyzed in the EIR. As part of the project modifications, no development would occur in areas that were not previously analyzed in the EIR. Mitigation measures required to protect resources would remain the same (see CUL-1). As a result, no new significant environmental impacts are associated with the proposed project modifications and no revisions to the EIR analysis are required. Utilities and Service Systems. Section 5.14 of the EIR evaluates the potential for Proposed Project to impact utilities, services systems, and energy. The type and scale of the Modified Project is smaller than what was analyzed for the River Street Marketplace Project EIR. Therefore, this topic was adequately analyzed by the River Street Marketplace Project EIR. Furthermore, the project would still be required to comply with applicable regulations. Additionally, mitigation identified in the EIR (see Mitigation Measure USS-1) would also be implemented to assure that impacts would remain less than significant. Therefore, no new impacts or substantially greater impacts than previously analyzed would occur. Analysis of Draft EIR Recirculation Requirements 1.Would a new significant environmental impact result from the project or from a new mitigation measure proposed to be implemented? No. As detailed above, the Modified Project would not require major revisions to the EIR because the proposed modifications would not result in any physical changes to the environment that would cause new significant effects or increase the severity of previously identified cumulative impacts. No new mitigation measures are proposed. Therefore, recirculation is not required under State CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5(a)(1). 2.Would a substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact result unless mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of insignificance? No. Since the circulation of the EIR, no new, previously unknown information of substantial importance has come to light that would affect the mitigation measures that were considered in the EIR. The Modified Project would reduce all environmental effects that were previously analyzed, in the EIR. No new mitigation measures are proposed, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program remains adequate to mitigate impacts of the Modified Project. Therefore, recirculation is not required under State CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5(a)(2). September 19, 2019 | Page 9 3.Would a feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others previously analyzed clearly lessen the environmental impacts of the project, but the project’s proponents decline to adopt it? No. The Modified Project constitutes an alternative that would lessen environmental impacts and is proposed to be adopted. The following alternatives were considered for the circulated EIR for the River Street Marketplace Project: alternative development areas, reduced construction noise alternatives, no project/no build alternative, no project/existing Los Rios Specific Plan alternative, and reduced intensity alternative. No alternatives were found to be environmentally superior whilst also attaining project objectives and a City revenue-generating tax base. The Modified Project is within the scope of what was already analyzed and would decrease total square footage by a total of 5,833 square feet. No new information regarding alternatives not already analyzed has been obtained and existing alternative conclusions would be consistent with the circulated EIR. Therefore, recirculation is not required under State CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5(a)(3). 4.Was the draft EIR so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comment were precluded? No. No issues relating to the draft EIR have been raised, calling into question the value of the public review and comment period. A meaningful public review and comment period occurred from January 30,2019 to March 18, 2019 on the Draft EIR. The EIR is considered adequate and project modifications are insignificant and minimal in nature and would not deem the existing analysis for the circulated EIR inadequate. CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5(b) states: Recirculation is not required where the new information added to the EIR merely clarifies or amplifies or makes insignificant modifications in an adequate EIR. New information obtained by the project applicant includes square footage modifications to the proposed structures and the addition of