19-1015_RIVER STREET SJC, LLC_Agenda Report_D1_Attachment_21
RESOLUTION NO. 19-10-15-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JUAN
CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
OF FACT PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT, CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT (SCH#2018011019) AND; ADOPTING THE MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE RIVER STREET
MARKETPLACE PROJECT; APPROVING GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT (GPA) 18-002 AND FLOOD PLAIN LAND USE PERMIT
(FP) 16-003 FOR THE SAME, LOCATED AT 31825 LOS RIOS STREET
(ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBERS 121-160-22, 28, 49) (APPLICANT:
DAN ALMQUIST, RIVER STREET SJC, LLC)
WHEREAS, Dan Almquist, River Street SJC, LLC, 610 Newport Center Drive,
Newport Beach, CA 92660 (the “Applicant”), is proposing the River Street Marketplace
Project, approximately 5.86-acre mixed use project including 59,067 square feet of
office/commercial development at 31825 Los Rios Street (the “Modified Project”); and,
WHEREAS, the entitlements sought include General Plan Amendment (GPA) 18-
002, Code Amendment (CA 16-003) to the Los Rios Specific Plan (SP 78-01), Flood
Plan Land Use Permit (FP) 16-003, Architectural Control (AC) 16-029, Grading Plan
Modification (GPM) 16-014, Tree Removal Permit (TRP) 16-047, Sign Program (SP) 16-
037, and Development Agreement (DA) 18-002; and
WHEREAS, Sheree & Doug Ito are the owners of the real property located at
31825 Los Rios Street (Assessor Parcel Numbers 121-160-22, 28, 49); and,
WHEREAS, on April 3, 2018, the City Council initiated a General Plan
Amendment to conduct an appropriate study to update the description of the Los Rios
Specific Plan contained in the General Plan as a result of the proposed Los Rios
Specific Plan Amendment requested for the proposed commercial development project
located on 5.86 acres; and,
WHEREAS, the Modified Project has been processed pursuant to Section 9-
2.307, General Plan Amendment 17-002, Section 9-2.309, Code Amendment 16-003,
Section 9-2.321, Flood Plain Land Use Permit 16-003, of Title 9, Land Use Code of the
City of San Juan Capistrano to establish the land use policies and zoning regulations;
and pursuant to Government Code Section 65864 et. seq., Development Agreement 18-
002, for the project site, in the form of the proposed River Street Marketplace; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to section 21067 of the Public Resources Code, and
section 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.),
the City of San Juan Capistrano is the lead agency for the proposed Modified Project;
and,
ATTACHMENT 2
2
WHEREAS, in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines section 15082, on
January 12, 2018, the City sent to the Office of Planning and Research and each
responsible and trustee agency a Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) stating that an
Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse Number # 2018011019 ) would be
prepared; and
WHEREAS, twenty-seven comment letters were received in response to the
NOP; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.9 and State
CEQA Guidelines sections 15082(c) and 15083, the City held a duly noticed Scoping
Meeting on January 24, 2018, to further solicit comments on the scope of the
environmental review; and,
WHEREAS, a Draft Environmental Impact Report (“Draft EIR”) was prepared,
incorporating comments received in response to the NOP; and,
WHERE, the Draft EIR analyzed a proposed that contained 64,900 square feet of
commercial uses within five buildings (“Original Project”); and
WHEREAS, the Draft EIR concluded that the Original Project would result in
significant and unavoidable impacts relating to temporary construction-related noise
increases; and,
WHEREAS, the Draft EIR further determined that mitigation measures were
required to mitigate impacts to a less than significant level for the following resource
areas: air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, traffic, and utilities
(wastewater treatment); and,
WHEREAS, in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines section 15085, a Notice
of Completion was prepared and filed with the Office of Planning and Research on
January 30, 2019; and,
WHEREAS, as required by State CEQA Guidelines section 15087(a), the City
provided Notice of Availability of the Draft EIR to the public at the same time that the
City sent Notice of Completion to the Office of Planning and Research, on January 30,
2019; and
WHEREAS, during the public comment period, copies of the Draft EIR and
technical appendices were available for review and inspection at City Hall, on the City’s
website, and at the San Juan Capistrano public library; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15087(e), the Draft EIR
was circulated for a 45-day review period from January 30, 2019 to March 18, 2019;
and,
WHEREAS, during the 45-day public comment period, the City consulted with
and requested comments from all responsible and trustee agencies, other regulatory
agencies, and others pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15086; and,
3
WHEREAS, the City received twenty-five written comment letters on the Draft
EIR, including an acknowledgement from the State Clearinghouse that the City has
complied with CEQA environmental review requirements; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21092.5, the City
provided copies of its responses to commenting public agencies on June 14, 2019, at
least ten (10) days prior to the City’s consideration of the Final EIR; and
WHEREAS, on May 9, 2019, the City released the Final EIR (“Final EIR”), which
consists of the Draft EIR, all technical appendices prepared in support of the Draft EIR,
all written comment letters received on the Draft EIR, written responses to all written
comment letters received on the Draft EIR, and errata to the Draft EIR and technical
appendices; and
WHEREAS, on May 14, 2019, the Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing to consider the Draft EIR and General Plan Amendment 18-002, Code
Amendment 16-003, Development Agreement 18-002, Flood Plain Land Use Permit 16-
003, and Architectural Control 16-029, Grading Plan Modification 16-014, Tree Removal
Permit 16-047, Sign Program 16-007 for the Original Project and solicited comments on
the document. After hearing all relevant testimony from staff, the public and the City’s
consultant team, the Planning Commission voted to recommend that the City Council
certify the EIR for the Original Project and approve the General Plan Amendment, Code
Amendment, Development Agreement, and Flood Plain Land Use Permit; and
WHEREAS, following the Planning Commission hearing, the Original Project was
set and noticed for public hearing at the July 2, 2019 City Council meeting; and
WHEREAS, in the two days prior to the noticed City Council meeting, the City
received additional late comment letters relating to the Original Project and, while
written responses to comments received after the close of the public review and
comment period are not required pursuant to CEQA, in order to thoroughly review and
respond to the late comments City Staff postponed the City Council hearing for the
Original Project; and
WHEREAS, Staff and the City’s consultants reviewed the late comment letters
and prepared a Technical Memorandum that provides responses to each late comment
received prior to the scheduled July 2, 2019 City Council hearing, and this Technical
Memorandum is part of the administrative record for the Project; and
WHEREAS, subsequently, the Applicant notified the City that he would like to
make some modifications to the Original Project to address concerned raised by the a
member of the public; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant submitted modified project plans that shift the
proposed buildings further west, reduce building heights, and reduce overall square
footage by 5,833 square feet (from 64,900 to 59,067); and
WHEREAS, to determine whether the modifications proposed trigger the need to
recirculate all or a portion of the Draft EIR, the City prepared a “Technical
4
Memorandum: Environmental Compliance of the Project Modification to the River Street
Marketplace EIR”, which concludes that the Modified Project does not require major
revisions to the River Street Marketplace Project Draft EIR and none of the conditions
identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 requiring recirculation of the Draft EIR
would occur; and
WHEREAS, on September 24, 2019, the Planning Commission held a duly
noticed public hearing to consider the Modified Project, and recommended that the City
Council approve the Modified Project and certify the EIR; and
WHEREAS, the “EIR” consists of the Final EIR and its attachments and
appendices, as well as the Draft EIR and its attachments and appendices (as modified
by the Final EIR); and WHEREAS, as contained herein, the City has endeavored in
good faith to set forth the basis for its decision on the Modified Project; and
WHEREAS, all of the requirements of the Public Resources Code and the State
CEQA Guidelines have been satisfied by the City in connection with the preparation of
the EIR, which is sufficiently detailed so that all of the potentially significant
environmental effects of the Modified Project have been adequately evaluated; and
WHEREAS, the EIR prepared in connection with the Modified Project sufficiently
analyzes the Modified Project’s potentially significant environmental impacts and
analyzes a range of feasible alternatives capable of reducing these effects a less that
significant level; and
WHEREAS, all of the findings and conclusions made by the City pursuant to this
Resolution are based upon the oral and written evidence presented to it as a whole and
the entirety of the administrative record for the Modified Project, which are incorporated
herein by this reference, and not based solely on the information provided in this
Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the City finds that environmental impacts that are identified in the
EIR as less than significant and do not require mitigation are described in Section 2 of
the Environmental Findings of Fact, attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit
A; and
WHEREAS, the City finds that environmental impacts that are identified in the
EIR that are less than significant with incorporation of mitigation measures are
described in Section 3 of the Environmental Findings of Fact, attached hereto and
incorporated herein as Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the City finds that even with the incorporation of all feasible
mitigation measures, the environmental impacts that are identified in the EIR that are
significant and unavoidable are described in Section 4 of the Environmental Findings of
Fact, attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the cumulative impacts of the Modified Project identified in the EIR
and set forth herein, are described in Section 5 of the Environmental Findings of Fact,
attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A; and
5
WHEREAS, the potential significant and irreversible environmental changes that
would result from the proposed Modified Project identified in the EIR and set forth
herein, are described in Section 6 of the Environmental Findings of Fact, attached
hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the existence of any growth-inducing impacts resulting from the
proposed Modified Project identified in the EIR and set forth herein, are described in
Section 7 of the Environmental Findings of Fact, attached hereto and incorporated
herein as Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, alternatives that might reduce the Modified Project’s significant
environmental impacts are described in Section 8 of the Environmental Findings of Fact,
attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, an analysis of the Modified Project’s benefits and a Statement of
Overriding Considerations is described in Section 9 of the Environmental Findings of
Fact, attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program sets forth the
mitigation measures to which the City shall bind itself in connection with the Modified
Project and is attached hereto as Exhibit B; and
WHEREAS, prior to taking action, the City has heard, been presented with,
reviewed and considered all of the information and data in the administrative record,
including but not limited to the EIR, and all oral and written evidence presented to it
during all meetings and hearings; and
WHEREAS, the EIR reflects the independent judgment of the City and is deemed
adequate for purposes of making decisions on the merits of the Modified Project; and
WHEREAS, no comments made in the public hearings conducted by the City and
no additional information submitted to the City have produced substantial new
information requiring recirculation of the EIR or additional environmental review under
Public Resources Code section 21092.1 and State CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5;
and
WHEREAS, on October 15, 2019, the City Council conducted a duly noticed
public hearing on this Resolution, at which time all persons wishing to testify were heard
and the Modified Project was fully considered; and
WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have
occurred.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Recitals. The City Council finds that the above recitals are true and
correct, and incorporated herein as findings of fact.
6
Section 2. Compliance with CEQA. As the decision-making body for the City,
and in the City’s roll as lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act
(Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.) (“CEQA”) and the State CEQA Guidelines
(Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.), the City Council has reviewed and
considered the information relating to the River Street Marketplace Project contained
within the Draft EIR, Final EIR (together, the “EIR”), the Technical Memorandum
prepared to respond to late comment letters, the “Technical Memorandum:
Environmental Compliance of the Project Modification to the River Street Marketplace
EIR,” and all supporting documentation, together with all oral and written comments
received during the public review process, and all other related documents, which are
available at City Hall, and which are incorporated by reference herein, prior to approving
the Modified Project. The City Council finds that the EIR reflects the independent
judgment and analysis of the City. The City Council further finds that the EIR contains a
complete and accurate reporting of the environmental impacts associated with the
Modified Project, and was prepared in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA
Guidelines, and the City’s Local CEQA Guidelines.
Section 3. Recirculation. The City Council declares that the City has not received
evidence of new significant impacts, as defined by the State CEQA Guidelines, section
15088.5, after circulation of the Draft EIR, which would require recirculation. No
substantial changes to the Project have occurred that would require a supplemental or
subsequent EIR. The City Council bases this determination on the whole of the
administrative record, including but not limited to, the “Technical Memorandum:
Environmental Compliance of the Project Modification to the River Street Marketplace
EIR” dated September 13, 2019.
Section 4. Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations. In
accordance with State CEQA Guidelines, sections 15091 and 15093, the City Council
hereby adopts the Environmental Findings of Fact and the Statement of Overriding
Considerations attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference
as if fully set forth herein.
Section 5. Certification of the EIR. In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines,
section 15090, the City Council hereby certifies that:
A. The EIR is an accurate and objective statement that has been completed
in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines.
B. The City Council has been presented with and has reviewed and
considered the information contained in the EIR prior to approving the
Modified Project.
C. The EIR reflects the City Council’s independent judgment and analysis.
Section 6. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Pursuant to Public
Resources Code section 21081.6, the City Council hereby adopts the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”) attached hereto as Exhibit B and
incorporated herein by this reference. The City Council finds that the MMRP is
7
designed to ensure that, during the implementation of the Modified Project, the City and
any other responsible parties implement the components of the Modified Project and
comply with the mitigation measures identified in the MMRP. To the extent there is any
conflict between the MMRP, the EIR, or the Environmental Findings of Fact, the terms
and provisions of the MMRP shall control.
Section 7. General Plan Amendment. The City Council of the City of San Juan
Capistrano does hereby make the following findings pursuant to Title 9, Land Use Code
of the City of San Juan Capistrano with respect to General Plan Amendment (GPA 18-
002):
A. The proposed General Plan Amendment is internally consistent with all
other sections of the Land Use Element and also with all other Elements of the General
Plan. This amendment would amend various sections of the General Plan to ensure
consistency between the proposed Amendments and the Los Rios Specific Plan. This
amendment would allow for the adoption of the accompanying Code Amendment.
B. The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with the overall
goals and policies of the General Plan because it establishes a land use designation
governed by the Los Rios Specific Plan, and the proposed land uses, development
standards and design elements of the Commercial Core Planning Area are consistent
with the following goals and policies of the General Plan including:
Land Use Element
Land Use GOAL 1: Develop a balanced land use pattern to ensure that
revenue generation matches the City's responsibility for provision and maintenance of
public services and facilities.
Amending the Los Rios Specific Plan to include the Commercial Core
Planning Area would allow for implementation of the River Street Marketplace Project.
The Commercial Core Planning Area would provide additional retail uses to serve the
community. Additionally, the amendment would contribute to an increase in property
taxes, due to the improvement of an undeveloped and underutilized property. This
increase in property tax revenue would assist the City to maintain and improve public
services and facilities. Property improvement and development of the Modified Project
would help to facilitate Land Use Goal 1.
Policy 1.1: Encourage a land use composition in San Juan Capistrano that
provides a balance or surplus between the generation of public revenues and the cost
of providing public facilities and services.
The proposed Modified Project would contribute its fair share of public
facility and utility costs through payment of Development Impact Fees. Additionally,
property taxes generated as a result of project implementation would go to the City’s
General Fund, from which the City utilizes revenue to fund public services and utilities.
8
Policy 1.2: Encourage commercial, tourist-oriented, and industrial
development that is compatible with existing land uses within the City to improve the
generation of sales tax, property tax, and hotel occupancy tax.
The Commercial Core Planning Area is envisioned as a commercial,
tourist-oriented development that has been designed to be compatible with existing land
uses. The Specific Plan Amendment would improve the generation of sales tax and
property tax within the City.
GOAL 2: Control and direct future growth within the City to preserve the
rural village-like character of the community.
The Modified Project would develop the site with a commercial center at a
maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.23:1 and at a maximum height of two stories. The
Modified Project is a designed development that highlights the agrarian history of the
area, with themed buildings and an earth-toned color palette. The development concept
fosters interaction and mutual support between the project’s various land uses. Visiting
patrons are provided retail and dining opportunities without the need for multiple
vehicular trips. The Modified Project is envisioned as a pedestrian-oriented
development, offering communal tables for outdoor dining, a vegetable garden for farm-
to-table inspired dining, and other amenities. A portion of the site is also envisioned as
an area for community gatherings and activities that foster public involvement.
Policy 2.2: Assure that new development is consistent and compatible with
the existing character of the City.
The Modified Project would allow for the development of a commercial
center that would be consistent in use and character with surrounding development in
the Los Rios Street Historic District, including surrounding buildings and retail uses.
The proposed development plan includes an Agrarian influence design that ensures
consistency in visual character between the Modified Project and surrounding
architecture. The proposed architectural style is consistent with the Los Rios Street
Historic District’s heritage containing significant amounts of Agrarian, Craftsman
Bungalow and California vernacular board-and-batten styles currently represented
along Los Rios Street.
Policy 2.3: Ensure that development corresponds to the provision of public
facilities and services.
The Modified Project would be served by existing infrastructure and
utilities. The EIR includes a detailed analysis of all potential environmental impacts of
the Specific Plan Amendment and a specific section is devoted to the project’s impacts
on public facilities and services. According to the EIR, the Modified Project would have
less than significant impacts with mitigation incorporated.
GOAL 3: Distribute additional population within the City based on risk
factors. Policy 3.1: Confine higher density land uses to the valley areas outside of the
floodplain.
9
Development of the proposed Commercial Core Planning Area would not
cause a population increase within the City. Residential uses are not a permitted use
within the Commercial Core Planning Area and the General Plan recognizes that future
densities of population could be allocated to the valley areas of the City outside of the
floodplain.
Policy 3.2: Limit density of development in the hillsides, floodplains, and
other high risk areas.
Open space and natural features provide visual quality in San Juan
Capistrano. Open spaces also can protect community safety by limiting development in
high risk areas such as hillsides and floodplains. The quality of life can also be
maintained by preserving areas which contribute to the community in an open space
capacity, such as groundwater recharge and recreational areas.
The proposed uses within the Commercial Core Planning Area are not
high-density land uses. As part of the proposed development, the elevation of a portion
of the site will be raised to remove that portion from the floodplain consistent with local,
state, and federal requirements. In addition, no open spaces or natural features are
located on the site.
GOAL 4: Preserve major areas of open space and natural features.