two new buildings. Overall, square footage would decrease by 5,833 square feet from the project analyzed in the River Street Marketplace Project EIR. This would constitute an insignificant modification as the reduction in square footage would not result in changes in previously identified impacts. CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5(e) states: A decision not to recirculate an EIR must be supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record. Recirculation of the EIR is not required unless there is substantial evidence that modifications to the project would significantly increase the severity of the impacts identified in the previous EIR. Under CEQA, “substantial evidence” includes facts, reasonable assumptions predicated upon facts, and expert opinion supported by facts. The analysis herein provides substantial evidence as to why project modifications would not require the recirculation of the River Street Marketplace EIR given its consistency with existing analyses. As identified above, proposed modifications would not require major revisions to the circulated EIR because no new significant environmental effects or substantial increase in the severity of previously identified September 19, 2019 | Page 10 significant effects would occur. The overall amount of development proposed is less than what was analyzed in the project for the River Street Marketplace Project EIR. The project modifications would not physically change the environment such that an increase in previously identified cumulative impacts would occur. Furthermore, project modifications would not cause a substantial increase in the severity of cumulative impacts identified in the River Street Marketplace Project EIR. Appendix A. Site Plan Appendix B. Trip Generation Analysis and Parking Study Addendum River Development Project N:\3900\2173910 - River Street Development, San Juan Capistrano\1 - Report\3910 River Street Traffic and Parking Addendum 09-19-2019.doc September 19, 2019 Mr. David Contreras Principal Planner City of San Juan Capistrano 32400 Paseo Adelanto San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 O:949-443-6320 F: 949-202-5383 dcontreras@sanjuancapistrano.org www.sanjuancapistrano.org LLG Reference: 2.17.3910.1 Subject: Trip Generation Analysis and Parking Study Addendum River Street Development Project San Juan Capistrano, California Dear Mr. Contreras: As requested, Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers (LLG) is pleased to submit this Trip Generation Analysis and Parking Study Addendum associated with an amendment to the description/development totals of the proposed River Street Development Project (herein after referred to as Project) in the City of San Juan Capistrano, California. The proposed Project site, which is currently developed as a plant nursery, is generally located north of Del Obispo Street, east of Paseo Adelanto, and west of Los Rios Street. The Project site is located within the previously approved Los Rios Specific Plan area and will require an amendment of the Specific Plan. The proposed Project was previously analyzed as part of the Revised Traffic Impact Analysis Report for the River Street Development, prepared by LLG, dated November 19, 2018. The November 2019 TIA will serve a reference and database for this evaluation. This letter summarizes the trip generation forecast potential and parking requirements for the proposed Amended Project and compares it to the Original Project for the site. City of San Juan Capistrano September 19, 2019 Page 2 N:\3900\2173910 - River Street Development, San Juan Capistrano\1 - Report\3910 River Street Traffic and Parking Addendum 09-19-2019.doc PROJECT DESCRIPTION The River Street Development project site is located in the City of San Juan Capistrano in southern Orange County. The City encompasses approximately 14 square-miles of land (8,975 acres) within the County. The City is bordered on the north by the Cities of Mission Viejo and Laguna Niguel. The City of Laguna Niguel also borders San Juan Capistrano on the west, while the Cities of Dana Point and San Clemente border San Juan Capistrano to the south. To the east, the City is bordered by un-incorporated land within the County of Orange. Original Project Development Description The Original Project included development of five (5) commercial buildings totaling 64,900 square-feet (SF) on 5.86 acres of land. The Marketplace building totaled 23,100 SF, which consisted of 3,200 SF of storage, a 5,970 SF market, 5,970 SF of retail