The project site is currently a commercial plant nursery and is designated
by the Los Rios Specific Plan for commercial uses (not open space or agricultural uses).
The project site does not contain natural topography or natural features that have
functioned as public open space or would represent a natural hazard. Although the
project site is within a 100-year flood plain, specific plan amendment includes a Water
Quality Management Plan specifying that proposed buildings would be elevated above
flood depths anticipated for the site. The project site consists of a commercial nursery
operation and would not affect ridgelines or its immediate adjacent area. Therefore, the
Modified Project would be consistent with Goal 4 of the Land Use Element.
GOAL 5: Encourage commercial development which serves community
needs and is located in the existing central business district.
The Modified Project has been designed to serve the community with
retail, restaurants, and office and community gatherings. The Commercial Core
Planning Area has been specifically designed to complete the buildout of the Los Rios
Specific Plan. The site has been designated for low density commercial uses since at
least the 1970’s and its location acts as an extension of the City’s downtown area.
GOAL 6: Enhance or redevelop underperforming commercial centers.
Policy 6.1: Allow for the transition of the oversupply of commercial land use to other
economically viable revenue producing land uses.
10
Although the site is not considered an underperforming commercial
center, the existing nursery could be considered an underperforming commercial use
that would be redeveloped as part of the Commercial Core Planning Area. No transition
of land uses are proposed as part of the Specific Plan Amendment.
GOAL 7: Enhance and maintain the character of neighborhoods.
The Modified Project has been designed as a neighborhood-scale
commercial and office development that highlights the agrarian history of the area. The
project site would be developed with 59,067 square feet of commercial and office space
in seven buildings: Marketplace, Mercantile, Greenhouse, Red Barn, Farmstead, Hay
Loft/Restrooms, and Workshop. 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 center would provide indoor and
outdoor dining, farm fresh produce, and unique retail venues. A grassy common setting
provides varied seating options and communal tables for outdoor dining. Consistent with
the project theme, the proposal proposes to replace the existing asphalt on River Street
with decomposed granite to enhance the pedestrian path. The Modified Project also
includes a parking area with a Sycamore grove that would be accessed via Paseo
Adelanto and Los Rios Street.
Policy 7.1: Preserve and enhance the quality of San Juan Capistrano
neighborhoods by avoiding or abating the intrusion of non-conforming buildings and
uses.
The project site has been designated and used for commercial uses for
over 40 years. The proposed uses within the Commercial Core Planning Area are not
considered to be non-conforming buildings or uses. The Commercial Core Planning
Area includes new uses that have been specifically designed to minimize impacts to the
adjacent residential uses within the Los Rios Street Historic District.
Policy 7.2: Ensure that new development is compatible with the physical
characteristics of its site, surrounding land uses, and available public infrastructure.
There are no physical characteristics of the site that would preclude
development of the Commercial Core Planning Area. The Modified Project has been
specifically designed to minimize impacts to the adjacent residential uses within the Los
Rios Street Historic District. The available and required public infrastructure to serve the
Commercial Core Planning Area was assessed as part of the EIR process.
Policy 7.4: Protect the existing population and social character of older
areas subject to rehabilitation and redevelopment.
The Modified Project with seven uniquely crafted buildings to reflect the
existing character of the community has been designed and will be accessible to
pedestrians via River Street, a rehabilitated pedestrian pathway with decomposed
granite to enhance the pedestrian path, edge landscaping and a historic depiction
program.
11
Circulation Element
GOAL 1: Provide a system of roadways that meets the needs of the
community. Policy 1.4: Improve the San Juan Capistrano circulation system roadways
in concert with land development to ensure sufficient levels of service.
The Modified Project includes the following roadway improvements:
• The addition of a 2nd left turn lane eastbound Del Obispo to northbound Paseo
Adelanto.
• The widening of the west side of Paseo Adelanto from the southern property line
to the intersection with River Street.
• The installation of a traffic circle at the intersection of Paseo Adelanto and River
Street.
The roadway improvements implemented by the proposed project will
implement this Goal. Therefore, the Modified Project would be consistent with Goal 1 of
the Circulation Element.
GOAL 2: Promote and advanced local transportation network. Policy 2.1:
Encourage the increased use and expansion of public transportation opportunities.
The proposed Commercial Core Planning Area is situated near major
public transportation facilities (the San Juan Capistrano train station and OCTA Route
91). The project’s location is ideal for visitors to utilize the use of such facilities.
GOAL 4: Minimize the conflict between the automobile, commercial,
vehicles, pedestrians, horses, and bicycles.
The Modified Project is designed to prohibit vehicular traffic along River
Street. River Street will be transitioned from the existing asphalt paved street to a
pedestrian pathway with a decomposed granite surface that is reminiscent of the
historic use. Vehicular gates and bollards will be installed on the pathway to strictly limit
access to emergency vehicles.
Conservation and Open Space Element
GOAL 4: Prevent incompatible development in areas which should be
preserved for scenic, historic, conservation, or public safety purposes.
Although the project site does not have historic structures, a portion of
the property is located within the Los Rios Street Historic District. Specifically the
Modified Project includes improvements to River Street and Los Rios Street. The
proposed enhancements to River Street include the removal of asphalt and replacing
with decomposed granite results in re-establishing a more natural character to the street
and the removal of the property line dividing fence results in re-establishing the view
corridor on the entire length of the street; and the installation of a Historic Depiction
Program (HDP) adjacent to the street will be designed with high-quality materials and
12
will complement the character of the Los Rios Street Historic District. In addition, the
nearest proposed building adjacent to River Street is the Marketplace Building which
has a height of 35 feet and has a setback of 10 feet from the edge of River Street and is
designed to maintain the character of the Los Rios Street Historic District – with an
Agrarian architectural style, standing seam metal roof and corrugated metal and
distressed wood siding. The landscape plan includes trees and shrubs along the entire
length of River Street. The proposed driveway on Los Rios Street is located in proximity
to the existing Ito Nursery access driveway and will include a new sidewalk and
landscaping. Additionally, the location of the proposed orchard combined with the
strategic placement of buildings acts to shield adjacent residential uses from operational
activity associated with proposed land uses. Additionally, primary vehicular access to
the site would be provided by Paseo Adelanto, which encourages traffic away from the
center of the District.
GOAL 5: Shape and guide development in order to achieve efficient
growth and maintain community scale and identity.
The Modified Project would allow for the development of 59,067 square
feet of retail and office uses on the project site. The proposed building on the site would
be developed in a manner that would be consistent with the character and scale of
adjacent commercial developments surrounding the site, be constructed in the agrarian
influenced architectural style, and be consistent with the proposed amendments to the
Los Rios Specific Plan development standards and design guidelines.
Policy 5.1: Encourage high-quality design in new development and
redevelopment to maintain the low-density character of the City.
The proposed Specific Plan Amendment includes the Commercial Core
Planning Area, which has been designed as a low density specialty retail and office
center. The Modified Project has been designed to maintain the character of the Los
Rios Street Historic District – with an agrarian architectural style, cedar shake shingles,
an earth-toned color palette and board and batten vertical siding. The landscape plan
includes trees and shrubs along the entire length of River Street.
Policy 5.2: Ensure that new development integrates and preserves areas
designated for scenic, historic, conservation, or public safety reasons.
The proposed Commercial Core Planning Area has been designed to
enhance the Los Rios Street Historic District via sensitive site planning, architecture and
landscaping treatments. The Modified Project will preserve historic areas (resources) as
provided in Conservation and Open Space Element Goal 4, presented previously.
Public Services and Utilities Element
GOAL 6: Provide sufficient levels of water and sewer service.
As a part of the environmental review, the Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) considered the Modified Project impacts to utility services, and referenced the
13
City’s 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), which indicates that there are
sufficient water resources to meet full service demands through the year 2040.
Specifically, the project-related demand for water would represent a small percentage
(0.1 percent) of the City’s water supply in 2020. The City has water capacity to serve the
proposed 59,067 square foot retail and office development project. Additionally,
wastewater generated as a result of project implementation would represent less than
one percent of the remaining treatment capacity of the J.B. Latham Wastewater
Treatment Plant. Therefore, the Modified Project would be consistent with Goal 6.
Based on the above findings, the City Council hereby adopts and approves
General Plan Amendment (GPA) 18-002.
Section 7. Land Use Code Amendment. The City Council of the City of
San Juan Capistrano l makes the following findings as established by Section 9-2.321
Flood Land Use Permit, of Title 9, Land Use Code of the City of San Juan Capistrano:
A. The application complies with all of the location and land use
standards for uses or structures as set forth in Section 9-3.405 of this Code because
the site will be graded to elevate the proposed buildings above the 100-year
floodplain elevation.
B. Approval of the application will not result in a discernible net
increase in water surface elevation, will not create or exacerbate erosive velocities
within special flood hazard areas, and will not contribute to flooding of other
properties not previously inundated by the 100-year storm event because in order to
raise the existing grades above the 100-year floodplain elevation, the Modified
Project proposes to fill the center portion of the site with approximately 2 to 5 feet of
import soil which equates to approximately 19,628 cubic yards of import soil.
Although the project site is within a 100-year floodplain, the Modified Project
includes a Water Quality Management Plan specifying that proposed buildings would
be elevated above flood depths anticipated for site development.
C. Development and use of the property as proposed are consistent
with General Plan policies regarding flood control, public safety, aesthetics, and
resource protection because the Modified Project will complement the existing
aesthetics of the Los Rios Street Historic District and existing grade elevations of the
adjacent properties.
D. The proposed use and development of the property are consistent
with all other applicable requirements of the Municipal Code and of the Federal
Emergency Management Agency, California Fish and Game Department, United
States Army Corps of Engineers, and Regional Water Quality Control Board
requirements in effect at the time the application was deemed complete.
Based on the above findings, the City Council hereby adopts and
approves Flood Plan Land Use Permit (FP) 16-003.
14
Section 8. Custodian of Records. The documents and materials that
constitute the record of proceedings on which this Resolution has been based are
located at City Hall, 32400 Paseo Adelanto, San Juan Capistrano, California. The
custodian of the record of proceedings is the Office of the City Clerk.
Section 9. Notice of Determination. The City Council hereby directs staff
to file a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk of the County of Orange within
five working days of final Project approval.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of October 2019.
_____________________________________
BRIAN L. MARYOTT, MAYOR
ATTEST:
________________________________________
MARIA MORRIS, CITY CLERK
15
EXHIBIT A
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT, PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (“CEQA”)
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT MADE PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (“CEQA”)
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION
A. Project Description
The River Street Marketplace Project (“project” or “proposed project”), as
originally proposed and as analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report, included
development of approximately 64,900 square feet of commercial retail within five new
buildings (“Original Project”). In addition, development includes demolition of the
existing single-story sales office, sheds, and various hardscape improvements
associated with Ito Nursery, a commercial nursery operating onsite. Project
development also requires removal of several trees, shrubs, and other landscape
improvements throughout the project site, as well the existing chain-link fence that runs
along the entire project boundary.
After circulation of the Draft EIR for public review, the Applicant submitted
modified project plans, which shift buildings further west, reduce building heights, and
reduce overall square footage by 5,833 square feet, from what was analyzed in the
Draft EIR (“Modified Project”).
Pursuant to the Modified Project site plan, upon clearing, the 5.86-acre project
site would be developed with the River Street Marketplace Project, a neighborhood-
scale commercial and office development that highlights the agrarian history of the area.
The project site would be developed with approximately 59,067 square feet of
commercial and office space in seven buildings: Red Barn, Greenhouse, Farmstead,
Mercantile, Marketplace, Hay Loft, and the Workshop. 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 is proposed to be 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
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 cheeses, and specialty meats. Onsite dining options may include specialty deli
and sandwich shops, specialty food stalls, and craft beer and wine. The two-story,
22,443 square foot Mercantile building would provide retail, restaurant, and fitness
offerings on the ground floor (12,750 square feet), and office/commercial space on the
second floor (9,693 square feet). The single-story Greenhouse would house
approximately 7,040 square feet of restaurant and retail uses along the eastern portion
of the site. The single-story, 8,080-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 in the northern portion
of the site. In addition a 4,000 square foot Workshop Building and 3,904 Hay Loft
Building would provide quality restaurant uses.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 2 of 144
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 quickserve/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.
Because the EIR considered a slightly larger project than the Modified Project
now proposes, a subsequent analysis was prepared to determine of these changes in
the project site plan triggered the need for recirculation of all or a portion of the Draft
EIR. The City prepared a “Technical Memorandum: Environmental Compliance of the
Project Modification to the River Street Marketplace EIR”, dated September 19, 2019
(“Tech. Memo.”).
The Modified Project requires adoption of the General Plan Amendment, Code
Amendment, and Specific Plan Amendment, and approval of Architectural Control,
Grading Plan Modification, Flood Plain Land Use Permit, Tree Removal Permit, Site
Plan Review, Sign Program, and Development Agreement.
B. Legal Requirements
Public Resources Code section 21002 states that “public agencies should not
approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation
measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental
effects of such projects[.]” Section 21002 further states that the procedures required by
CEQA “are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the
significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible
mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects.”
Pursuant to section 21081 of the Public Resources Code, the City may only
approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been completed that identifies any
significant environmental effects if the City makes one or more of the following written
finding(s) for each of those significant effects accompanied by a brief explanation of the
rationale for each finding:
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment.
2. Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction
of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted
by that other agency.
3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations,
including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for
highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or
alternatives identified in the environmental impact report.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 3 of 144
As indicated above, section 21002 requires an agency to “avoid or substantially
lessen” significant adverse environmental impacts. Thus, mitigation measures that
“substantially lessen” significant environmental impacts, even if not completely avoided,
satisfy section 21002’s mandate. (Laurel Hills Homeowners Assn. v. City Council
(1978) 83 Cal.App.3d 515, 521 [“CEQA does not mandate the choice of the
environmentally best feasible project if through the imposition of feasible mitigation
measures alone the appropriate public agency has reduced environmental damage
from a project to an acceptable level”]; Las Virgenes Homeowners Fed., Inc. v. County
of Los Angeles (1986) 177 Cal. App. 3d 300, 309 [“[t]here is no requirement that
adverse impacts of a project be avoided completely or reduced to a level of
insignificance . . . if such would render the project unfeasible”].)
While CEQA requires that lead agencies adopt feasible mitigation measures or
alternatives to substantially lessen or avoid significant environmental impacts, an
agency need not adopt infeasible mitigation measures or alternatives. (Pub. Res. Code
§ 21002.1(c) [if “economic, social, or other conditions make it infeasible to mitigate one
or more significant effects on the environment of a project, the project may nonetheless
be carried out or approved at the discretion of a public agency”]; see also State CEQA
Guidelines § 15126.6(a) [an “EIR is not required to consider alternatives which are
infeasible”].) CEQA defines “feasible” to mean “capable of being accomplished in a
successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic,
environmental, social, and technological factors.” (Pub. Res. Code § 21061.1.) The
State CEQA Guidelines add “legal” considerations as another indicia of feasibility.
(State CEQA Guidelines § 15364.) Project objectives also inform the determination of
“feasibility.” (Jones v. U.C. Regents (2010) 183 Cal. App. 4th 818, 828-829.)
“‘[F]easibility’ under CEQA encompasses ‘desirability’ to the extent that desirability is
based on a reasonable balancing of the relevant economic, environmental, social, and
technological factors.” (City of Del Mar v. City of San Diego (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 401,
417; see also Sequoyah Hills Homeowners Assn. v. City of Oakland (1993) 23
Cal.App.4th 704, 715.) “Broader considerations of policy thus come into play when the
decision making body is considering actual feasibility[.]” (Cal. Native Plant Soc’y v. City
of Santa Cruz (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 957, 1000 (“Native Plant”); see also Pub. Res.
Code § 21081(a)(3) [“economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations”
may justify rejecting mitigation and alternatives as infeasible] (emphasis added).)
Environmental impacts that are less than significant do not require the imposition
of mitigation measures. (Leonoff v. Monterey County Board of Supervisors (1990) 222
Cal.App.3d 1337, 1347.)
The California Supreme Court has stated, “[t]he wisdom of approving . . . any
development project, a delicate task which requires a balancing of interests, is
necessarily left to the sound discretion of the local officials and their constituents who
are responsible for such decisions. The law as we interpret and apply it simply requires
that those decisions be informed, and therefore balanced.” (Citizens of Goleta Valley v.
Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 576.) In addition, perfection in a project or
a project’s environmental alternatives is not required; rather, the requirement is that
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 4 of 144
sufficient information be produced “to permit a reasonable choice of alternatives so far
as environmental aspects are concerned.” Outside agencies (including courts) are not
to “impose unreasonable extremes or to interject [themselves] within the area of
discretion as to the choice of the action to be taken.” (Residents Ad Hoc Stadium Com.
v. Board of Trustees (1979) 89 Cal.App.3d 274, 287.)
No comments made in the public hearings conducted by the Planning
Commission or City Council or any additional information submitted to the City has
produced any substantial new information requiring recirculation or additional
environmental review of the Final EIR under CEQA because no new significant
environmental impacts were identified, no substantial increase in the severity of any
environmental impacts would occur, and no feasible Project mitigation measures or
Project alternatives as defined in State CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5 were
rejected.
SECTION 2
FINDINGS REGARDING LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACTS NOT REQUIRING MITIGATION
The City Council hereby finds that the following potential environmental impacts
of the Project are less than significant and therefore do not require the imposition of
Mitigation Measures.
A. AESTHETICS
1. Scenic Vistas
Threshold: Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.1-28 of the DEIR; pages 3-4 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.1, Aesthetics, starting on page 5.1-27 of the DEIR.