shop use, and 7,960 SF of quick-serve/food uses. The 2-story Mercantile building totaled 18,800 SF that consisted of a 4,500 SF of fitness/health club uses, 4,300 SF of retail shops, and 2,000 SF of quick-serve/food uses on the 1st level and 8,000 SF of office space on the 2nd level. The 10,900 SF Greenhouse multi-tenant building included 4,600 SF of retail shops, 5,000 SF quality restaurant space and 1,300 SF of quick-serve/food uses. The single-story 7,500 SF Red Barn was proposed as a quality restaurant and/or brewery/winery use, whereas the Farmstead building was identified as 4,600 SF of quality restaurant space. When combined, the Original Project tenant mix would consists of 3,200 SF of storage, 4,500 SF of fitness space, 8,000 SF of office, a 5,970 SF market, 14,870 SF of retail shops, 17,100 SF of quality restaurant, and 11,260 SF of quick-serve/high- turnover (sit-down) restaurant, totaling 64,900 SF within five (5) buildings. The Original Project site plan identified approximately 292 (+/-5%) on-site parking spaces. Table A presents the Original Project development summary. City of San Juan Capistrano September 19, 2019 Page 3 N:\3900\2173910 - River Street Development, San Juan Capistrano\1 - Report\3910 River Street Traffic and Parking Addendum 09-19-2019.doc Amended Project Development Description As currently proposed, the Amended Project includes site plan and land use modifications that will result in the development of a total floor area of 59,067 SF within seven (7) buildings. The Marketplace building now totals 9,100 SF with a proposed tenant mix of 1,274 SF of storage, a 2,366 SF market, 2,366 SF of retail shop use, and 3,094 SF of quick- serve/food uses. The 2-story Mercantile building now totals 22,443 SF with uses that would consist of a 5,225 SF of fitness/health club uses, 5,100 SF of retail shops, and 2,425 SF of quick-serve/food uses on the 1st level and 9,693SF of office/commercial space on the 2nd level. The Greenhouse multi-tenant building has a proposed floor area of 7,040 SF, which would be occupied with 2,957 SF of retail shops, 3,238 SF quality restaurant space and 845 SF of quick-serve/food uses. The single-story Red Barn is now 8,080 SF and is now proposed to include 2,828 SF of quality restaurant, 4,040 SF of quick-serve/food uses, and 1,212 SF of storage space, whereas the Farmstead building is a 4,500 SF of quality restaurant space. The two (2) new buildings now proposed as part of the Amended Project consists of two quality restaurants, the 4,000 SF Work Shop and 3,904 SF Hay Loft/Restroom building. In total, the Amended Project tenant mix is proposed to include 3,390 SF of storage (includes restroom building), 5,225 SF of fitness space, 9,693 SF of office, a 2,366 SF market, 13,251 SF of retail shops, 14,738 SF of quality restaurant, and 10,404 SF of quick-serve/high-turnover (sit-down) restaurant, totaling 59,067 SF within eight (8) buildings. The Amended Project site plan, dated September 13, 2019, prepared by Bicker Group Architecture, Attachment 1 of this letter report, identifies 242 on-site parking spaces. Table A also summarizes the proposed uses and associated floor areas for the Amended Project, and provides a comparison to the Original Project development. When the Amended Project is compared to the Original Project, the Amended Project has 5,833 SF less floor area and 50 fewer on-site parking spaces. Further, in reviewing the mix of tenants, the percent allocation of floor area to the Project’s various land uses (i.e. retail, restaurant, office, fitness, etc.) is very similar. City of San Juan Capistrano September 19, 2019 Page 4 N:\3900\2173910 - River Street Development, San Juan Capistrano\1 - Report\3910 River Street Traffic and Parking Addendum 09-19-2019.doc TRAFFIC GENERATION FORECAST Traffic generation is expressed in vehicle trip ends, defined as one-way vehicular movements, either entering or exiting the generating land use. For this analysis, generation equations and/or rates used in the traffic forecasting procedure for the Amended Project as well as the Original Project uses have been estimated based on the most current version of the Trip Generation Manual and can be found in the 10th Edition of Trip Generation, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), [Washington, D.C., 2017]. Table B and Table C summarize the trip generation rates/equations used in forecasting the vehicular trips generated by the Amended Project and the Original Project, respectively. As shown in the upper half of these