Scenic vistas are panoramic views of features such as mountains, forests, the
ocean, or urban skylines. The project site is in an urban area and in the interior of a
block surrounded by other urban land uses. The most continuous scenic vista visible
from the project area is of ridgelines in southern San Juan Capistrano east of I-5. As
shown in the existing photographs on Figures 5.1-3 through 5.1-6 of the DEIR, the
project site currently provides limited views of surrounding hills and ridgelines, which are
largely obscured by surrounding buildings, trees, and vegetation. No panoramic view or
other scenic vista would be substantially blocked by the proposed project. Of the four
views, the ridgeline views from Paseo Adelanto would be most affected (see View B in
Figure 5.1-4 of the DEIR), however, this location of the project site offers limited views
of the surrounding ridgeline under existing conditions. Views of the ridgeline to the south
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 5 of 144
would not be affected by the proposed development; travelers commuting Paseo
Adelanto or pedestrians and cyclists traveling Trabuco Creek Trail would continue to
experience views of the ridgeline to the south and southeast. The Draft EIR also
included photo simulations illustrating exactly how the project would impact views from
various vantage points, and show the height of the proposed structures and what it
would look like when completed.
The Los Rios Specific Plan includes guidance about preservation of views from
Del Obispo Street to surrounding hills. The Los Rios Specific Plan requires that
landscaping be used to “frame and direct” these views and screen undesirable views of
land uses that are not consistent with the area’s character. Views from the historic
corridor of Del Obispo Street would be largely unaffected due to the project site’s
location behind other land uses and slightly downslope from Los Rios Street. For
example, the pedestrian’s view toward the project site from Los Rios Street (see View A
in Figure 5.1-3 of the DEIR) would include new buildings, trees, and landscaping, but
would still offer limited views of ridgelines to the west. Therefore, project impacts to
scenic views are less than significant.
Like the Original 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. Therefore, impacts remain less than
significant.
2. Scenic Resources
Threshold: Would the Project substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-3 of the DEIR)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.2, Aesthetics, page 8-3 of the DEIR.
The project site is not located near a state- or county-designated scenic highway.
SR-74 east of I-5 and I-5 south of SR-74 are eligible for scenic highway status but not
officially designated. These roadway segments are not visible from the project site.
Furthermore, due to its location near the downtown of a largely developed community,
views of the project site from these highways are obstructed by buildings, trees, and
other vegetation. Implementation of the Modified project would not alter scenic
resources within a state scenic highway and no impacts would occur.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 6 of 144
3. Visual Character
Threshold: Would the Project substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of the site and its surroundings?
Finding: Less than significant. (Pages 5.1-24 and 5.1-27 of the DEIR; pages
3-4 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.1, Aesthetics, Impact 5.1-1 and 5.1-2, starting on page 5.1-24 of the DEIR.
The proposed project would not substantially degrade its existing visual character
or quality. Because the proposed project would replace an existing land use that gives
the project site a somewhat undeveloped appearance, its development would represent
a substantial change in the appearance of the project site. The project would introduce
new structures and hardscape that are visually distinct from adjacent land uses to the
north (Zoomars Petting Zoo) and east (historic, single-story residential structures along
Los Rios Street) that have a rural character. However, the proposed project has been
intentionally designed to create an architectural style that contributes to the area’s
existing visual appearance and character. Instead of orienting the proposed buildings to
a rigid orthogonal grid that is often found in more urban-scaled development, the
project’s five buildings are arranged as an informal cluster of structures (see Figure 3-4)
that mimics the placement of buildings in a rural, agrarian community. Furthermore, as
shown in Figures 3-5 and 3-6, the five proposed building have been designed to
embody an agrarian set of building typologies, including barns, greenhouses, and water
towers. Architectural styles, colors, materials (such as raw steel, wood siding, and
corrugated metal), and a landscape palette emphasizing California native plants are
used to continue this context-sensitive theming
As demonstrated in Table 5.1-1 of the DEIR, the proposed project is consistent
with the City’s goals and policies governing urban design in the Los Rios Specific Plan
area. Although the proposed project is located in a historic area, the project site is
adjacent to the City’s train station, in the near vicinity of a variety of commercial
businesses and land uses, and in an area long planned for further development.
Although the current use at the site is the Ito Nursery, this is a commercial nursery for
landscape plants, and the site is not currently, and has never been, used for agriculture
The proposed project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the project site and its surroundings. The proposed project has been designed
to complement the historic, rural atmosphere of the Los Rios Specific Plan area, and the
project would not introduce buildings that are dramatically out of scale or character with
surrounding land uses. Furthermore, proposed trees, landscaping, and pedestrian
amenities would soften the visual impact of the proposed buildings when viewed from
outside the project site. Provisions of the proposed project, including the development
regulations, design guidelines, site lighting plan and master sign program would ensure
that design details of the proposed project are context-sensitive and of high quality.
Impacts related to visual appearance and community character would be less than
significant. The development regulations provide specific standards for land use
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 7 of 144
development and general landscaping development standards within the Commercial
Core Planning Area, and encourage the most appropriate use of the land, ensure the
highest quality of development, and protect the public health, safety, and general
welfare.
The proposed project would not cause shade and shadow impacts on
surrounding uses. Land uses near the project site that are sensitive to shade and
shadows include residential uses to the immediate east along Los Rios Street and the
petting zoo to the immediate north across River Street. As the project site is largely
vacant, existing shade and shadows generated onsite are from existing trees. The
proposed project includes five buildings that would vary in size, bulk, and height,
ranging from 25 to 35 feet. The two tallest buildings would be near the center of the
project site. All proposed buildings are separated from the project site’s eastern
boundary by a 20-foot-wide gated drive aisle. At its narrowest, this buffer is 26 feet, 4
inches between the Red Barn and site boundary, 30 feet, 5 inches between the Green
House and site boundary, and 31 feet between the Marketplace and site boundary. In
general, this buffer would absorb some of the shadow generated by the proposed
buildings. River Street would provide a similar buffer for shadows cast by the Farmstead
building toward the Zoomars petting zoo.
For most of the day, buildings onsite would not cast substantial shadows. For
example, at summer solstice, morning shadows would be cast almost entirely within the
project site. In the evening (generally 6:00 p.m. and later), shadows from the
Marketplace, Green House, and Red Barn buildings would fall eastward onto land uses
along Los Rios Street. However, this would be during a small window of time during the
evening when these properties already experience shadows from existing trees and
structures. At winter solstice, substantial shadows would be cast in the morning (in a
northwest direct across River Street) and in the evening (eastward toward Los Rios
Street). However, due to the proposed buildings’ orientation and height, these shadows
would be generated for small intervals of time. For example, even at winter solstice,
project-related shadows falling on Zoomars Petting Zoo would end by approximately
9:00 a.m., which is when the business opens on weekends. Winter shadows would also
be cast eastward in the evening but would only fall on adjacent land uses between
approximately 3:30 p.m. and 5:00 p.m.
In summary, most outdoor activities conducted near the project site—including
activities at the nearby petting zoo—would be unaffected by shadows cast by the five
proposed buildings. Shadows would be cast on adjacent shadow-sensitive uses for only
small windows of time and outside of hours normally used for outdoor activity.
Furthermore, most shade generated by the proposed buildings would be onsite.
Therefore, shade and shadow impacts would be less than significant.
Further, like the Original 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
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 8 of 144
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. Therefore, impacts remain 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 Original 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. Impacts would remain
less than significant.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 9 of 144
4. Light and Glare
Threshold: Would the Project create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.1-29 of the DEIR)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.1, Aesthetics, Impact 5.1-4, starting on page 5.1-28 of the DEIR.
The proposed project would introduce new sources of lighting, including building,
security, and parking lighting. New sources of glare would include exterior glazing (e.g.,
windows and doors) on the five proposed buildings and cars in the parking area.
However, the large number of trees proposed for the project site¬, including 158 newly
planted trees, would create a substantial buffer to shield surrounding land uses from
light and glare generated onsite. To demonstrate compliance with Section 9-3.529,
Lighting Standards, of the City’s municipal code (see Section 5.1.1.1, Regulatory
Setting of the DEIR), the project applicant submitted a site photometric analysis and
lighting plan for the proposed project. The lighting plan (see Figure 5.1-7 of the DEIR)
identifies six types of lighting fixtures that would be used on the project site.
• Parking pole/pedestrian pole lighting. These fixtures would be located in the
parking lot, along River Street and Paseo Adelanto, and along the gated drive
aisle at the eastern edge of the project site. They would be styled to match the
architecture of the project’s buildings and would face downward with shielding as
required.
• Building sconces. Downward-facing sconces would match pole lighting (see
above) and would be attached to the wall planes of four of the five buildings.
• Canopy and trellis lighting. These accent lights would be attached to the
underside of canopies and trellises. They would generally be located around the
proposed project’s central courtyard.
• Tree lantern lighting. These would be small lights in trees adjacent to the
central courtyard and along the pedestrian connection to Los Rios Street.
• Tree uplighting. These light fixtures would also be located in trees but would be
limited to four specimen trees, including the cluster of torch cacti. Although this
lighting would face upward, it would be required to comply with 9-3.529 of the
municipal code related to light overspill.
• Festoon lighting. As shown in Figure 5.1-7 of the DEIR, these would consist of
overhead strings or rows of small lights connecting the proposed project’s
buildings. Due to their location within the proposed cluster of buildings, they
would not be expected to generate substantial light overspill onto surrounding
land uses.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 10 of 144
The range of fixture types listed above is consistent with the Los Rios Specific
Plan’s requirement that lighting “create different levels of light intensity to accent or
highlight important structures, spaces, or landscape elements (trees, fountains,
sculpture, etc.)” (San Juan Capistrano 1978). Approval of the proposed project would
amend the Los Rios Specific Plan to include the proposed project’s lighting plan.
The photometric analysis prepared for the proposed project (see Figure 5.1-8 of
the FEIR) demonstrates that the project complies with Section 9-2.401, Nuisances, of
the municipal code, which requires that “no operation, activity, sign, or lighting fixture
shall create illumination on adjacent property that exceeds one foot-candle, whether the
illumination is direct or indirect light from the source.” While locations within the project
site would produce illumination above this level, illumination levels generally decrease
to below 0.4 foot-candle at adjacent sensitive uses (Zoomars Petting Zoo north of River
Street and residential uses east of the project site). During the City’s plan check
process, the final lighting plan and photometric plan will be reviewed and approved by
the Development Services Department to ensure that the project complies with
Municipal Code Section 9-2.401. Outdoor lighting would be required to comply with
energy efficiency standards in the California Building Code (see Section 5.1.1.1, above),
which require shielding and dimming of outdoor lighting to reduce inefficient light
overspill.
Overall, illumination generated by the proposed project would be required to
comply with provisions of the municipal code and the Los Rios Specific Plan related to
outdoor lighting. For example, the Los Rios Specific Plan requires that “No internally
illuminated blinking or flashing signs are permitted. All sign lighting to be directed away
from view of residences and should incorporate glare shields as appropriate.”
Adherence to these standards would ensure that the proposed commercial uses would
not create substantial adverse effects on surrounding land uses due to excessive light
overspill or glare. Therefore, impacts from the Modified Project relating to light and glare
would be less than significant
B. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES
1. Prime Farmland
Threshold: Would the Project 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 Resources Agency, to non-agricultural
use?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-2 of the DEIR)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.1, Agriculture and Forestry Resources, starting on page 8-1 of the DEIR.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 11 of 144
The project site is mapped as Urban and Built-Up Land, and not as important
mapped farmland, on the California Important Farmland Finder maintained by the
Division of Land Resource Protection (DLRP 2018). Development of the Modified
Project would not convert important mapped farmland to non-agricultural use, and no
impact would occur.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 12 of 144
2. Agricultural Zoning
Threshold: Would the Project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,
or a Williamson Act contract?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-2 of the DEIR)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.1, Agriculture and Forestry Resources, starting on page 8-1 of the DEIR.
The General Plan land use and Zoning designation of the project site is Specific
Plan/Precise Plan. The project site is designated Low Density Commercial (LDC) in the
current Los Rios Specific Plan, which allows for nurseries, open markets, arts and crafts
workshops, display, retail and conditionally approved equestrian uses. Permitted non-
retail uses include greenhouse, crop and tree farming, and wholesale nursery. The
proposed project would continue to permit these uses within the Commercial Core
Planning Area and would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural uses.
Williamson Act contracts restrict the use of privately-owned land to agriculture
and compatible open space uses under contract with local governments. In exchange,
the land is taxed based on actual use rather than potential market value. The site is not
under a Williamson Act contract (DLRP 2004). No impact would occur.
3. Forestland Zoning
Threshold: Would the Project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources
Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production
(as defined by Government Code section 51104(g)?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-2 of the DEIR)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.1, Agriculture and Forestry Resources, starting on page 8-1 of the DEIR.
The General Plan land use and Zoning designation of the project site is Specific
Plan/Precise Plan. Within the Los Rios Specific Plan, the site is designated as Low
Density Commercial (LDC). The site is not zoned as forest land, timberland, or
timberland production, and no impact would occur.
4. Loss of Forest Land
Threshold: Would the Project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-2 of the DEIR)
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 13 of 144
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.1, Agriculture and Forestry Resources, starting on page 8-1 of the DEIR.
The project site is a commercial nursery. The site is not forest land, and project
development would not convert forest land to non-forest use. No impact would occur.
5. Conversion of Farmland or Forestland
Threshold: Would the Project 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?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-2 of the DEIR)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.1, Agriculture and Forestry Resources, starting on page 8-1 of the DEIR.
The project site is not mapped important farmland or forest land, and no impact
would occur.
C. AIR QUALITY
1. Air Quality Plans
Threshold: Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.2-28 of the DEIR; page 5 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.2, Air Quality, Impact 5.2-1, starting on page 5.2-28 of the DEIR, and on
page 5 of the Tech. Memo.
CEQA requires that projects be evaluated for consistency with the AQMP. A
consistency determination plays an important role in local agency project review by
linking local planning and individual projects to the AQMP. It fulfills the CEQA goal of
informing decision makers of the environmental effects of a project under consideration
at a stage early enough to ensure that air quality concerns are fully addressed. It also
provides the local agency with ongoing information as to whether they are contributing
to the clean air goals of the AQMP. The regional emissions inventory for the SoCAB is
compiled by SCAQMD and SCAG. Regional population, housing, and employment
projections developed by SCAG are based, in part, on the local jurisdictions’ general
plan land use designations. These projections form the foundation for the emissions
inventory of the AQMP. These demographic trends are incorporated into the 2016–2040
Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, compiled by SCAG to
determine priority transportation projects and vehicle miles traveled within the SCAG
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 14 of 144
region. Projects that are consistent with the local general plan are considered consistent
with the air quality–related regional plan.
Per the CEQA Guidelines Section 15206 screening guidelines, because the
proposed project would require an amendment to the City’s General Plan, and an EIR
has been prepared to analyze project-related environmental impacts, the proposed
project is considered regionally significant by SCAG. However, as discussed in Section
8.10, Population and Housing, of the DEIR, implementation of the proposed project
would not result in population growth. Additionally, while the proposed project would
create up to 250 new jobs, the number of new jobs created would be within the job
growth projections for the City. Furthermore, as discussed in Impact 5.2-3 of the DEIR,
operation of the proposed project would not generate long-term regional emissions that
would exceed the SCAQMD regional significance thresholds. Further, the Modified
Project reduces square footage by 5,833 from what was analyzed in the DEIR,
indicating that air emissions will actually be slightly less. Therefore, the Modified Project
would be consistent with the AQMP, and impacts are less than significant.
2. Air Quality Standards – Long-term Operation
Threshold: Would the Project violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.2-31 of the DEIR; page 5 of the
Tech. Memo.).
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.2, Air Quality, Impact 5.2-3, starting on page 5.2-30 of the DEIR, and page
5 of the Tech. Memo. Refer to Section 3, Impacts That Are Less Than Significant With
Mitigation Incorporated, of these Findings for Construction-related impacts.
Long-term air pollutant emissions would be generated by the project from
transportation sources, area sources (e.g., landscape fuel use, aerosols, and
architectural coatings), and energy use (natural gas). Table 5.2-10, Maximum Daily
Regional Operational Phase Emissions, of the DEIR identifies the criteria air pollutant
emissions that would result from implementation of the proposed project. As shown in
the table, project-related air pollutant emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD’s
regional emissions thresholds for operational activities. Further, the Modified Project
reduces square footage by 5,833 from what was analyzed in the DEIR, and would
reduce operational trips by 329 than what was analyzed. Therefore, impacts would be
less than significant.
3. Criteria Pollutants – Long-term Operation
Threshold: Would the Project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase
of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-
attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 15 of 144
standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.2-31 of the DEIR; page 5 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.2, Air Quality, Impact 5.2-3, starting on page 5.2-30 of the DEIR, and page
5 of the Tech. Memo. Refer to Section 3, Impacts That Are Less Than Significant With
Mitigation Incorporated, of these Findings for Construction-related impacts.
Long-term air pollutant emissions would be generated by the project from
transportation sources, area sources (e.g., landscape fuel use, aerosols, and
architectural coatings), and energy use (natural gas). Table 5.2-10, Maximum Daily
Regional Operational Phase Emissions, of the DEIR identifies the criteria air pollutant
emissions that would result from implementation of the proposed project. As shown in
the table, project-related air pollutant emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD’s
regional emissions thresholds for operational activities. Further, the Modified Project
reduces square footage by 5,833 from what was analyzed in the DEIR, and would
reduce operational trips by 329 than what was analyzed. As described in the DEIR, 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. Therefore, impacts would be less
than significant.
4. Sensitive Receptors – Long-term Operation
Threshold: Would the Project expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.2-33 of the DEIR; page 5 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.2, Air Quality, Impact 5.2-4, starting on page 5.2-33 of the DEIR, and page
5 of the Tech. Memo. Refer to Section 3, Impacts That Are Less Than Significant With
Mitigation Incorporated, of these Findings for Construction-related impacts.
Operational Phase LSTs
SCAQMD’s Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (LST) was applied to
determine whether the project could result in a potentially significant impact. The LST
are designed to screen for potential localized impacts, using them to screen for potential
localized impacts from a larger project—i.e., one in which emissions will be dispersed
over a larger area—is a conservative approach. The greater the size of a project site,
the higher total emissions can be without creating localized impacts. This is reflected in
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 16 of 144
the SCAQMD’s thresholds for both construction and operational impacts, which set forth
higher thresholds for larger project sites. (See DEIR, Table 5.2-6; South Coast Air
Quality Management District, Localized Significance Threshold Methodology, July
2008.) Thus, as explained in the Draft EIR, the LST can appropriately “be used for
larger projects to determine whether or not dispersion modeling may be required.”
(DEIR, p. 5.2-25.)
Operation of the proposed project would not generate substantial quantities of
emission from onsite, stationary sources. Land uses that have the potential to generate
substantial stationary sources of emissions that would require a permit from SCAQMD
include industrial land uses such as chemical processing and warehousing operations
where substantial truck idling could occur onsite. The proposed project does not fall
within these categories of uses. While operation of the proposed 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, air pollutant emissions generated from these activities would be nominal
(see Table 5.2-10 of the DEIR). Therefore, localized air quality impacts related to
stationary-source emissions would not expose sensitive receptors to pollutant
concentrations.
CO Hotspots
Under existing and future vehicle emission rates, a project would have to
increase traffic volumes at a single intersection by more than 44,000 vehicles per
hour—or 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is
substantially limited—in order to generate a significant CO impact. The proposed project
would result in a high of up to approximately 176 peak hour trips and would be below
the CO hotspots screening criteria (LLG 2018). Thus, implementation of the proposed
project would not produce the volume of traffic required to generate a CO hotspot.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not have the potential to
substantially increase CO hotspots at intersections near the project site, and impacts
would be less than significant.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 17 of 144
5. Odors
Threshold: Would the Project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.2-34 of the DEIR)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.2, Air Quality, Impact 5.2-5, starting on page 5.2-34 of the DEIR.
The type of facilities that are considered to have objectionable odors include
wastewater treatments plants, compost facilities, landfills, solid waste transfer stations,
fiberglass manufacturing facilities, paint/coating operations (e.g., auto body shops),
dairy farms, petroleum refineries, asphalt batch plants, chemical manufacturing, and
food manufacturing facilities. The proposed land uses would not result in the types of
odors generated by the aforementioned land uses. While the proposed restaurants
could potentially emit odors from their operation, odors from restaurants are not typically
considered objectionable odors that would affect a substantial number of people. In
addition, proposed uses would be subject to SCAQMD Rule 402, which would minimize
and provide a control for odors.
Emissions from construction equipment, such as diesel exhaust and volatile
organic compounds from architectural coatings and paving activities, may also generate
odors. However, these odors would be low in concentration, temporary, and are not
expected to affect a substantial number of people. Therefore, overall, potential odor
impacts associated with implementation of operation of the Modified Project are
considered less than significant.
D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
1. Riparian Habitat
Threshold: Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department
of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Finding: No Impact. (Page 8-3 of the DEIR; page 5 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.3, Biological Resources, starting on page 8-3 of the DEIR, and page 5 of
the Tech. Memo.
Sensitive natural communities are natural communities that are considered rare
in the region by regulatory agencies; that are known to provide habitat for sensitive
animal or plant species; or are known to be important wildlife corridors. Riparian
habitats are those occurring along the banks of rivers and streams. No riparian, vernal
pool or sensitive natural communities regulated by the CDFW occur within or adjacent
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 18 of 144
to the project site. The project site is dominated by heavily disturbed, developed lands,
and does not possess any native vegetation communities. Biological resource impacts
for the Modified Project would be similar to that analyzed in the DEIR, 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. No impact would occur.
2. Wetlands
Threshold: Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.3-9 of the DEIR; page 5 of the Tech.
Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.3, Biological Resources, Impact 5.3-2, starting on page 5.3-9 of the DEIR,
and page 5 of the Tech. Memo.
No wetlands regulated by the United States Army Corps of Engineers, CDFW, or
the Regional Water Quality Control Board were documented within or adjacent to the
project site. The proposed project would not result in direct impacts to federally
protected wetlands through removal, filling, or hydrological interruption. No
improvements or relocation of the existing storm drain outlet structure (inlet) located
within the Trabuco Canyon flood-prone area would occur as a result of projection
initiation or construction.
The proposed project would comply with all applicable water quality regulations,
including obtaining and complying with conditions established in the City of San Juan
Capistrano MSR and National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
Stormwater program permits. Both of these permits include the treatment of all surface
runoff from paved and developed areas, the implementation of applicable best
management practices (BMPs) during construction activities, and the installation and
proper maintenance of structural BMPs to ensure adequate long-term treatment of
water before entering into any stream course. Biological resource impacts for the
Modified Project would be similar to that analyzed in the DEIR, 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. No impact would occur.
3. Local Policies and Ordinances
Threshold: Would the Project conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 19 of 144
or ordinance, including but not limited to the City of Claremont’s
tree Policies and Guidelines Manual Governing City-owned trees;
Chapter 12.26 of the Claremont Municipal Code, as amended; or
General Plan policies concerning City-owned or privately-owned
trees?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.3-10 of the DEIR; page 5 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.3, Biological Resources, Impact 5.3-3, starting on page 5.3-9 of the DEIR,
and page 5 of the Tech. Memo.
Tree removals associated with new development and discretionary land uses
approvals are subject to the City’s tree removal ordinance. (San Juan Capistrano
Municipal Code [SJCMC], Section 9-2.349), which requires specified findings for
removal of trees with a trunk diameter six inches or greater measured three feet above
grade. Tree removal is permitted where the tree is nonnative or invasive species, is a
safety hazard, replacements trees are more appropriate to the site and planting area, or
other findings made pursuant to SJCMC, Section 9-2.349(e). There are no heritage
trees present on the project site, since none of the existing trees onsite have a 36 inch
or greater trunk diameter at breast height.
As shown on the Tree Mitigation Plan (Appendix C of the DEIR), the vast majority
of trees to be removed are (i) not native, (ii) invasive, (iii) dead, and/or (iv) are a safety
hazard. For example, the pepper tree to be removed cannot hold itself upright and is
therefore a safety hazard. Additionally, removal of 34 trees onsite would be replaced
with 158 new trees. The project would add approximately 124 more trees than currently
exist, as well as a greater number of shrubs and groundcover, which is consistent with
the requirements of the City’s tree removal ordinance. Therefore impacts of the Modified
Project would be less than significant.
4. Habitat Conservation Plans
Threshold: Would the Project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
Finding: No Impact. (Page 8-3 of the DEIR)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.3, Biological Resources, starting on page 8-3 of the DEIR.
The project site is in the plan area of the Natural Community Conservation
Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP) for the Central and Coastal Subregion of
Orange County. The NCCP/HCP plan area spans approximately 208,000 acres,
including 37,378 acres of reserves; and protects 39 covered species in 12 natural
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 20 of 144
communities (CDFW 2017; COEMA 1996). The project site is in an area designated for
urban development and is not in a reserve designated under the NCCP/HCP—there are
no survey requirements for the site pursuant to the NCCP/HCP. Additionally, the project
site is developed/disturbed and in an urbanized of the city and does not support any
sensitive habitat and/or species that are protected by the NCCP/HCP. Therefore,
project development would not result in a conflict, either directly or indirectly, with the
established NCCP/HCP. The Modified Project occurs on the same site as analyzed in
the DEIR. No impact would occur.
E. CULTURAL RESOURCES
1. Historical Resources
Threshold: Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.4-28 of the DEIR; page 5 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.4, Cultural Resources, Impact 5.4-1, starting on page 5.4-19 of the DEIR,
and page 5 of the Tech. Memo.
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.
Under CEQA, a project has a significant impact on a historical resource if it
“would result in the physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the
resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of an historical
resources would be materially impaired” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b)(1)).
Material impairment would occur if the project would result in demolition or material
alteration of those physical characteristics that convey the resource’s historical
significance (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b)(2)). The project would have the
potential to result in indirect impacts to historical resources if it would result in new
development that is incompatible, spatially obstructive, or would otherwise damage the
integrity of a historical resource.
For the purposes of assessing the potential for impacts to historical resources–
the Los Rios Historic District and the IHCL listed properties–the proposed project has
been evaluated for conformance to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for
Rehabilitation and for consistency with the applicable goals and policies contained
within the Los Rios Specific Plan. The prescriptive language within these documents
provides guiding principles and an approach to inform development of new construction
at or adjacent to historic properties, including historic districts. Additionally, pursuant to
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 21 of 144
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 significant impacts resultant from a proposed project
can be mitigated to a less than significant level of impact by meeting the Secretary of
the Interior’s Standards. Where applicable, references to direct/material impacts and
indirect/visual impacts are included in the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for
Rehabilitation compliance conclusions.
Rehabilitation is defined as the act or process of making possible a compatible
use for a property through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving those
portions or features which convey its historical, cultural, or architectural values. The
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation provide the highest level of
flexibility for alterations, reuse or adaptive reuse, and new construction at or in close
proximity to a historic property.
For the purposes of design review and CEQA analysis, proposed projects are
analyzed by the Secretary of Interior’s ten rehabilitation standards. The proposed
project’s direct and indirect impacts were evaluated against these standards starting on
page 5.4-20 of the DEIR. As demonstrated, the proposed project is fully consistent with
the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, and impacts to historical
resources are less than significant. Further, the project’s operations will not be
dramatically different and/or incompatible with other businesses in the vicinity. A
number of restaurants and bars within the City’s historic downtown have similar or much
later hours of operation than the project proposes. Regardless, the hours of operation
would not result in any physical alteration of the Los Rios Historic District and thus
would not result in a significant impact on a historic resource for purposes of CEQA.
Table 5.4-2 of the DEIR includes a summary response to the goals and policies
of the Los Rios Specific Plan that are salient to the scope of this HRAR. As
demonstrated in Table 5.4-2, the proposed project would be consistent with the Los
Rios Specific Plan. 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 DEIR. Impacts would be less than significant.
2. Human Remains
Threshold: Would the Project disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.4-30 of the DEIR; page 5 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.4, Cultural Resources, Impact 5.4-4, starting on page 5.4-30 of the DEIR,
and page 5 of the Tech. Memo.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 22 of 144
There are no known human remains on the project site; the nearest cemetery to
the site is the Mission San Juan Capistrano Cemetery about 0.5 mile to the northeast.
The likelihood that human remains may be discovered during site clearing and grading
activities is low. However, given the prehistory and history of the area, ground-disturbing
activities have the potential to disturb previously undiscovered subsurface human
remains.
California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that if human remains
are discovered within the project site, disturbance of the site shall halt and remain
halted until the coroner has investigated the circumstances, manner, and cause of any
death, and the recommendations concerning the treatment and disposition of the
human remains have been made to the person responsible for the excavation, or to his
or her authorized representative. If the coroner determines that the remains are not
subject to his or her authority and if the coroner recognizes or has reason to believe the
human remains to be those of a Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone
within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission. 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. The Modified Project would comply with existing law, and potential impacts
to human remains would be less than significant.
F. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
1. Faults
Threshold: Would the Project 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?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-4 of the DEIR; page 6 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.4, Geology and Soils, page 8-4 of the DEIR, and page 6 of the Tech.
Memo.
The Modified Project would not require a change to the geology and soils
analysis in the DEIR. Since the Modified Project would occur in the footprint of what was
already analyzed, new or more severe impacts would not occur. As described in the
DEIR, existing buildings would be removed and graded. The project would still be
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 23 of 144
required to comply with existing regulations and standard conditions identified as a part
of the DEIR. There are no known active faults in or near the project site. The nearest
known active fault to the project site is the Newport-Inglewood Fault about 19 miles to
the northwest; the nearest Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone to the site is along the
Newport-Inglewood Fault. Project development would not subject people or structures
to hazards from surface rupture of a known active fault.
2. Ground Shaking, Liquefaction
Threshold: Would the Project expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death
involving:
- Strong seismic ground shaking?
- Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.5-11 of the DEIR; page 6 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.5, Geology and Soils, Impact 5.5-1, starting on page 5.5-9 of the DEIR, and
page 6 of the Tech. Memo.
Site preparation and rough grading would involve about 19,500 cubic yards (cy)
of fill grading and 2,864 cy of cut. Most of the site is in a 100-year flood zone with flood
depths of two feet; the fill grading would raise the site above the 100-year flood
elevation. The Modified Project would not require a change to the geology and soils
analysis in the DEIR. Since the Modified Project would occur in the footprint of what was
already analyzed, new or more severe impacts would not occur. As described in the
DEIR, 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 DEIR.
Ground Shaking
The intensity of ground shaking at a given location depends primarily upon the
earthquake magnitude, the distance from the earthquake source, and the site response
characteristics, which are dependent upon the subsurface soil conditions. Therefore, a
smaller-magnitude earthquake closer to a site could induce greater shaking than a
larger-magnitude earthquake further away. The intensity of ground shaking at a given
location depends on several factors, but primarily on the earthquake magnitude, the
distance from the epicenter to the site of interest, and the response characteristics of
the soils or bedrock units underlying the site. In southern California, there is no way to
avoid earthquake hazards. Based on 2016 CBC Section 1613.3, a site-specific ground
motion analysis was conducted and determined that the ground acceleration used for
project design shall be 0.499g where g is the acceleration of gravity. Ground
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 24 of 144
acceleration of 0.499g correlates with intensity VIII on the Modified Mercalli Intensity
(MMI) Scale (Wald et. al. 1999). In an intensity VIII earthquake, damage is slight in
specially designed structures; considerable damage occurs in ordinary substantial
buildings with partial collapse; and damage is great in poorly built structures. Chimneys,
factory stacks, columns, monuments, and walls fall, and heavy furniture is overturned
(USGS 2018).
The CBC and City Building Code provide the appropriate building design criteria
needed to protect the structural integrity of structures and infrastructure against damage
and collapse. The proposed project will be designed and constructed in accordance with
the City of San Juan Capistrano Building Code, which adopts the California Building
Code (CBC), which is based on the International Building Code (IBC). New
construction, alteration, or rehabilitation shall comply with applicable ordinances set
forth by the City building and seismic codes in effect at the time of project design. In
accordance with Section 1803.2 of the 2016 CBC, a geotechnical investigation is
required that must evaluate soil classification, slope stability, soil strength, position and
adequacy of load-bearing soils, the effect of moisture variation on soil-bearing capacity,
compressibility, liquefaction, and expansiveness, as necessary, determined by the
Building Official. The geotechnical investigation must be prepared by registered
professionals (i.e., California Registered Civil Engineer or Certified Engineering
Geologist). Recommendations of the report, as they pertain to structural design and
construction recommendations for earthwork, grading, slopes, foundations, pavements,
and other necessary geologic and seismic considerations, must be incorporated into the
design and construction of the proposed project.
Seismic design parameters for the project are set forth in the preliminary
geotechnical investigation report (see Appendix E1 of the DEIR). Project design and
construction would comply with 2016 CBC standards for earthquake resistance. Seismic
design criteria and requirements in the CBC would allow structures and infrastructure to
withstand seismic ground shaking and reduce hazards to persons and property. The
CBC also requires that the recommendations of the geotechnical report, prepared by
registered professionals (i.e., California Registered Civil Engineer or Certified
Engineering Geologist), be incorporated into the design and construction of the project.
Compliance with CBC requirements, including the seismic design parameters of set
forth in Appendix E1 of this EIR, would ensure that the project development would not
exacerbate a seismic hazard or subject people or structures to substantial hazards from
ground shaking.
Liquefaction
Liquefaction refers to loose, saturated sand or silt deposits that behave as a
liquid and lose their load-supporting capability when strongly shaken. A liquefaction
analysis conducted as part of the geotechnical investigation estimated Seismically
induced settlement onsite at about 2.5 inches, and differential seismically-induced
settlement at about 1.25 inches over a 30-foot span. Estimated liquefaction onsite was
considered in the foundation design—exterior continuous footings—recommended in
the geotechnical investigation report. Compliance with CBC requirements, including the
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 25 of 144
foundation design parameters of set forth in Appendix E1 of this EIR, would ensure that
project development would not exacerbate a seismic-related ground failure or subject
people or structures to substantial liquefaction hazards.
3. Landslides
Threshold: Would the Project expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death
involving:
- Landslides?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-4 of the DEIR; page 6 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.4, Geology and Soils, page 8-4 of the DEIR, and page 6 of the Tech.
Memo.
The Modified Project would not require a change to the geology and soils
analysis in the DEIR. Since the Modified Project would occur in the footprint of what was
already analyzed, new or more severe impacts would not occur. As described in the
DEIR, 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 DEIR. The site and surroundings are nearly level. The nearest slope to the site is
the east bank of Trabuco Creek, opposite Paseo Adelanto west of the site, which is
concrete and does not pose a landslide hazard.
4. Erosion
Threshold: Would the Project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.5-12 of the DEIR; page 6 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.5, Geology and Soils, Impact 5.5-2, starting on page 5.5-11 of the DEIR,
and page 6 of the Tech. Memo.
The Modified Project would not require a change to the geology and soils
analysis in the DEIR. Since the Modified Project would occur in the footprint of what was
already analyzed, new or more severe impacts would not occur. As described in the
DEIR, 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 DEIR. Erosion is the movement of soil from place to place, and is a natural
process. The main natural agents of erosion in the region are wind and flowing water.