tables, the trip generation potential of the proposed Project was estimated using the following ITE Land Use Codes, consistent with the approach documented in the November 2018 TIA. ITE Land Use Code 151: Mini-Warehouse ITE Land Use Code 492: Health/Fitness Club ITE Land Use Code 710: General Office Building ITE Land Use Code 820: Shopping Center ITE Land Use Code 850: Supermarket ITE Land Use Code 931: Quality Restaurant ITE Land Use Code 932: High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant It should be noted that the trip generation for the retail, health/fitness club, office, and restaurant components of the Amended Project and Original Project includes adjustments for the internal trip capture within the Project site. The internal trip capture is based on the procedure outlined in Chapter 6 – Trip Generation for Mixed- Use Development of the Trip Generation Manual, 3rd Edition, published by ITE [2017]. Further, to account for trips that come directly from the everyday traffic stream on the adjoining streets (i.e., Del Obispo Street), applicable pass-by reduction factors were incorporated into the Daily, AM peak hour and PM peak hour traffic forecasts for the retail and restaurant components. Based on the data provided in the Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition, published by ITE [2017], a pass-by reduction factor of 34%, 43% and 44% were utilized for the PM peak hour traffic for the retail, high-turnover restaurant and quality restaurant components of the Project, respectively. A pass-by reduction factor of 10% was estimated for the daily and AM peak hour traffic for the retail, high-turnover restaurant and quality restaurant components of the Project. City of San Juan Capistrano September 19, 2019 Page 5 N:\3900\2173910 - River Street Development, San Juan Capistrano\1 - Report\3910 River Street Traffic and Parking Addendum 09-19-2019.doc Amended Project Trip Generation As shown in the lower half of Table B, the development of the Amended Project is forecast to generate 2,382 daily trips (one half arriving and one half departing), with 132 trips (82 inbound, 50 outbound) produced in the AM peak hour and 150 trips (106 inbound, 70 outbound) produced in the PM peak hour on a “typical” weekday. Original Project Trip Generation A review of Table C presents the trip generation forecast for the Original Project, which was previously presented in the November 2018 TIA as Table 5-1, shows that the previously proposed development is forecast to generate 2,711 daily trips (one half arriving and one half departing), with 152 trips (92 inbound, 60 outbound) produced in the AM peak hour and 176 trips (106 inbound, 70 outbound) produced in the PM peak hour on a “typical” weekday. Amended Project vs. Original Project Trip Generation Comparison The review of the last row of values in Table B shows that a comparison of the Amended Project trips with that of the Original Development indicates that the net trip generation for the Amended Project would result in 329 fewer daily trips, 20 fewer AM peak hour trips and 26 fewer PM peak hour trips. PARKING ANALYSIS Similar to the methodology used in the assessing the requirement of the Original Project, the parking analysis for the Amended Project was conducted by utilizing the parking ratios defined in the City of San Juan Capistrano Municipal Code and comparing it to the proposed parking supply. City Code Parking Requirements The code parking calculation for the Amended Project was again calculated using parking code requirements per the City of San Juan Capistrano Municipal Code Title 9, Chapter 3, Sec. 9-3.535 Parking (h) Land Use Parking Ratios in the Historic Town Center Master Plan Area for Nonresidential Properties. The Project site is located within the Historic Town Center Master Plan Parking Area and the hence the following parking ratios were used to determine the required parking of the Amended Project: City of San Juan Capistrano September 19, 2019 Page 6 N:\3900\2173910 - River Street Development, San Juan Capistrano\1 - Report\3910 River Street Traffic and Parking Addendum 09-19-2019.doc Restaurants (sit down and take out) = 1 Parking Space per 100 square feet (SF) of dining or drinking area (kitchens, prep areas and storage are excluded from this area). General Retail = 1 Parking Space per 400 SF of building or tenant lease area. General Office = 1 Parking Space per 400 SF of building or tenant lease area. Service Uses (i.e. markets, grocery stores, supermarkets, etc.) = 1 Parking Space per 300 