Erosion can be accelerated dramatically by ground-disturbing activities if effective
erosion control measures are not used. Soil can be carried off construction sites or bare
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 26 of 144
land by wind and water, and tracked off construction sites by vehicles. Implementation
of the proposed project would require grading, exposing onsite soils susceptible to
erosion impact, especially during heavy rains. However, reduction of the erosion
potential would be accomplished through the requirement to prepare a SWPPP. The
project is required to comply with the NPDES General Permit for Storm Water
Discharges Associated with the Construction and Land Disturbance Activities, including
filing a Notice of Intent and preparing a SWPPP (See Impact 5.8-1, Section 5.8,
Hydrology and Water Quality of the DEIR). The SWPPP would specify BMPs to be used
to minimize stormwater pollution from project construction, including erosion and
sediment. The project construction contractor would implement the specified BMPs.
Categories of BMPs specified in SWPPPs are described in Table 5.5-1 of the DEIR.
Impacts would be less than significant after implementation of BMPs.
At project completion the entire project site would be developed with buildings,
surface parking, walkways and other paved areas, and landscaping; thus, soil onsite
would not be susceptible to substantial erosion.
5. Unstable Soils
Threshold: Would the Project 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 on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.5-17 of the DEIR; page 6 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.5, Geology and Soils, Impact 5.5-3, starting on page 5.5-13 of the DEIR,
and page 6 of the Tech. Memo. The Modified Project would not require a change to the
geology and soils analysis in the DEIR. Since the Modified Project would occur in the
footprint of what was already analyzed, new or more severe impacts would not occur.
As described in the DEIR, 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 DEIR.
Collapsible Soils
Collapsible soils shrink upon being wetted and/or being subject to a load. The
uppermost few feet of soil onsite were determined to be compressible, and unsuitable
for supporting the proposed buildings, by the geotechnical investigation. The
geotechnical investigation report recommends removal of existing soils under the
proposed buildings to five feet below existing grade, or three feet below the proposed
footings bottoms, whichever is greater. Removed soils would be replaced with
engineered and compacted fill. Removal of existing soil under proposed pavement to a
depth of one foot is recommended. Compliance with recommendations in the
geotechnical investigation report as required by the San Juan Capistrano Municipal
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 27 of 144
Code Chapter 8-2 would ensure that project development would not subject people or
structures to substantial hazards arising from collapsible soils. The recommendations
set forth in the geotechnical report are provided in Table 5.5-2 of the DEIR.
Geotechnical report recommendations 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.1.5, and 4.1.6 would ensure less
than significant impacts from collapsible soils.
Expansive Soils
A test of a subsurface soil sample yielded an expansion index of 25, indicating
low expansion potential. Soils with expansion indices over 20 are considered expansive
per 2016 CBC Section 1803.5.3. Expansive soils were considered during the
geotechnical investigation in formulating recommendations for remedial grading,
foundation design, and site drainage. Compliance with recommendations in the
geotechnical investigation report as required by the San Juan Capistrano Municipal
Code Chapter 8-2 would ensure that project development would not subject people or
structures to substantial hazards ensuing from expansive soils. The recommendations
set forth in the geotechnical report are provided in Table 5.5-2 of the DEIR.
Geotechnical report recommendations 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.2.3, 4.1.5, and 4.1.6 would ensure
less than significant impacts from expansive soils.
Corrosive Soils
Onsite soils have high concentrations of soluble sulfate. Sulfate in soil is
corrosive to steel reinforcement and concrete (COGS 2018). Proposed concrete and
metal improvements contacting site soils could be subject to corrosion. The
geotechnical report recommends removal of existing site soils under proposed buildings
to depths of five feet below existing grade or three feet below proposed footings
bottoms, whichever is greater; and to depths of one foot below proposed pavement. In
addition, about 18,735 cy of fill soil would be imported to the site to raise the site above
the flood elevation in the 100-year flood zone. The geotechnical investigation report
recommends that import soils be approved by the project geotechnical consultant prior
to delivery to the site. Compliance with recommendations in the geotechnical
investigation report as required by the San Juan Capistrano Municipal Code Chapter 8-
2 would ensure that project development would not expose people or structures to
substantial hazards from corrosive soils. The recommendations set forth in the
geotechnical report are provided in Table 5.5-2 of the DEIR. Geotechnical report
recommendation 4.4 would ensure less than significant impacts from corrosive soils.
6. Septic Tanks
Threshold: Would the Project have soils incapable of adequately supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-4 of the DEIR; page 6 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 28 of 144
in Section 8.4, Geology and Soils, page 8-4 of the DEIR, and page 6 of the Tech.
Memo.
The Modified Project would not require a change to the geology and soils
analysis in the DEIR. Since the Modified Project would occur in the footprint of what was
already analyzed, new or more severe impacts would not occur. As described in the
DEIR, 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 DEIR. There are sewer mains in Paseo Adelanto and Los Rios Street. Proposed
project construction would include construction of sewer laterals to connect to existing
mains. Project development would not use septic tanks. No impact would occur.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 29 of 144
G. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
1. Emissions Generation
Threshold: Would the Project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.6-23 of the DEIR; page 6 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Impact 5.6-1, starting on page 5.6-23 of the
DEIR, and page 6 of the Tech. Memo.
Implementation of the proposed project would not generate a net increase in
GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that would have a significant impact on the
environment.
The increases in GHG emissions that would result from project implementation
are shown in Table 5.6-7, Operational Phase GHG Emissions, of the DEIR. Annual
GHG emissions were calculated for construction and operation of the proposed project.
Operational phase emissions are from operation of the proposed land use and from
new, project-related vehicle trips. Construction emissions were amortized into the
operational phase in accordance with SCAQMD’s proposed methodology (SCAQMD
2009). The SCAQMD-recommended threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year was applied
to the project, consistent with SCAQMD protocol.
As shown in the table, the primary source of GHG emissions is transportation
sources from project-related vehicle trips followed by emissions generated from energy
usage and solid waste generation. Overall, the proposed project would generate 2,784
MTCO2e of GHG emissions annually and would fall below the SCAQMD bright-line
screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year. Further, here, the proposed project is a
small artisan retail offering that is co-located adjacent to a train station and parking
structure in the downtown area of the City. Like most retail development projects, the
proposed project is not the type of project that has the potential to create significant
GHG impacts. Thus, in addition to being below the SCAQMD-recommended bright-line
threshold, from a “real world” perspective, the vehicle trips and associated tail pipe
emissions that the EIR reflected to be “new” are very likely (from a real world
perspective) already part of the existing conditions (i.e., residents of the City and
Rancho Mission Viejo) and not truly attributed to the project.
Implementation of the Modified Project would result in a reduction of vehicle trips,
VMT and overall building square footage compared to what was analyzed in the DEIR.
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. Therefore, GHG emissions generated by the Modified Project are
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 30 of 144
not considered to cumulatively contribute to statewide GHG emissions, and impacts
would be less than significant.
2. Emission Reduction Plans
Threshold: Would the Project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emission of
greenhouse gases?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.6-25 of the DEIR; page 6 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Impact 5.6-2, starting on page 5.6-43 of the
DEIR, and page 6 of the Tech. Memo..
Implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with an applicable plan,
policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs.
Applicable plans adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions include CARB’s
Scoping Plan and SCAG’s 2016-2040 RTP/SCS. Implementation of the Modified Project
would result in a reduction of vehicle trips, VMT and overall building square footage
compared to what was analyzed in the DEIR. 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. A consistency analysis
with these plans for the proposed project is presented below.
CARB Scoping Plan
The CARB Scoping Plan is applicable to state agencies, but is not directly
applicable to cities/counties and individual projects (i.e., the Scoping Plan does not
require the City to adopt policies, programs, or regulations to reduce GHG emissions).
However, new regulations adopted by the state agencies outlined in the Scoping Plan
result in GHG emissions reductions at the local level. As a result, local jurisdictions
benefit from reductions in transportation emissions rates, increases in water efficiency in
the building and landscape codes, and other statewide actions that would affect a local
jurisdiction’s emissions inventory from the top down. Statewide strategies to reduce
GHG emissions include the LCFS and changes in the corporate average fuel economy
standards (e.g., Pavley I and Pavley California Advanced Clean Cars program).
Although measures in the Scoping Plan apply to state agencies and not the proposed
project, the project’s GHG emissions would be reduced by compliance with statewide
measures that have been adopted since AB 32 and SB 32 were adopted. Therefore, the
proposed project would be consistent with the CARB Scoping Plan, and impacts are
considered less than significant.
SCAG’s Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
SCAG’s 2016-2040 RTP/SCS was adopted April 7, 2016. SCAG’s RTP/SCS
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 31 of 144
identifies that land use strategies that focus on new housing and job growth in areas
served by high quality transit and other opportunity areas would be consistent with a
land use development pattern that supports and complements the proposed
transportation network. The overarching strategy in the 2016-2040 RTP/SCS is to plan
for the southern California region to grow in more compact communities in existing
urban areas; provide neighborhoods with efficient and plentiful public transit and
abundant and safe opportunities to walk, bike, and pursue other forms of active
transportation; and preserve more of the region’s remaining natural lands (SCAG 2016).
The 2016-2040 RTP/SCS contains transportation projects to help more efficiently
distribute population, housing, and employment growth, as well as a forecast
development that is generally consistent with regional-level general plan data. The
projected regional development pattern, when integrated with the proposed regional
transportation network identified in the 2016-2040 RTP/SCS, would reduce per capita
vehicular travel-related GHG emissions and achieve the GHG reduction per capita
targets for the SCAG region. The 2016-2040 RTP/SCS does not require that local
general plans, specific plans, or zoning be consistent with the 2016-2040 RTP/SCS, but
provides incentives for consistency for governments and developers.
The proposed project would involve the operation of a commercial and retail
mixed-use infill development project. Additionally, the proposed project would be in
proximity (less than 0.15 mile) to the San Juan Capistrano Metrolink station along with
several nearby Orange County Transportation Authority bus transit stops along Del
Obispo Street and Camino Capistrano. Furthermore, as described in Section 3.4.1.4
and further discussed under Impact 5.13.5, of the DEIR, the proposed project is
envisioned as a pedestrian-oriented development, and pedestrian access and
circulation are key project components. As shown in Figure 3-4 in Chapter 3, an
enhanced pedestrian entrance to the project site would be provided from Los Rios
Street, connecting to the current River Street. Additionally, an enhanced pedestrian path
to the proposed common area and buildings would be provided between the Farmstead
and Red Barn and would connect to the decomposed granite path of the former River
Street. Overall, the nearby transit facilities and proposed improvements to the
pedestrian network would support public transit use and walking and bicycling.
Furthermore, as discussed in Impact 5.9-1, of Chapter 5.9, Land Use and Planning, of
the DEIR, the proposed project is not considered a project of regionwide significance.
Therefore, based on the nature of the proposed project, it is anticipated that
implementation of the proposed project would not interfere with SCAG’s ability to
implement the regional strategies outlined in the RTP/SCS, and impacts are considered
less than significant.
H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
1. Hazardous Materials, Upset and Accident
Threshold: Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of
hazardous materials?
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 32 of 144
Would the Project 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?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.7-14 of the DEIR; page 6 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Impact 5.7-1, starting on page 5.7-13
of the DEIR, and page 6 of the Tech. Memo.
Project construction and operations would involve limited transport, use, and/or
disposal of hazardous materials.
Construction
Construction activities would involve demolition, grading and construction of new
buildings. Potentially hazardous materials used during construction include substances
such as paints, sealants, solvents, adhesives, cleaners, and diesel fuel. There is
potential for these materials to spill or to create hazardous conditions. However, the
materials used would not be in such quantities or stored in such a manner as to pose a
significant safety hazard. These activities would also be short term or one time in
nature, and would cease upon completion of the proposed project’s construction phase.
Project construction workers would also be trained in safe handling and hazardous
materials use.
The use, storage, transport, and disposal of construction-related hazardous
materials would be required to conform to existing laws and regulations. Any project-
related hazardous waste generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal
will be conducted in compliance with the Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) (Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 263), including the
management of non-hazardous solid wastes and underground tanks storing petroleum
and other hazardous substances. The project will be designed and constructed in
accordance with the regulations of the Orange County EHD, which serves as the
designated CUPA and which implements State and federal regulations for the following
programs: (1) Hazardous Waste Generator Program, (2) Hazardous Materials Release
Response Plans and Inventory Program, (3) California Accidental Release Prevention
(CalARP), (4) Above Storage Tank (AST) Program, and (5) Underground Storage Tank
(UST) Program.
Compliance with applicable laws and regulations governing the use, storage,
transportation, and disposal of hazardous materials would ensure that all potentially
hazardous materials are used and handled in an appropriate manner and would
minimize the potential for safety impacts. For example, compliance with existing
regulations would ensure that construction workers and the general public are not
exposed to any risks related to hazardous materials during demolition and construction
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 33 of 144
activities. Cal/OSHA has regulations concerning the use of hazardous materials,
including requirements for safety training, exposure warnings, availability of safety
equipment, and preparation of emergency action/prevention plans. Additionally, all spills
or leakage of petroleum products during construction activities are required to be
immediately contained, the hazardous material identified, and the material remediated
in compliance with applicable state and local regulations for the cleanup and disposal of
that contaminant. All contaminated waste would be required to be collected and
disposed of at an appropriately licensed disposal or treatment facility. Therefore,
hazards to the public or the environment arising from the routine use of hazardous
materials during project construction would be less than significant.
Further, the current use at the project site, the Ito Nursery, avoided the use of
chemicals, including pesticides and herbicides. In addition, a Phase II soil survey was
completed to determine whether any actionable levels of herbicides, pesticides, or
metals were present on the project site, and the results indicated that no concerning
levels of contaminants are present.
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. Thus, the project will not create any
significant health risks to construction workers or members of the public.
Operation
Operation of the proposed commercial and office uses would involve the use of
small amounts of hazardous materials, such as cleansers, 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.
Additionally, the use, storage, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials
would be governed by existing regulations of several agencies, including the US EPA,
US Department of Transportation, California Division of Occupational Safety and
Health, and Orange County EHD. Compliance with applicable laws and regulations
governing the use, storage, transportation, and disposal of hazardous materials would
ensure that all potentially hazardous materials are used and handled in an appropriate
manner and would minimize the potential for safety impacts. The proposed project
would also be constructed and operated with strict adherence to all emergency
response plan requirements set forth by the Orange County EHD and Orange County
Fire Service. Therefore, substantial hazards to the public or the environment arising
from the routine use, storage, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials during
long-term operation of the proposed project would not occur. Implementation of the
project will not create any significant health risks to future patrons or members of the
public. Long-term operation of the Modified Project would be similar to what was
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 34 of 144
analyzed in the DEIR, 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. Impacts would
be less than significant.
2. Hazards Near Schools
Threshold: Would the Project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-
quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-4 of the DEIR; page 6 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.5, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, page 8-4 of the DEIR, and page 6 of
the Tech. Memo.
There are no schools within 0.25 mile of the project site, and project development
would not emit hazardous substances or handle hazardous materials within 0.25 mile of
an existing or proposed school. The Modified Project would occur within the footprint of
what was previously analyzed. No impact would occur.
3. Waste Sites
Threshold: Would the Project be located on a site which 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?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-4 of the DEIR; page 6 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.5, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, page 8-4 of the DEIR, and page 6 of
the Tech. Memo.
A regulatory records review and environmental radius report was conducted for
the project site as part of the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (see Appendix F1
of this DEIR). No listings of environmental hazards were identified on the project site.
The Modified Project would occur within the footprint of what was previously analyzed,
no new impacts related to hazards would occur. No impact would occur.
4. Public Airports
Threshold: For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such
a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 35 of 144
public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project area?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-5 of the DEIR; page 6 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.5, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, page 8-5 of the DEIR, and page 6 of
the Tech. Memo.
The closest airport to the site is the John Wayne Airport located 17 miles to the
northwest. The project site is outside the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for
John Wayne Airport (AELUP 2007). Therefore the site is not located within an airport
land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport where such a
plan has not been adopted. The Modified Project would occur within the footprint of
what was previously analyzed, no new impacts related to hazards would occur. Thus,
no impact would occur.
5. Private Airports
Threshold: For a 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?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-5 of the DEIR; page 6 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.5, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, page 8-5 of the DEIR, and page 6 of
the Tech. Memo.
The project is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip (AirNav 2018); therefore,
the project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the
project area. The Modified Project would occur within the footprint of what was
previously analyzed, no new impacts related to hazards would occur. Thus, no impact
would occur.
6. Emergency Plans
Threshold: Would the Project impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-5 of the DEIR; page 6 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.5, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, page 8-5 of the DEIR, and page 6 of
the Tech. Memo.
The City of San Juan Capistrano has an emergency preparedness plan that
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 36 of 144
designates procedures to be followed in a major emergency. The plan identifies
resources available for emergency response and establishes coordinated action plans
for specific emergency situations and disasters, including earthquakes, fires, major rail
and roadway accidents, flooding, hazardous materials incidents, civil disturbance, and
nuclear disasters and attack.
Project construction and operation would not block emergency evacuation
routes, such as by construction staging or stockpiling soil or other materials. The
construction of internal circulation and dedicated emergency access along the eastern
boundary of the site would allow better access and circulation in the project vicinity
during an emergency. The proposed project would not interfere with emergency access
to or evacuation from surrounding properties. It would also not interfere with
implementation of provisions of the City’s emergency preparedness plan. The Modified
Project would occur within the footprint of what was previously analyzed, no new
impacts related to hazards would occur. No impact would occur.
7. Wildland Fires
Threshold: Would the Project 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?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-5 of the DEIR; page 6 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.5, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, page 8-5 of the DEIR, and page 6 of
the Tech. Memo.
The project site and surrounding land are built out with urban land uses; no
wildland vegetation that could fuel wildfires is present. The project site does not lie
within, and is not adjacent to Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones as mapped by the
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE 2011). The Modified
Project would occur within the footprint of what was previously analyzed, no new
impacts related to hazards would occur. Thus, no impact would occur.
I. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
1. Water Quality Standards and Degradation of Water Quality
Threshold: Would the Project violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements?
Would the Project otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.8-22 of the DEIR; page 6 of the
Tech. Memo.)
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 37 of 144
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, Impact 5.8-1, starting on page 5.8-14 of
the DEIR, and page 6 of the Tech. Memo.
The proposed project would not violate water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements, otherwise degrade water quality, or have a significant impact
on water quality due to site discharges. The proposed project would result in an
increase in the overall amount of impervious surfaces on the site, which can result in a
greater potential to introduce pollutants to receiving waters. Urban runoff can carry a
variety of pollutants, such as oil and grease, metals, sediments, fertilizers and pesticide
residues from roadways, parking lots, and landscaped areas, and deposit them into an
adjacent waterway via the storm drain system. Construction of the project could also
result in the degradation of water quality with clearing and grading activities, potentially
releasing sediment, oil and greases, and other chemicals to downstream water bodies.
This runoff can flow directly into local streams or lakes or into storm drains and
continue through pipes until it is released untreated into a local waterway and eventually
the ocean. Untreated stormwater runoff degrades water quality in surface waters and
groundwater and can affect drinking water, human health, and plant and animal
habitats. Additionally, increased runoff from urban surfaces can increase the intensity of
flooding and erosion in receiving waters, resulting in increased sedimentation. The
following is a discussion of the potential impacts that the construction and operational
phases of the proposed project could have on water quality. 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.
Construction
Clearing, grading, excavation, and construction activities associated with the
proposed project have the potential to impact water quality through soil erosion and
increasing the amount of silt and debris carried in runoff. Additionally, the use of
construction materials such as fuels, solvents, and paints may present a risk to surface
water quality. Finally, the refueling and parking of construction vehicles and other
equipment onsite during construction may result in oil, grease, or related pollutant leaks
and spills that may discharge into the storm drain system.
Pollutants of concern are those which could be generated by the project for
which receiving waters are also listed on the CWA Section 303(d) List (see Table 5.8-1).
Project construction is expected to generate sediment, nutrients (nitrogen and
phosphorus), metals, trash and debris, and oil and grease. The use of concrete, paint,
and other building materials may also produce pollutants of concern.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 38 of 144
To minimize these potential impacts, the project is required to comply with the
NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with the Construction
and Land Disturbance Activities (NPDES No. CAS000002). Compliance requires filing a
Notice of Intent (NOI); a Risk Assessment; a Site Map; a Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and associated best management practices (BMPs); an
annual fee; and a signed certification statement. Additionally, an erosion and sediment
control plan (ESCP) is required for projects that disturb more than one acre of land and
implementation of BMPs to control erosion, debris, and construction-related pollutants.
The SWPPP must be implemented at the project site and revised as necessary as
administrative or physical conditions change. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit,
the project applicant is required to provide proof of compliance with the General Permit.
In addition, the proposed project is required to comply with the NPDES General Permit
pursuant to the City’s Municipal Code, Chapter 8-14, Water Quality Regulations.
The proposed project’s SWPPP would specify BMPs to be implemented to
minimize construction stormwater pollution impacts. The menu of BMPs has been
specifically designed by experts retained by the Water Board to ensure that
implementation of the BMPs will result in less than significant impacts to water quality
during construction. Construction BMPs include, but are not limited to, erosion controls,
sediment controls, tracking controls, non-stormwater management, materials and waste
management, and good housekeeping practices. The BMPs for construction activities
are briefly discussed below in Table 5.8-2 of the DEIR.
With the implementation of the SWPPP and BMPs during all construction
activities and compliance with the City’s erosion and sediment control requirements, the
impact to water quality during construction activities would be less than significant.
Operation
Once the project has been constructed, urban runoff could include a variety of
contaminants that could impact water quality. Runoff from buildings and parking lots
typically contain oils, grease, fuel, antifreeze, byproducts of combustion (such as lead,
cadmium, nickel, and other metals), as well as fertilizers, herbicides, pesticides, and
other pollutants. Precipitation at the beginning of the rainy season may result in an initial
stormwater runoff (first flush) with high pollutant concentrations. Pollutants expected
from the operational phase of the project are shown in Table 5.8-3 of the DEIR.
The project would be constructed and operated in accordance with the San
Diego Regional MS4 Permit (Order No. R9-2013-0001, as amended by Order Nos. R9-
2015-0001 and R9-2015-0100). The MS4 Permit requires new development and
redevelopment projects to adopt a WQMP to control contaminants into storm drain
systems, educate the public about stormwater impacts, detect and eliminate illicit
discharges, control runoff from construction sites, and implement BMPs and site-
specific runoff controls and treatments. A WQMP has been developed for this project
and is provided in Appendix G2 of the DEIR, which incorporates low-impact
development BMPs into the project. Low-impact development (LID) is an approach to
land development (or redevelopment) that works with nature to manage stormwater as
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 39 of 144
close to its source as possible. LID employs principles such as preserving and
recreating natural landscape features, minimizing effective imperviousness to create
functional and appealing site drainage that treat stormwater as a resource rather than a
waste product. There are many practices that have been used to adhere to these
principles such as bioretention facilities, rain gardens, vegetated rooftops, rain barrels,
and permeable pavements. By implementing LID principles and practices, water can be
managed in a way that reduces the impact of built areas and promotes the natural
movement of water within an ecosystem or watershed. In many instances,
implementation of BMPs can actually improve water quality; that is to say, applied on a
broad scale, LID can not only maintain but can in fact restore a watershed's hydrologic
and ecological functions (USEPA 2016). LID BMPs incorporated into the project include
permeable paving and bioinfiltration areas that contain vegetation and infiltrate into the
native soil.
Current LID standards require the on-site retention of runoff from the 85th
percentile, 24-hour rainfall event, through infiltration, biofiltration/bioretention, and/or
rainfall harvest and use. The biofiltration systems have been designed to retain the
post-development design capture volume for all storms up to and including the 85th
percentile, 24-hour rainfall event. Note that biofiltration systems are highly effective at
removing sediments, oil and grease, and trash and debris; and are also effective at
removing nutrients, metals, and pathogens/bacteria.
In compliance with the MS4 Permit, WQMP BMP features are required to be
implemented as part of the proposed development. Details regarding the proposed
stormwater treatment system are provided in the WQMP, which is attached as Appendix
G2. With the implementation of the operational BMPs and compliance with county and
city regulatory requirements, the impact of project with respect to water quality would be
less than significant.
2. Groundwater Supplies
Threshold: Would the Project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing
nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing
land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.8-23 of the DEIR; page 6 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, Impact 5.8-2, starting on page 5.8-22 of
the DEIR, and page 6 of the Tech. Memo.
The proposed project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 40 of 144
in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table. 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.
Construction
Construction activities would involve grading and excavation, which has the
potential to encounter groundwater and require construction dewatering. Soil borings
conducted on the project site indicate groundwater depths at 10 feet bgs. The
preliminary grading plan for the proposed project indicates that no excavation will
encounter the groundwater. Construction activities are temporary in nature and would
not result in a substantial depletion of groundwater supplies that could result in a
lowering of the groundwater table. Therefore, impacts to groundwater supplies or
recharge during construction would be less than significant.
Operation
Implementation of the project would increase development intensity and the
amount of impervious surfaces. The increase in impervious surfaces has the potential to
reduce groundwater recharge. Project development would increase the amount of
impervious surfaces onsite from 9.7 percent to 34.4 percent, an increase of 24.7
percent, according to the WQMP (Appendix G2 of the DEIR). However, in compliance
with the MS4 Permit, the project is required to implement LID, site design, and source
design treatment measures that will contribute to groundwater recharge and minimize
stormwater runoff from the site. The proposed LID BMPs include bioswales,
bioinfiltration systems, and permeable pavers, which contribute to groundwater
recharge via infiltration. The proposed development would increase stormwater runoff
by 3.2 cubic feet per second (cfs), however, the proposed infiltration systems would
accommodate the 85th percentile runoff rate and would decrease stormwater flow from
the site by 3.58 cfs and 4.97 cfs under 25-year and 100-year frequency events. This
would result in an increase in groundwater recharge compared to existing conditions
and would also reduce off-site sheet flow.
Project implementation would increase the number of employees, patrons, and
visitors onsite and result in an increase in water demand. According to the City of San
Juan Capistrano 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), imported water
currently provides 64 percent of demand. The City will move towards increasing
groundwater supplies so that by 2020 60 percent of demand is provided by groundwater
sources. Water supply is also discussed in further detail in Section 5.14, Utilities,
Service Systems, and Energy, of the DEIR. The UWMP indicates that the City will have
sufficient water supplies to meet demands in single-dry-years and multiple-dry-years
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 41 of 144
(that is, three consecutive dry years) over the 2020-2040 period (San Juan Capistrano,
2016). As discussed in Section 5.14, the City’s 20-year water supply projections would
meet the projected water demand for the project. Therefore, the operational phase of
the project will not result in a net deficit in aquifer volume. The impact of the project on
groundwater recharge and/or groundwater supplies would be less than significant.
3. Erosion or Siltation
Threshold: Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial
erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.8-27 of the DEIR; page 6 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, Impact 5.8-3 starting on page 5.8-23 of the
DEIR, and page 6 of the Tech. Memo.
The proposed project would not 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 which would result in a substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. The
proposed project is surrounded by urban development and is connected to existing
storm drain system. The proposed project does not include the alteration of any natural
drainage channels or any watercourse. In fact, the proposed drainage has been
designed to mimic the existing drainage patterns. As shown on Figure 5.8-3 of the
DEIR, the impervious area from the buildings and adjacent sidewalks are conveyed into
a bioinfiltration facility that will have capacity for the 85th percentile 24-hour storm event.
Pervious paving BMPs, such as gravel paving, will be provided for all parking and fire
apparatus roads. The parking lot area will be gravel paving that will be self-retaining for
the 85th percentile 24-hour event. Storm water flows will be conveyed into an
underground detention system (6,750 cubic foot) at the southwest corner of the site.
Multi-stage discharge pipes convey the storm water into the existing 5.5-foot width by
2.25-foot height box culvert within Paseo Adelanto that transitions to an existing 48-inch
pipe, which ultimately discharges into Trabuco Creek. The outlets of the underground
storage facility will restrict the flow from the facility and thus attenuate the peak flows for
the 25-year and 100-year frequency events. The underground facility will connect the
underground box culvert with a box structure. Stormwater flows from the existing
residential area to the east will be captured along the eastern property line with a
vegetated swale and conveyed into the on-site storm drain system.
The area inlet immediately west of Zoomars will be reconstructed to raise the top
of grate. A new 30-inch storm drain will be installed to replace the existing 18-inch
corrugated metal pipe. This will allow the additional flows from Los Rios Park to be
conveyed into the storm drain system.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 42 of 144
The proposed development has been designed in accordance with the Orange
County Hydrology Manual. The hydrology report, which is provided in Appendix G1 of
the DEIR, calculates the stormwater runoff volumes and rates from the 25-year and
100-year storms under existing and proposed buildout conditions. The results are
summarized in Table 5.8-4 of the DEIR the post development peak runoff is attenuated
to pre-developed condition. 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.
Construction
The majority of the risks for potential erosion and siltation impacts could occur
during the construction phase (e.g., grading, clearing, and excavating) of the proposed
project. During construction, the project site would be cleared of vegetation and existing
facilities and structures in preparation for grading, which would expose loose soil to
potential wind and water erosion. If not controlled, the transport of these materials to
local waterways would temporarily increase suspended sediment concentrations and
release pollutants attached to sediment particles into local waterways. However, as
stated under Impact 5.8-1, the project applicant is required to submit an NOI and
SWPPP prior to the commencement of construction activities. The SWPPP would
require the implementation of erosion control BMPs (i.e., mulch, geotextiles, mats,
hydroseeding, earth dikes, swales) and sediment control BMPs (i.e., barriers such as
straw bales, gravelbags, fiber rolls, and gravel bag berms; desilting basin; cleaning
measures such as street sweeping) to be implemented during the project’s construction
activities. BMPs outlined in the SWPPP would address potential impacts associated
with erosion and siltation, and impacts would be less than significant.
Operation
The operational phase of the proposed project would include landscaping,
impervious surface coverage, and the project-related water quality design features. The
hydrology report indicates that the proposed stormwater treatment measures would
ensure that peak flows at final discharge are reduced from predeveloped conditions
during 25-year and 100-year frequency events. With implementation of the proposed
stormwater treatment measures and BMPs in accordance with regulatory requirements,
the proposed project would not result in a significant increase in surface runoff flow
rates or volumes in a manner that would cause flooding, and the impact would be less
than significant.
The project would implement LID, site design, and source control stormwater
treatment measures in accordance with the San Diego Regional MS4 permit.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 43 of 144
Implementation of the bioswales and stormwater infiltration systems would remove
trash, debris, and sediment and provide natural filtration of pollutants from the
stormwater runoff prior to discharge to the county’s storm drain system. Therefore,
implementation of the proposed project would reduce the amount of sediment in
stormwater exiting the site, and the impacts related to erosion and siltation would be
less than significant.
4. Flooding and Runoff
Threshold: Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-
site?
Would the Project create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted
runoff??
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.8-28 of the DEIR; page 6 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, Impact 5.8-4 starting on page 5.8-27 of the
DEIR, and page 6 of the Tech. Memo.
Development of the proposed project would not substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern to result in adverse flooding impacts, and create or contribute runoff
water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater systems, or
provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. The proposed drainage has
been designed to mimic the existing drainage patterns. The hydrology report indicates
that the proposed stormwater treatment measures would ensure that peak flows for
developed conditions are reduced to be less than predeveloped conditions during 25-
year and 100-year frequency events. Additionally, the hydrology report (Appendix G1 of
the DEIR) calculated existing and proposed stormwater pipe capacities and contributing
flows and determined that all pipes demonstrated adequate capacity to accept
contributing flows. The proposed project would not result in an increase in surface runoff
flow rates or volumes in a manner that would cause flooding, and the impact would be
less than significant.
The existing flap gate at the culver outlet into Trabuco Creek and the secondary
overflow path at the bike path connection to Trabuco Creek would continue to operate
under the proposed conditions. As stated previously, during coincidental storm events
the flap gate will be closed until the site’s flood elevation reaches 90.40 at which time
the flap gate will begin to open to release runoff. Additionally, the secondary overflow
elevation is 93.05 feet msl and buildings south of the project site have an existing
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 44 of 144
finished floor elevation of 93.80 feet’ msl. Therefore, even in the unlikely condition that
the flap gate locked and the detention basin upstream backs up, the secondary overflow
plan ensures that if water levels reached an elevation of 93.05 feet msl it would drain
directly into the flood control channel and would not flood the downstream buildings
south of the project site. The project would implement LID, site design, and source
control stormwater treatment measures in accordance with the San Diego Regional
MS4 permit. Implementation of the bioswales and stormwater infiltration systems would
remove pollutants, such as, trash, debris, and sediment and provide natural filtration of
pollutants from the stormwater runoff prior to discharge to the county’s storm drain
system. 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. Therefore, implementation of the
proposed project would reduce the amount of pollutants in stormwater exiting the site,
and the impacts related to erosion and siltation would be less than significant.
5. Flooding – Housing and Other Structures
Threshold: Would the Project place housing within a 100-year flood hazard
area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map?
Would the Project place within a 100-year flood hazard area
structures which would impede or redirect flood flows?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.8-29 of the DEIR; page 6 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, Impact 5.8-5 starting on page 5.8-28 of the
DEIR, and page 6 of the Tech. Memo.
Development of the proposed project would not place housing or structures
within a 100-year flood hazard area. A portion of the project site is within an SFHA.
Floodplain elevations are shown to be at a depth of 2 feet, which corresponds to an
elevation of approximately 92 feet msl. To ensure that the development would not place
structures within the 100-year flood hazard area, the finished floors of the proposed five
buildings will be elevated to a minimum elevation of 94 feet msl. Therefore, all
structures will be above the 100-year floodplain by at least 2 feet. The proposed project
will not impede or redirect flood flows because implementation of the storm drain
system, bio swales, bioinfiltration systems, and permeable pavers ensure that the 100
year peak flow is 100 percent contained within the pipe. The proposed infiltration
systems would accommodate the 85th percentile runoff rate and would decrease
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 45 of 144
stormwater flow from the site by 3.58 cfs and 4.97 cfs under 25-year and 100-year
frequency events. This would result in an increase in groundwater recharge compared
to existing conditions and would also reduce off-site sheet flow. Additionally, as
described above, the secondary overflow plan ensures that if water levels reached an
elevation of 93.05 feet msl it would drain directly into the flood control channel and
would not flood the downstream buildings south of the project site.
Several storm drain improvements in the surrounding area have occurred since
FEMA last mapped the flood plain in the area; the City constructed three separate storm
drain facilities in River Street, the Los Rios Park, and Ramos Street. The flood plain
mapping has not been updated following these improvements. The City of San Juan
Capistrano has adopted local standards for construction in floodplain areas.
Development within the 100-year floodplain require the placement of fill to elevate
structures one foot above the 100-year floodplain elevation. In order for the proposed
project to be considered outside of the floodplain and no longer subject to special flood
hazard requirements, the project applicant is required to submit an application to FEMA
for a Conditional Letter of Map Revision/Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR-F/LOMR-F)
after the fill has been placed. After FEMA has revised the FIRM to show that the project
is outside of the SFHA, the minimum NFIP floodplain management standards and
mandatory flood insurance requirements would no longer apply. The City would review
and approve the plans prior to the issuance of building permits. The project applicant
submitted the CLOMR-F application to FEMA on May 31, 2018, indicating that the
proposed structures would be elevated by fill and would not be inundated by the base
flood. With elevating the lowest floor at least as high as the depth number specified in
feet on the FIRM and compliance with Federal and local regulatory requirements, the
potential to impede or redirect flood flows would be less than significant.