SF of building or tenant lease area. Health Studio (Other Uses consistent with Sec. 9-3.535 of Municipal Code) = 1 Parking Space per 150 SF of gross floor area (GFA). Table D summarizes the parking requirements for the Amended Project based on the City of San Juan Capistrano Municipal Code. Please note based on information provided by the City, approximately 55% of the total square-footage for restaurant uses will be used for dining/drinking area. Therefore, only 55% of the total square- footage for each restaurant use was applied to the code requirement of 1 space per 100 SF of dining/drinking area. As shown in the lower portion of Table D, application of the above-referenced parking code ratios to the Amended Project development totals results in a total code- parking requirement of 239 spaces. With a proposed on-site parking supply of 242 spaces, a theoretical parking surplus of 3 spaces is forecast. CONCLUSION Based on the findings of the trip generation analysis , the implementation of the Amended Project results in a lower trip generation forecast when compared to that of the Original Project. Given the results of trip generation comparison, LLG concludes that the peak hour trips resulting from implementation of the Amended Project would not create any new traffic impacts beyond those already previously identified for the Original Project as documented in the Revised Traffic Impact Analysis Report for the River Street Development, prepared by LLG, dated November 19, 2018. Further, the Amended Project is forecasted to experience a minimum parking surplus of 3 spaces under direct application of City Code requirements. Therefore, the results of the parking analysis indicate that the proposed on-site parking supply will be sufficient to accommodate the expected peak demand needs of the Amended Project tenant mix. City of San Juan Capistrano September 19, 2019 Page 7 N:\3900\2173910 - River Street Development, San Juan Capistrano\1 - Report\3910 River Street Traffic and Parking Addendum 09-19-2019.doc We appreciate the opportunity to prepare this investigation. Should you have any questions regarding this analysis, please call us at (949) 825-6175. Sincerely, Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers Richard E Barretto, P.E. Principal Attachment cc: File George Alvarez, Project Manager/City Traffic Engineer N:\3900\2173910 - River Street Development, San Juan Capistrano\1 - Report\3910 River Street Traffic and Parking Addendum 09-19-2019.doc TABLE A PROJECT DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY / MIX OF USES COMPARISON ORIGINAL PROJECT VS AMENDED PROJECT Land Use / Project Description Original Project Development Totals Amended Project Development Totals August 2019 site Plan River Street Development Marketplace o Market 5,970 SF (26%) 2,366 SF (26%) o Retail 5,970 SF (26%) 2,366 SF (26%) o High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant 7,960 SF (34%) 3,094 SF (34%) o Storage 3,200 SF (14%) 1,274 SF (14%) Marketplace Total 23,100 SF 9,100 SF Mercantile Level 1 o Fitness 4,500 SF (41%) 5,225 SF (41%) o Retail 4,300 SF (40%) 5,100 SF (40%) o High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant 2,000 SF (19%) 2,425 SF (19%) Mercantile Ground Floor Total 10,800 SF 12,750 SF Mercantile Level 2 o Office 8,000 SF (100%) 9,693 SF (100%) Mercantile Level 2 Total 8,000 SF 9,693 SF Greenhouse o Retail 4,600 SF (42%) 2,957 SF (42%) o Quality Restaurant 5,000 SF (46%) 3,238 SF (46%) o High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant 1,300 SF (12%) 845 SF (12%) Greenhouse Total 10,900 SF 7,040 SF Red Barn o Quality Restaurant 7,500 SF (100%) -- o Retail -- 2,828 SF (35%) o High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant -- 4,040 SF (50%) o Storage -- 1,212 SF (15%) Red Barn Total 7,500 SF 8,080 SF Farmstead o Quality Restaurant 4,600 SF (100%) 4,500 SF (100%) Farmstead Total 4,600 SF 4,500 SF New - Work Shop o Quality Restaurant ---- 4,000 SF (100%) Work Shop Total ---- 4,000 SF New - Hay Loft/Restrooms o Quality Restaurant o Restrooms ---- 3,000 SF (77% 904 SF (23%) Hay Loft Total ---- 3,904 SF Storage (restroom building) 3,200 SF (5%) 3,390 SF (6%) Fitness 4,500 SF (7%) 5,225 SF (9%) Office 8,000 SF (12%) 9,693 SF (16%) Market 5,970 SF (9%) 2,366 SF (4%) Retail 14,870 SF (23%) 13,251 SF (22%) Quality Restaurant 17,100 SF (26%) 14,738 SF (25%) High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant 11,260 SF (17%) 10,404 SF (18%) Total Project Development 64,900 SF (100%) 59,067 SF (100%) On-site Parking