Construction within SFHAs is governed by the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 8-
11, Floodplain Management Regulations. Section 8-11.113 sets forth construction
requirements for development that would minimize flood hazard risks, including
anchoring, elevation, and flood-proofing, and standards for utilities, subdivisions,
residential and non-residential construction. Compliance with the City’s floodplain
management regulations, would be less than significant. 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.
6. Levee and Dam Failure
Threshold: Would the Project 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?
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 46 of 144
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-5 of the DEIR; page 6 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.6, Hydrology and Water Quality, page 8-5 of the DEIR, and page 6 of the
Tech. Memo.
The project site is outside any dam inundation areas as indicated on the
California Office of Emergency Services Dam Inundation Map (Cal OES, 2016). The
project is also not subject to flooding due to levees as indicated on FEMA/ Firm Maps
(FEMA, 2018). Thus, no impact would occur.
7. Seiche, Tsunami and Mudflow
Threshold: Would the Project expose people or structures to inundation by
seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-6 of the DEIR; page 6 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.6, Hydrology and Water Quality, page 8-6 of the DEIR, and page 6 of the
Tech. Memo.
A seiche is a surface wave created when a body of water is shaken, usually by
earthquake activity. Seiches are of concern relative to water storage facilities because
inundation from a seiche can occur if the wave overflows a containment wall, such as
the wall of a reservoir, water storage tank, dam or other artificial body of water. There
currently are no active aboveground water storage tanks or reservoirs in close proximity
to the project site that could cause flooding if the tanks or reservoirs were to fail during a
maximum credible earthquake. Thus, no impact would occur.
Tsunamis are large ocean waves caused by underwater seismic activity. When
tsunamis hit the coast, they can cause considerable damage to property and put the
public at risk. The project site is outside the tsunami hazard zone as indicated on the
California Geological Survey’s Tsunami Inundation Zones map. Thus, no impact would
occur.
Mudflows are associated with landslides and heavy rainfall. The project site is
mostly flat with mild slopes and is surrounded by urban development; therefore, no
adjacent hillsides could cause mudflows or landslides onto the project site. No impact
would occur.
J. LAND USE AND PLANNING
1. Established Communities
Threshold: Would the Project physically divide an established community?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-6 of the DEIR; page 7 of the Tech. Memo.)
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 47 of 144
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.7, Land Use, page 8-6 of the DEIR, and page 7 of the Tech. Memo.
The project site is within the Los Rios Specific Plan area and is surrounded by a
mix of residential and commercial uses to the north, east, and south. Residential uses
are also located west of the site across from Paseo Adelanto, the Trabuco Creek Trail,
and the Trabuco Creek Channel. Currently the project site is fenced and provides
limited access between surrounding land uses. Development would occur within an infill
area. The proposed project is designed to enhance bicycle and pedestrian connectivity
and provide connections to the Los Rios Specific Plan area, the San Juan Capistrano
Metrolink Station, and downtown area. Project development would not divide an
established community, and no impact would occur.
2. Conflicts With Plans
Threshold: Would the Project conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy,
or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local
coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.9-12 of the DEIR; page 7 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.9, Land Use and Planning, Impact 5.9-1 starting on page 5.9-4 of the DEIR,
and page 7 of the Tech. Memo.
Implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with applicable plans
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.
San Juan Capistrano General Plan
According to the City’s current General Plan Land Use Map (San Juan
Capistrano 2015), the land use designation of the project site is Specific Plan/Precise
Plan (SP/PP), which applies to areas governed by a specific plan or precise plan
adopted prior to development. As described above, the project site lies within the
boundaries of and is governed by the Los Rios Specific Plan. Upon the adoption of the
Specific Plan, it was deemed consistent with the provisions of the General Plan.
Consistency with the applicable goals and policies of the City’s General Plan is
evaluated in Table 5.9-1 of the DEIR. Although the City’s General Plan contains
numerous additional goals and policies beyond those discussed in the following table,
those goals and policies are not closely related to the “purpose of avoiding or mitigating
an environmental effect” and are therefore not analyzed in the table. Consistency with
the City’s Circulation Element is provided in Section 5.12, Transportation and Traffic, of
the DEIR.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 48 of 144
As demonstrated in Table 5.9-1 of the DEIR, development of the proposed
project would not result in a conflict with the City’s General Plan. A general plan
amendment being processed to ensure consistency of the proposed project with both
the City’s General Plan and the Los Rios Specific Plan, as amended. Proposed General
Plan text amendments include:
• Cleaning up references to the Los Rios Specific Plan and the proposed
Commercial Core Planning Area.
• Revising Table LU-4, Development Capacity, to include the 5.86 acre
Commercial Core Planning Area, with a floor area ratio of 0.25 and 64,900
square feet.
• Adding policies to General Plan Circulation Goal 4 to allow on-street parking
along Paseo Adelanto and to transition River Street from an existing asphalt
street to a decomposed granite pedestrian access only.
• With adoption of the proposed general plan amendments, the proposed project
would be consistent with the City’s General Plan.
San Juan Capistrano Zoning Ordinance
Specific plans act as a bridge between general plans and individual development
proposals, which outside of specific plan areas are regulated solely by provisions of the
Zoning Ordinance. As discussed above, the zoning district of the project site is Specific
Plan/Precise Plan. The project site lies within the boundaries of and is governed by the
Los Rios Specific Plan, which outlines the zoning regulations (e.g., permitted land uses,
development standards, and design guidelines) applicable to development within the
Specific Plan area. The proposed project requires a Code Amendment (CA 16-003) to
amend various sections of the specific plan (as discussed below), ensuring that the
proposed project would be consistent with zoning regulations applicable to the project
site.
Los Rios Specific Plan
Goals and policies in the Los Rios Specific Plan are generally related to land use
compatibility, circulation improvements, and urban design; very few appear to have
been adopted “for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.”
Therefore, an analysis of consistency between these goals and policies is not
necessary to evaluate the proposed project under Threshold LU-2. For an evaluation of
the proposed project’s consistency with applicable land use and design-related goals
and policies, see Sections 5.1, Aesthetics, and 5.4, Cultural Resources, of this DEIR.
Consistency with circulation-related goals and policies are provided in Section 5.12,
Transportation and Traffic.
Approval of a Specific Plan Amendment is required to add the Commercial Core
Planning Area, change the development standards and policy statements contained
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 49 of 144
within the Los Rios Specific Plan, and add Appendix A to regulate land uses on the
project site. This would allow the precise mix of uses and buildings proposed by the
project. Approval of this Los Rios Specific Plan Amendment represents approval of the
River Street Marketplace Project and no further discretionary approvals will be
necessary or required; Municipal Code requirements for subsequent permits such as
tree removal permits, flood plain permits, and similar types of permits would be instead
replaced with the requirements contained in the Specific Plan Amendment (see Section
3.5 of the Specific Plan Amendment). Proposed changes to the specific plan are
summarized below.
• The Specific Plan would be amended to include a fourth planning area: the
“Commercial Core” area, which would be comprised of the project site. The area
would be intended to serve as “the commercial hub of the Specific Plan” and be a
“comprehensively designed project that highlights the agrarian history of the
area.”
• The Low Density Commercial designation would be redefined to reflect the
proposed project.
• Phase 1 of the Specific Plan circulation element would be modified to better
manage access to River Street from Los Rios Street.
• The Specific Plan would be amended to allow continued street parking along
Paseo Adelanto in addition to off-street parking proposed for the project site.
• Permitted uses, development standards, and design guidelines for the Low
Density Commercial District (the project site) would be moved to Appendix A of
the Los Rios Specific Plan. This appendix includes conceptual renderings for the
proposed project, a lighting plan, master sign program, detailed development
standards, and design guidelines (including a plant palette).
While the Project includes some changes to the Specific Plan’s existing
regulations applicable to the Low Density Commercial District, the revised standards
have been designed to continue to protect the existing character of the area. The
project does not propose any high intensity use, but instead a total of less than 65,000
square feet of commercial, spread out over 5 buildings. With adoption of the proposed
specific plan amendments, the proposed project would be consistent with the Los Rios
Specific Plan.
Historic Town Center Master Plan
The project site lies within the Connectivity subarea of the HTCMP. However this
area is not governed by the any aspect of the HTCMP or related Form Based Code and
is only discussed as a larger “study area” for purposes of discussing connectivity
between the Historic Town Center and adjacent neighborhoods. Overall, the proposed
project helps implement the type of connectivity envisioned by the HTCMP by creating
an enhanced pedestrian connection between Los Rios Street and the River Street. The
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 50 of 144
proposed project would also add parking near the Historic Town Center and would
broaden the range of retail offerings near transit attracting visitors to central San Juan
Capistrano, as advocated for in the HTCMP. Implementation of the proposed project
would be consistent with the HTCMP.
Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
Table 5.9-2 of the DEIR provides an assessment of the proposed project’s
relationship to pertinent 2016–2040 SCAG RTP/SCS goals. The RTP/SCS goals are
directed toward transit, transportation and mobility, and protection of the environment
and health of residents. The consistency analysis below focuses on the broad, policy-
oriented goals of the 2016–2040 RTP/SCS to determine consistency between the two
plans.
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.
3. Habitat Conservation Plans
Threshold: Would the Project conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural community conservation plan?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-6 of the DEIR; page 7 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.7, Land Use, page 8-6 of the DEIR, and page 7 of the Tech. Memo.
No impact would occur, as substantiated in Section 8.2, Biological Resources,
Threshold B-6, of the DEIR.
K. MINERAL RESOURCES
1. Regional and Statewide Mineral Resources
Threshold: Would the Project 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?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-6 of the DEIR)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.8, Mineral Resources, page 8-6 of the DEIR.
The project site is mapped Mineral Resource Zone 3 (MRZ-3) by the California
Geological Survey, indicating that it is in an area containing mineral deposits of
indeterminable significance. The project site is in a built-out urban area; surrounding
uses include residential uses, a petting zoo, a historic district, and a museum, all of
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 51 of 144
which are incompatible with mining use. The project site has operated as a nursery
since the early 1970s and project development would not cause a loss of availability of
mineral resources valuable to the region, and no impacts would occur.
2. Local Mineral Resources
Threshold: Would the Project 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?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-7 of the DEIR)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.8, Mineral Resources, page 8-7 of the DEIR.
No mining sites are identified in the City of San Juan Capistrano General Plan
Conservation and Open Space Element (San Juan Capistrano 2014). Project
development would not cause a loss of availability of a mining site identified in the City’s
General Plan or locally important mineral resource, and no impact would occur.
L. NOISE
1. Noise Standards – Long-term Operation and Permanent Increase in
Ambient Noise
Threshold: Would the Project result in the exposure of persons to or generation
of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
Would the Project result in a substantial permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.10-21 of the DEIR; page 7 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.10, Noise, Impact 5.10-2, starting on page 5.10-17 of the DEIR, and page 7
of the Tech. Memo.
Project implementation would result in long-term operation-related noise that
would not exceed local standards.
Roadway Noise
A significant roadway noise impact depends on the magnitude of increase.
“Audible” increases in general community noise levels generally refer to a changes of 3
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 52 of 144
dB or more because this level is the threshold of perception in exterior environments.
“Potentially audible” impacts refer to a change in noise level between 1 and 3 dB. Noise
level increases of less than 1 dB that are typically “inaudible” to the human ear except
under quiet conditions in controlled environments. Only “audible” changes in noise
levels at sensitive receptor locations (i.e., 3 dB or more) are considered potentially
significant. Note that a 3 dB increase in traffic-generated noise levels would require a
doubling of traffic flows (e.g., 5,000 vehicles per day to 10,000 per day). An increase of
3 dB is considered a significant increase.
All people driving to the proposed project site would access the site from Paseo
Adelanto or Los Rios Street, primarily via Del Obispo Street. Given the lack of direct
access to the project site from River Street, and the narrow configuration of this
roadway, negligible changes in traffic flows along River Street are expected as a result
of the project. The project’s traffic impact analysis shows that the proposed
development is expected to result in approximately 2,711 daily vehicle trips to and from
the study area at full buildout (LLG 2018). The expected increase in traffic was used to
determine potential traffic-generated noise impacts.
In order to assess the potential for mobile-source noise impacts, it was
necessary to determine the noise currently generated by vehicles traveling through the
project area. Table 5.10-8 of the DEIR shows that existing traffic noise along study area
roadways currently ranges from approximately 63 dBA to 72 dBA CNEL at a reference
distance of 50 feet from the centerline of each roadway.
Traffic noise increases were analyzed along major roadways in the vicinity of the
proposed project area. Based on the FHWA roadway noise calculation method, noise
levels at segments of Ortega Highway, Del Obispo Street, and Camino Capistrano were
analyzed with respect to existing traffic conditions, estimated traffic conditions at full
buildout of the project in 2020, and estimated traffic conditions at full buildout of the
citywide General Plan in 2040. These values were compared, and project-related
roadway noise increases are shown in Table 5.10-8 of the DEIR.
Based on this traffic noise analysis, the worst-case roadway noise increase
would result from traffic increases on Ortega Highway (RTE-74) between Camino
Capistrano and Del Obispo. The roadway noise increase along this segment is
estimated to be 1.5 dB. This worst-case result is well below the significance threshold of
a 3 dB increase. Thus, all road segments in the vicinity of the project site would
experience negligible or inaudible long-term traffic noise increases due to project
implementation. Therefore, the implementation of the proposed project would not result
in significant increases in traffic-related noise along the surrounding roadways, and
project-related roadway noise would be less than significant.
Stationary Source Noise
The proposed project site is currently developed with a commercial nursery that
generates noise from patrons, parking facilities, mechanical/HVAC equipment noise, on-
site material conveyances, and various deliveries/haul-offs. The proposed project
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 53 of 144
includes development of 64,900 square feet of commercial and office space. Some
noise sources associated with implementation of the proposed project would be similar
to the noise sources associated with the existing commercial nursery. However, due to
the increase in patron traffic, expanded parking facilities, and increased retail and office
uses, the proposed project is expected to generate noise in excess of existing
conditions. A significant stationary-source impact would occur if the activities or
equipment at the proposed project site produce noise levels at nearby sensitive
receptors in excess of the San Juan Capistrano Municipal Code noise standards.
The commercial receptors to the north and south of the proposed project site are
considered much less noise sensitive than residential receptors; as a result, they would
not be significantly impacted by on-site operations of the proposed project. Also, the
residential uses to the west of the proposed project site are at sufficient distances (i.e.,
at least 400 feet from the nearest project parking and at least 500 feet from the nearest
project buildings) to not be affected by stationary source noise associated with the
proposed project. The most sensitive receptors would be the residences directly to the
east of the proposed project site (that are accessed via Los Rios Street). However,
these would be shielded from the majority of proposed project noise sources by the
project’s buildings, which would reduce most stationary noise sources. Additionally, no
new notable noise sources such as trash compactors, loading docks, or other
mechanical equipment are currently planned for the eastern side of the Red Barn,
Green House, or Marketplace buildings, which are adjacent to the backyards of the Los
Rios Street homes.
While there is currently no plan for mechanical equipment along this eastern
roadway (at the rear of buildings), there will be electrical equipment, including building-
specific electrical panels / ‘switch-gear’ and two power transformers. For the former, the
meters, breakers, fuses, and associated items would not produce noise, and their
planned placement would result in no impact. For the latter, one transformer would be
located between the Red Barn and the Greenhouse building (approximately 30 feet
from the eastern boundary line), and the second would be located behind the
Marketplace building (approximately 40 feet from the eastern boundary line).
Transformers can produce a low-pitched humming sound. The size and duty of the
envisioned transformers (≤ 100 kilo-volt-amps) would be expected to yield sound levels
of approximately 51 dBA at one foot. This basic noise production level would be
reduced by 30 to 32 dB in propagating to the noted 30 to 40 feet receptor distances.
Thus, the expected transformer noise at the Los Rios properties would be
approximately 20 dBA. This expected value is well below the existing (and future) noise
environments by approximately 10 dB. Therefore, such sources would be completely
negligible with respect to adding to the community noise soundscape or with respect to
the City noise standards in Municipal Code Section 9-3.531. Therefore, the transformers
would also not produce notable noise, and their planned placement would result in no
impact.
Last, the proposed project’s easternmost emergency access roadway (between
the easternmost buildings and the Los Rios Street homes) is currently slated for
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 54 of 144
emergency vehicle use only and would not be used for deliveries, pick-ups, or trash
hauling. With the lack of new significant noise sources and the building shielding effects,
it is anticipated that the noise levels on the east edge of the commercial site would be
lower than existing conditions—a benefit to the Los Rios Street residences. Additional
details are provided in the following subsections.
Noise from Patrons, Parking Facilities, and Mechanical HVAC Equipment
The proposed development is expected to result in approximately 2,711 daily
vehicle trips to and from the study area at full buildout (LLG 2018). The associated
noise generation from expanded parking facilities and patrons visiting the project site is
expected to increase over existing project site conditions. However, in terms of the most
sensitive receptors, the building layout is designed in such a way so that most outdoor
patron activity would be near the central courtyard area and that most parking activities
would be within the western or southern portions of the project site. Thus, the proposed
buildings are expected to provide considerable barrier attenuation to the most sensitive
receptors. Additionally, due to the commonality between the proposed project
operations and the mix of uses in the project vicinity, the proposed project is not
expected to introduce any new intrusive noise sources and is not expected to contribute
to the total noise environment in the project vicinity.
Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning equipment on top of the proposed
buildings would be similar to such equipment being used at the commercial buildings to
the south of the proposed project site. Additionally, this equipment would be placed
within appropriate sound enclosures or parapets that would substantially reduce
mechanical equipment noise in terms of nearby sensitive receptors.