Supply 292 spaces 242 spaces N:\3900\2173910 - River Street Development, San Juan Capistrano\1 - Report\3910 River Street Traffic and Parking Addendum 09-19-2019.doc TABLE B AMENDED PROJECT TRIP GENERATION RATES AND FORECAST ITE Land Use Code/ Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Project Description 2-Way Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Trip Generation Factors: 1 • 151: Mini-Warehouse (TE/TSF)1.51 60% 40% 0.10 47% 53% 0.17 • 492: Health/Fitness Club 34.502 51% 49% 1.31 57% 43% 3.45 • 710: General Office Building (TE/TSF)9.74 86% 14% 1.16 16% 84% 1.15 • 820: Shopping Center (TE/TSF)37.75 62% 38% 0.94 48% 52% 3.81 • 850: Supermarket (TE/1000 SF)106.78 60% 40% 3.82 51% 49% 9.24 • 931: Quality Restaurant (TE/TSF)83.84 90% 10% 0.73 67% 33% 7.80 • 932: High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant (TE/TSF)112.18 55% 45% 9.94 62% 38% 9.77 Proposed Project: • Marketplace ○ 2,366 SF Retail 89 1 1 2 4 5 9 Internal Capture 3 -37 0 0 0 -2 -2 -4 Retail Subtotal 52 1 1 2 2 3 5 ○ 2,366 SF Market 253 5 4 9 11 11 22 Internal Capture3 -105 -1 0 -1 -6 -3 -9 Market Subtotal 148 4 4 8 5 8 13 ○ 3,094 SF High-Turnover Restaurant 347 17 14 31 19 11 30 Internal Capture3 -56 -1 -1 -2 -2 -3 -5 High-Turnover Restaurant Subtotal 291 16 13 29 17 8 25 Marketplace Subtotal 491 21 18 39 24 19 43 Pass-by (10% Daily, 10% AM, 34% PM) 4 -49 -2 -2 -4 -8 -7 -15 Marketplace Subtotal 442 19 16 35 16 12 28 ○ 1,274 SF Storage 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Marketplace Total 444 19 16 35 16 12 28 • Mercantile Level 1 ○ 5,225 SF Fitness 180 4 3 7 10 8 18 Internal Capture3 -75 0 -1 -1 -5 -3 -8 Fitness Subtotal 105 4 2 6 5 5 10 ○ 5,100 SF Retail 193 3 2 5 9 10 19 Internal Capture3 -80 0 -1 -1 -5 -3 -8 Retail Subtotal 113 3 1 4 4 7 11 Pass-by (10% Daily, 10% AM, 34% PM) -11 0 0 0 -1 -3 -4 Retail Subtotal 102 3 1 4 3 4 7 ○ 2,425 SF High-Turnover Restaurant 272 13 11 24 15 9 24 Internal Capture3 -44 -1 0 -1 -1 -3 -4 High-Turnover Restaurant Subtotal 228 12 11 23 14 6 20 Pass-by (10% Daily, 10% AM, 43% PM) 5 -23 -1 -1 -2 -6 -3 -9 High-Turnover Restaurant Subtotal 205 11 10 21 8 3 11 Mercantile Level 1 Total 412 18 13 31 16 12 28 • Mercantile Level 2 ○ 9,693 SF Office 94 9 2 11 2 9 11 Internal Capture3 -34 -1 -1 -2 -1 -2 -3 Mercantile Level 2 Total 60 8 1 9 1 7 8 • Greenhouse ○ 2,957 SF Retail 112 2 1 3 5 6 11 Internal Capture3 -46 0 0 0 -3 -2 -5 Retail Subtotal 66 2 1 3 2 4 6 Pass-by (10% Daily, 10% AM, 34% PM) -7 0 0 0 -1 -1 -2 Retail Subtotal 59 2 1 3 1 3 4 ○ 3,238 SF Quality Restaurant 271 2 0 2 17 8 25 Internal Capture3 -43 0 0 0 -2 -2 -4 Quality Restaurant Subtotal 228 2 0 2 15 6 21 Pass-by (10% Daily, 10% AM, 44% PM) 6 -23 0 0 0 -7 -2 -9 Quality Restaurant Subtotal 205 2 0 2 8 4 12 ○ 845 SF High-Turnover Restaurant 95 4 4 8 5 3 8 Internal Capture3 -15 0 0 0 0 -1 -1 High-Turnover Restaurant Subtotal 80 4 4 8 5 2 7 Pass-by (10% Daily, 10% AM, 43% PM)5 -8 0 -1 -1 -2 -1 -3 High-Turnover Restaurant Subtotal 72 4 3 7 3 1 4 Greenhouse Total 336 8 4 12 12 8 20 • Red Barn ○ 2,828 SF Retail 107 2 1 3 5 6 11 Internal Capture3 -44 0 0 0 -3 -1 -4 Retail Subtotal 63 2 1 3 2 5 7 Pass-by (10% Daily, 10% AM, 34% PM)4 -6 0 0 0 -1 -1 -2 Retail Subtotal 57 2 1 3 1 4 5 ○ 4,040 SF High-Turnover Restaurant 453 22 18 40 24 15 39 Internal Capture3 -73 -1 -1 -2 -2 -4 -6 High-Turnover Restaurant Subtotal 380 21 17 38 22 11 33 Pass-by (10% Daily, 10% AM, 43% PM) 5 -38 -2 -2 -4 -9 -5 -14 High-Turnover Restaurant Subtotal 342 19 15 34 13 6 19 ○ 1,212 SF Storage 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Red Barn Total 401 21 16 37 14 10 24 • Farmstead ○ 4,500 SF Quality Restaurant 377 3 0 3 23 12 35 Internal Capture3 -60 0 0 0 -2 -4 -6 Quality Restaurant Subtotal 317 3 0 3 21 8 29 Pass-by (10% Daily, 10% AM, 44% PM)6 -32 0 0 0 -9 -4 -13 Farmstead Total 285 3 0 3 12 4 16 • Work Shop ○ 4,000 SF Quality Restaurant 335 3 0 3 21 10 31 Internal Capture3 -54 0 0 0 -2 -3 -5 Quality Restaurant Subtotal 281 3 0 3 19 7 26 Pass-by (10% Daily, 10% AM, 44% PM) 6 -28 0 0 0 -8 -3 -11 Work Shop Total 253 3 0 3 11 4 15 • Hay Loft ○ 3,000 SF Quality Restaurant 252 2 0 2 15 8 23 Internal Capture3 -40 0 0 0 -2 -2 -4 Quality Restaurant Subtotal 212 2 0 2 13 6 19 Pass-by (10% Daily, 10% AM, 44% PM) 6 -21 0 0 0 -6 -2 -8 Hay Loft Total 191 2 0 2 7 4 11 Amended Project Total Trip Generation Potential: 2,382 82 50 132 89 61 150 Original Project Total Trip Generation (See Table 2): 2,711 92 60 152 106 70 176 Net Trip Comparison (Amended – Proposed): -329 -10 -10 -20 -17 -9 -26 1 Source: Trip Generation, 10th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Washington, D.C. (2017). Average rates used. 2 As there is no Daily average rate for ITE Land Use 492: Health/Fitness Club, the Daily rate has been estimated at ten times the PM average rate. 3 Consistent with the Trip Generation Handbook, published by ITE (2017), Project trip generation was adjusted to account for internal capture between the office, retail, and restaurant components of the Project. 4 Pass-by trips are trips made as intermediate stops on the way from an origin to a primary trip destination. Pass-by trips are attracted from traffic passing the site on adjacent streets, which contain direct access to the generator. A pass-by reduction of 10% (estimated) was applied to the Daily and AM peak hour Project trips and 34% (Source: Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition, published by ITE (2017)) was applied to the PM peak hour Project trips. 5 A pass-by reduction of 10% (estimated) was applied to the Daily and AM peak hour Project trips and 43% (Source: Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition, published by ITE (2017)) was applied to the PM peak hour Project trips. 6 A pass-by reduction of 10% (estimated) was applied to the Daily and AM peak hour Project trips and 44% (Source: Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition, published by ITE (2017)) was applied to the PM peak hour Project trips. N:\3900\2173910 - River Street Development, San Juan Capistrano\1 - Report\3910 River Street Traffic and Parking Addendum 09-19-2019.doc TABLE C ORIGINAL PROJECT TRIP GENERATION RATES AND FORECAST ITE Land Use Code/ Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Project Description 2-Way Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Trip Generation Factors: 7 • 151: Mini-Warehouse (TE/TSF)1.51 60% 40% 0.10 47% 53% 0.17 • 492: Health/Fitness Club 34.508 51% 49% 1.31 57% 43% 3.45 • 710: General Office Building (TE/TSF)9.74 86% 14% 1.16 16% 84% 1.15 • 820: Shopping Center (TE/TSF)37.75 62% 38% 0.94 48% 52% 3.81 • 850: Supermarket (TE/1000 SF)106.78 60% 40% 3.82 51% 49% 9.24 • 931: Quality Restaurant (TE/TSF)83.84 90% 10% 0.73 67% 33% 7.80 • 932: High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant (TE/TSF)112.18 55% 45% 9.94 62% 38% 9.77 Proposed Project: • Marketplace ○ LU 820: 5,970 SF Retail 225 4 2 6 11 12 23 Internal Capture 9 -92 -1 0 -1 -6 -4 -10 Retail Subtotal 133 3 2 5 5 8 13 ○ LU 850: 5,970 SF Market 637 14 9 23 28 27 55 Internal Capture9 -261 -1 -1 -2 -15 -8 -23 Market Subtotal 376 13 8 21 13 19 32 ○ LU 932: 7,960 SF High-Turnover Restaurant 893 43 36 79 48 30 78 Internal Capture9 -181 -1 -2 -3 -5 -11 -16 High-Turnover Restaurant Subtotal 712 42 34 76 43 19 62 Marketplace Subtotal 1,221 58 44 102 61 46 107 Pass-by (10% Daily, 10% AM, 34% PM)10 -122 -6 -4 -10 -21 -15 -36 Marketplace Subtotal 1,099 52 40 92 40 31 71 ○ LU 151: 3,200 SF Storage 5 0 0 0 0 1 1 Marketplace Total 1,104 52 40 92 40 32 72 • Mercantile Level 1 ○ LU 492: 4,500 SF Fitness 155 3 3 6 9 7 16 Internal Capture9 -63 0 -1 -1 -5 -2 -7 Fitness Subtotal 92 3 2 5 4 5 9 ○ LU 820: 4,300 SF Retail 162 2 2 4 8 8 16 Internal Capture9 -67 0 0 0 -4 -2 -6 Retail Subtotal 95 2 2 4 4 6 10 Pass-by (10% Daily, 10% AM, 34% PM)10 -10 0 0 0 -1 -2 -3 Retail Subtotal 85 2 2 4 3 4 7 ○ LU 932: 2,000 SF High-Turnover Restaurant 224 11 9 20 12 8 20 Internal Capture9 -46 -1 0 -1 -1 -3 -4 High-Turnover Restaurant Subtotal 178 10 9 19 11 5 16 Pass-by (10% Daily, 10% AM, 43% PM)11 -18 -1 -1 -2 -5 -2 -7 High-Turnover Restaurant Subtotal 160 9 8 17 6 3 9 Mercantile Level 1 Total 337 14 12 26 13 12 25 • Mercantile Level 2 ○ LU 710: 8,000 SF Office 78 8 1 9 1 8 9 Internal Capture9 -34 -1 0 -1 0 -2 -2 Mercantile Level 2 Total 44 7 1 8 1 6 7 • Greenhouse ○ LU 820: 4,600 SF Retail 174 2 2 4 9 9 18 Internal Capture9 -71 0 0 0 -5 -2 -7 Retail Subtotal 103 2 2 4 4 7 11 Pass-by (10% Daily, 10% AM, 34% PM)10 -10 0 0 0 -1 -3 -4 Retail Subtotal 93 2 2 4 3 4 7 ○ LU 931: 5,000 SF Quality Restaurant 419 4 0 4 26 13 39 Internal Capture9 -85 0 0 0 -3 -5 -8 Quality Restaurant Subtotal 334 4 0 4 23 8 31 Pass-by (10% Daily, 10% AM, 44% PM)12 -33 0 0 0 -10 -4 -14 Quality Restaurant Subtotal 301 4 0 4 13 4 17 ○ LU 932: 1,300 SF High-Turnover Restaurant 146 7 6 13 8 5 13 Internal Capture9 -30 0 -1 -1 -1 -2 -3 High-Turnover Restaurant Subtotal 116 7 5 12 7 3 10 Pass-by (10% Daily, 10% AM, 43% PM)11 -12 -1 0 -1 -3 -1 -4 High-Turnover Restaurant Subtotal 104 6 5 11 4 2 6 Greenhouse Total 498 12 7 19 20 10 30 • Red Barn ○ LU 931: 7,500 SF Quality Restaurant 629 5 0 5 40 19 59 Internal Capture9 -128 0 0 0 -5 -7 -12 Quality Restaurant Subtotal 501 5 0 5 35 12 47 Pass-by (10% Daily, 10% AM, 44% PM)12 -50 -1 0 -1 -15 -6 -21 Red Barn Total 451 4 0 4 20 6 26 • Farmstead ○ LU 931: 4,600 SF Quality Restaurant 386 3 0 3 24 12 36 Internal Capture9 -78 0 0 0 -3 -5 -8 Quality Restaurant Subtotal 308 3 0 3 21 7 28 Pass-by (10% Daily, 10% AM, 44% PM)12 -31 0 0 0 -9 -3 -12 Farmstead Total 277 3 0 3 12 4 16 Original Project Total Trip Generation Potential: 2,711 92 60 152 106 70 176 Notes: TE/TSF = Trip ends per Thousand Square-Feet, LU = Land Use Code 7 Source: Trip Generation, 10th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Washington, D.C. (2017). Average rates used. 8 As there is no Daily average rate for ITE Land Use 492: Health/Fitness Club, the Daily rate has been estimated at ten times the PM average rate. 9 Consistent with the Trip Generation Handbook, published by ITE (2017), Project trip generation was adjusted to account for internal capture between the office, retail, and restaurant components of the Project. 10 Pass-by trips are trips made as intermediate stops on the way from an origin to a primary trip destination. Pass-by trips are attracted from traffic passing the site on adjacent streets, which contain direct access to the generator. A pass-by reduction of 10% (estimated) was applied to the Daily and AM peak hour Project trips and 34% (Source: Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition, published by ITE (2017)) was applied to the PM peak hour Project trips. 11 A pass-by reduction of 10% (estimated) was applied to the Daily and AM peak hour Project trips and 43% (Source: Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition, published by ITE (2017)) was applied to the PM peak hour Project trips. 12 A pass-by reduction of 10% (estimated) was applied to the Daily and AM peak hour Project trips and 44% (Source: Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition, published by ITE (2017)) was applied to the PM peak hour Project trips. N:\3900\2173910 - River Street Development, San Juan Capistrano\1 - Report\3910 River Street Traffic and Parking Addendum 09-19-2019.doc TABLE D CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO CODE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AMENDED PROJECT Land Use ULI Profile City of San Juan Capistrano Code Parking Ratio [a] Spaces Required Amended Project Tenant Mix: • Marketplace Retail 2,366 SF Retail 1 space/400 SF 6 Market 2,366 SF Retail 1 space/300 SF 8 High-Turnover Restaurant 3,094 SF Family Restaurant 1 space/100 SF [b]17 Storage 1,274 SF N/A N/A [c]-- • Mercantile Level 1 Fitness 5,225 SF Health Club 1 space/150 SF 35 Retail 5,100 SF Retail 1 space/400 SF 13 High-Turnover Restaurant 2,425 SF Family Restaurant 1 space/100 SF [b]13 • Mercantile Level 2 Office 9,693 SF Office 1 space/400 SF 24 • Greenhouse Retail 2,957 SF Retail 1 space/400 SF 7 Quality Restaurant 3,238 SF Fine & Casual Dining 1 space/100 SF [b]18 High-Turnover Restaurant 845 SF Family Restaurant 1 space/100 SF [b]5 • Red Barn Retail 2,828 SF Retail 1 space/400 SF 7 High-Turnover Restaurant 4,040 SF Family Restaurant 1 space/100 SF [b]22 Storage 1,212 SF N/A N/A [c]-- • Farmstead Quality Restaurant 4,500 SF Fine & Casual Dining 1 space/100 SF [b]25 • Work Shop Quality Restaurant 4,000 SF Fine & Casual Dining 1 space/100 SF [b]22 • Hay Loft Quality Restaurant 3,000 SF Fine & Casual Dining 1 space/100 SF [b]17 • Restroom Restroom 904 SF N/A N/A [c]-- 239 242 3 Notes: Size City Code Parking Requirement Proposed Parking Supply [d] Parking Surplus/Deficiency (+/-) [a] = Source: City of City of San Juan Capistrano Municipal Code: Title 9, Chapter 3, Sec. 9-3.535 Parking (h) Land Use Parking Ratios in the Historic Town Center Master Plan Area for Nonresidential Properties, Ordinance #980. [b] = Based on information provided by the City, approximately 55% of the total square-footage (SF) for restaurant uses will be used for dining/drinking. Therefore, only 55% of the total SF for each restaurant use was applied to the code requirement of 1 space per 100 SF of dining/drinking area. [c] = Storage and Restroom area is assumed to be ancillary use, therefore no parking requirement is considered for this use. [d] = Proposed parking supply based on River Street Site Plan prepared by Bickel Group Architecture dated September 11, 2019. Please note the total proposed parking supply does not include the additional 20 on-street parking spaces on Paseo Adelanto.