Further, as described above, the existing noise environment in areas surrounding
the proposed project site is in the range of 52 to 60 dBA Leq. Due to the low-level noise
generating characteristics of project-related stationary noise sources, the intervening
structures between the project-related noise sources and the nearest sensitive
receptors, and the relatively loud existing day time noise environment, stationary noise
associated with the proposed project is not expected to significantly contribute to the
total noise environment within the project vicinity.
Noise from Project-Related Delivery Trucks
The proposed project is also expected to generate truck movement noise from
regular material deliveries. Deliveries would occur on the south side of the proposed
Marketplace building and on the west side of the Mercantile building. No truck
movements or deliveries/pick-ups would occur along the easternmost emergency
access roadway (directly adjacent to the Los Rios Street homes).
To ascertain an appropriate reference noise level for delivery-related truck
movements, a survey of truck loading dock operational noise was used. The sampling
accounted for the major noise sources associated with one truck, such as airbrake
discharge, king-pin coupling, back-up warning “beep-beep” tone, and drive-off.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 55 of 144
Reference noise levels for a single truck are shown in Table 5.10-9 of the DEIR in
several different noise metrics. The nearest sensitive receptors would be the residences
to the east of the proposed project site. To account for the potential for trucks operating
at both delivery locations (i.e., the south side of the proposed Marketplace building and
the west side of the Mercantile building) the single-truck reference levels were
combined after applying distance attenuation for each delivery location. Additionally,
since the project buildings will generally act as noise barriers between the delivery
locations and the residences to the east, an estimated barrier attenuation was included
(where applicable). Truck delivery noise estimates at the nearest sensitive receptors are
provided in Table 5.10-9 of the DEIR. A significant impact would occur if delivery trucks
would produce noise levels at nearby sensitive receptors in excess of the San Juan
Capistrano Municipal Code noise standards.
As described above, the San Juan Capistrano Municipal Code limits exterior
noise (as measured at the nearest residences) to the following levels: 65 dBA L50; 70
dBA L25; 75 dBA L8; 80 dBA L2; 85 dBA Lmax. Noise from delivery-related truck
movements at the most sensitive residential receptors would be well below the
applicable limits in the municipal code. Thus, project-related delivery truck noise would
be less than significant.
In summary, noise generated by normal operations would not be notably different
from existing conditions in and around the proposed area of improvements and would
not exceed the City’s exterior noise standards. Therefore, no significant permanent
noise increases due to project-related activities would occur, and no mitigation
measures are necessary.
2. Vibration
Threshold: Would the Project result in the exposure of persons to or generation
of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.10-24 of the DEIR; page 7 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.10, Noise, Impact 5.10-3, starting on page 5.10-21 of the DEIR, and page 7
of the Tech. Memo.
The project would not create groundborne vibration and groundborne noise.
Groundborne vibration and groundborne noise may be of concern during construction
activities. Section 9-2.401 of the municipal code states that the generation of vibration of
a duration and intensity so as to be excessive, disturbing, or objectionable to persons of
ordinary sensibility located offsite, shall not be permitted. In lieu of numerical municipal
code vibration level limits, the vibration thresholds for this analysis use FTA guidelines
(see Tables 5.10-1 and 5.10-2 of the DEIR for annoyance and damage effects,
respectively). Groundborne vibration effects are relevant during both temporary
construction and ongoing operations of the proposed project.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 56 of 144
Vibration during Operation
Operation of the proposed project would not generate substantial levels of
vibration because there are no notable sources of vibrational energy associated with the
project. Thus, proposed project operations would not result in significant groundborne
vibration impacts for either damage or annoyance effects to offsite receptors.
Vibration during Construction
Construction activities generate varying degrees of ground vibration depending
on the construction procedures, construction equipment used, and proximity to
vibration-sensitive uses. Vibration can range from no perceptible effects at the lowest
vibration levels, to low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibrations at moderate levels, to
slight damage at the highest levels. Table 5.10-10 of the DEIR lists reference vibration
levels for different types of commonly used construction equipment.
Demolition of the existing structures and asphalt would require concrete saws,
excavators, and dozers. The proposed project would also include grading, which would
use excavators, dozers, and backhoes. Paving activities may also generate high levels
of construction vibration and would include pavers and rollers. There are some items
that are expected to be employed on the construction site that are not listed Tables
5.10-11 and 5.10-12 of the DEIR (e.g., excavator, backhoe). The vibration levels
produced by such items are estimated to be comparable to other items in the tables—
for example, excavator levels are comparable to large bulldozer levels. Some of these
equipment types may generate substantial levels of vibration at close distances.
Vibration Annoyance
Construction activities may be perceptible at the nearest sensitive receptors due
to their proximity. Groundborne vibration is rarely annoying to people who are outdoors,
so it is usually evaluated in terms of indoor receivers. For annoyance, vibration is
typically noticed nearby when objects in a building generate noise from rattling windows
or picture frames. Since construction activities are usually distributed throughout the
project site, vibration annoyance impacts are typically based on average vibration
levels, and annoyance impacts are estimated using the distance to the nearest building
from the center of the construction zone.
A significant impact would occur if construction-related vibration levels exceed 78
VdB at surrounding residential receptors or 84 VdB at surrounding commercial
receptors. Table 5.10-11, Average Annoyance Vibration Levels from Construction
Equipment, of the DEIR shows the vibration levels from typical earthmoving
construction equipment at the nearest receptors. Construction-generated vibration
levels would not exceed 78 VdB at any nearby residential receptors or 84 VdB at any
nearby commercial receptors. Therefore, no sensitive receptors would experience
vibration levels in excess of the San Juan Capistrano Municipal Code perception
threshold or the FTA vibration guidelines. Impacts related to construction vibration
annoyance would be less than significant.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 57 of 144
Vibration-Induced Structural/Architectural Damage
Beyond annoyance effects, higher levels of vibration can result in architectural
damage at receptor buildings. “Architectural damage” is defined as minor surface cracks
(in plaster, drywall, tile, or stucco) or sticking doors and windows. This is less severe
than “structural damage,” which compromises structural soundness or threatens the
basic integrity of the building shell. Building damage is typically not a concern for most
projects, with the occasional exception of blasting and pile driving during construction
(FTA 2006). No blasting, pile driving, or hard rock ripping/crushing activities would be
required during project construction. However, several of the structures surrounding the
proposed project site could be classified as historical buildings—particularly to the east
along Los Rios Street. For a conservative analysis, all the surrounding receptors will be
considered “Buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage” according to the FTA
vibration guidelines, and therefore the maximum vibration limit would be 0.12 ins/sec
PPV. Note that small construction equipment generates vibration levels less than 0.1
PPV in/sec at 25 feet away.
Since architectural damage from construction vibration sources can be a one-
time event, and since such damage depends on the soil type, ground strata, and
receptor building construction, vibration-damage distances are measured from the
construction boundary to the façade of the nearest receptor building. The nearest off-
site sensitive receptors to construction activities are the residences approximately 40
feet to the east of the boundary of proposed construction activities and the Zoomars
Petting Zoo approximately 40 feet north of the boundary of proposed construction
activities. Table 5.10-12, Architectural Damage Vibration Levels from Construction
Equipment, of the DEIR shows the PPV of some common construction equipment and
(loaded) haul trucks at the nearest receptors.
The maximum construction-related vibration level at the nearest receptors to the
east would be 0.104 PPV in/sec, which is below the 0.12 PPV in/sec criteria for
vibration-induced architectural damage (at “Buildings extremely susceptible to vibration
damage”). Therefore, architectural-damage vibration impacts from construction would
be less than significant for off-site receptors.
3. Public Airport Noise
Threshold: For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such
a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport, would the project expose people residing or
working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-7 of the DEIR; page 7 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.9, Noise, page 8-7 of the DEIR, and page 7 of the Tech. Memo.
The closest airport to the site is the John Wayne Airport located 17 miles to the
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 58 of 144
northwest. Project development would not expose people onsite to excessive levels of
airport-related noise, and no impact would occur.
4. Private Airstrip Noise
Threshold: 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?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-7 of the DEIR; page 7 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.9, Noise, page 8-7 of the DEIR, and page 7 of the Tech. Memo.
The project is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip (AirNav 2018), and project
development would not expose people to excessive noise levels. No impact would
occur.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 59 of 144
M. POPULATION AND HOUSING
1. Population Growth
Threshold: Would the Project induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of road or
other infrastructure?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-7 of the DEIR)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.10, Population and Housing, page 8-7 of the DEIR.
The addition of new commercial uses on the project site would result in
approximately 250 new employees on the project site. The Southern California
Association of Governments (SCAG) forecasts that there will be approximately 17,900
jobs in San Juan Capistrano in 2040 (SCAG 2016), an increase of 5.3 percent from the
existing 17,000 jobs estimated by the California Employment Development Department
(EDD) for December 2017 (EDD 2018). Jobs generated by the proposed project would
be within the projected job growth for the city, representing 27.8 percent of the job
growth anticipated between 2017 and 2040. Furthermore, jobs generated by the
proposed commercial uses would not substantially increase the workforce employed in
San Juan Capistrano—they would represent an increase of 1.5 percent from December
2017—and the jobs would be expected to be filled by existing nearby residents.
Southern Orange County has a substantial existing labor force within commuting
distance of the project site and new employees would not need to move to San Juan
Capistrano from outside the region. The proposed project would not induce substantial
population growth; and no impact would occur.
The project site is surrounded by urbanized neighborhoods and is already served
by City streets, infrastructure, and public services. The Modified Project would connect
into the existing infrastructure surrounding the project site and would not indirectly
induce population growth through the extension of roads, infrastructure, or utilities. No
impact would occur.
2. Displacement of Housing
Threshold: Would the Project displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-7 of the DEIR)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.10, Population and Housing, page 8-8 of the DEIR.
There are no homes or residents onsite. The Modified Project would not displace
housing; no impact would occur.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 60 of 144
3. Displacement of People
Threshold: Would the Project displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-8 of the DEIR)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.10, Population and Housing, page 8-8 of the DEIR.
There are no homes or residents onsite. The Modified Project would not
displace substantial numbers of people; no impact would occur.
N. PUBLIC SERVICES
1. Fire Protection
Threshold: Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for
fire protection?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.11-5 of the DEIR; page 7 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.11, Public Services, Impact 5.11-1, starting on page 5.11-3 of the DEIR,
and page 7 of the Tech. Memo.
Construction
Construction of the proposed project is not expected to increase demand for fire
protection and emergency medical services, however, the construction activities has the
potential to result in temporary traffic detours and disruptions. To address fire and
emergency access needs, the project applicant is responsible for the preparation and
submittal of a construction area traffic management plan. As described in Chapter 3,
Project Description, of the DEIR the plan would be required to identify truck routes and
traffic controls in the event of limited access or closure of any traffic lanes, parking
lanes, parkways or any other public right-of-way is required. Fire and emergency
vehicles would have access to the project site via Del Obispo Street, Paseo Adelanto,
and Los Rios Street. During the development review process the project applicant
would be required to coordinate with OCFA to ensure adequate emergency vehicle
access during all phases of construction. Therefore, construction activities would not
interfere with response times or service ratios and impacts would be less than
significant.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 61 of 144
Operation
Project development would result in a slight increase in demands for fire
protection and emergency medical services. OCFA determined that it can serve the
project with existing firefighting stations, apparatus, and staff, and that project
development would not require the OCFA to build new or expanded fire stations or
obtain additional apparatus and staff (Rivers 2018). Therefore, impacts would be less
than significant.
Further, the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable fire
code and ordinances for construction, access, water mains, fire flows, and fire hydrants.
For example, site plans would be submitted to OCFA to ensure compliance with OCFA
standard conditions, including fire flow requirement based upon the tenant type, building
size, and building type. Access to and around structures would meet OCFA and CFC
requirements. The project would provide restricted, emergency-only access along the
eastern boundary of the site, via gated entries from both River Street and the southern
parking pool. Fire personnel will be provided exclusive access via installation of a Knox
Box. Compliance with OCFA requirements would ensure adequate provision of
resources.
In order to ensure adequate level of fire protections service within the City of San
Juan Capistrano, OCFA typically enters into a Secured Fire Projection Agreement with
private developers. As stated, the proposed project would not require the construction of
a new fire station or additional personnel. However, the project applicant will enter into a
Secured Fire Protection Agreement with OCFA to address any incremental impacts to
fire facilities and services. Additionally, project operation would generate tax revenue,
part of which would be available to fund OCFA through the City’s General Fund and
Structural Fire Fund.
2. Police Protection
Threshold: Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for
police protection?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.11-8 of the DEIR; page 7 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.11, Public Services, Impact 5.11-2, starting on page 5.11-7 of the DEIR,
and page 7 of the Tech. Memo.
Construction
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 62 of 144
Construction activities on the site would occur over a period of approximately 17
months. During construction activities there is a potential for increased theft, vandalism,
and trespassing. However, the project applicant will be required to ensure that site
access is restricted and adequate security is maintained to prevent unlawful trespass,
vandalism, theft of construction materials and/or equipment, and other property crimes.
Additionally, implementation of the project’s construction area traffic management plan
would ensure that road or lane closures do not affect response times by law
enforcement agencies. With prior notification of construction schedules, lane closures,
etc., OCSD will be able to respond in a timely manner to emergency calls in the affected
area. As the Modified Project 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. Therefore, construction
activities would not interfere with response times or service ratios and impacts would be
less than significant.
Operation
The proposed project would result in the development of 64,900 square feet of
commercial and office land uses, resulting in an increase of approximately 250
employees. The proposed uses and increase in employees and visitors to the project
site would increase calls for polices services. OCSD anticipates that it will be able to
serve the proposed project with existing stations, staff, and equipment, and that it would
not need to build new or expanded Sheriff’s stations—or obtain additional staff or
equipment—to serve the project (Bulanek 2018). Therefore, law enforcement personnel
will be able to respond in a timely manner to emergency calls in the affected area and
impacts would be less than significant.
Additional tax revenue generated by implementation of the proposed project
would also contribute to the City’s General Fund, which could be allocated to fund
additional police services. As the Modified Project 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.
3. Schools, Parks, or Libraries
Threshold: Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for
schools, parks or libraries?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-8 of the DEIR; page 7 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.11, Public Services, page 8-8 of the DEIR, and page 7 of the Tech. Memo.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 63 of 144
Demands for school, parks and library services and facilities are generated by
the population within the service area. The proposed project would not increase the
number of residents or households in the region and thus would not generate increased
demands for schools, parks, or libraries. The proposed project would increase the
number of employees on the project site. However, jobs would be expected to be filled
by existing nearby residents and would not increase the demand for schools, parks, or
libraries. As the Modified Project 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. No impact would occur.
O. RECREATION
1. Deterioration
Threshold: Would the Project increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-8 of the DEIR)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.12, Recreation, page 8-8 of the DEIR.
Demand for recreational facilities is generated by the population within the parks
and recreation service area. The project does not propose development of housing and
would not increase the population within the City. The proposed project would increase
the number of employees on the project site. However, jobs would be expected to be
filled by existing nearby residents and would not increase the demand on existing parks
or other recreational facilities. As the Modified Project 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.
Project development would not increase use of recreational facilities, and no impact
would occur.
2. Construction of New Facilities
Threshold: Does the Project include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities which have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-9 of the DEIR)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.12, Recreation, page 8-9 of the DEIR.
The project does not propose development of recreational facilities and, as
indicated previous, the project would not increase the demand requiring expansion of
such facilities. As the Modified Project would include less square footage, and it is
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 64 of 144
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. No
impact would occur.
P. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC
1. Plans, Policies, and Ordinances – Long-term Operation
Threshold: Would the Project 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 n 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?
Finding: Less than significant. (Pages 5.12-49, 5.12-64, and 5.12-65 of the
DEIR; pages 7-8 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.12, Transportation and Traffic, Impacts 5.12-1 and 5.12-2, starting on page
5.12-40 of the DEIR, and pages 7-8 of the Tech. Memo.
Project-related trip generation would not impact levels of service for the existing
area roadway system. The TIA evaluated project-related traffic impacts on the City’s
circulation system utilizing several methodologies: ICU analysis, HCM analysis,
intersection “Hot Spot” Synchro analysis, roadway link volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio
analysis, and peak hour segment analysis. As discussed, potential project-related traffic
impacts were evaluated for three scenarios to determine potential project-related traffic
impacts: (1) Existing Plus Project; (2) Existing Plus Project Plus Cumulative (Year
2020); and (3) General Plan Buildout.
Revised trip generation based on the changes associated with the Modified
Project would be less than that identified in the EIR. The EIR’s analysis forecast the
project 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. Thus, the traffic conditions and significance conclusions
below apply to the Modified Project as well.
Existing Plus Project
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 65 of 144
The Existing Plus Project traffic conditions is evaluated to determine the project’s
potential direct impacts.
Intersection Capacity Analysis (ICU Method)
Table 5.12-12 (columns 2 and 4) of the DEIR show the City’s LOS goal and a
summary of the existing AM and PM peak hour LOS. As shown, all intersections are
currently operating at acceptable LOS. A project’s impact (direct impact) on the existing
street system is considered “significant” if the project’s ICU increase is 0.010 or greater
and the resulting Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions LOS is “E” or “F” (ICU >
0.900). For “Hot Spot” intersections, a project’s impact (direct impact) on the existing
street system is considered “significant” if the project’s ICU increase is 0.010 or greater
and the resulting Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions LOS is “F” (ICU > 1.000).
Table 5.12-12 of the DEIR provides a comparison of existing peak hour traffic
conditions (column 4) with the addition of project related traffic (column 5), a
determination of direct project impacts (column 7). As shown, all key area intersections
are expected to continue to operate at acceptable LOS based on the City’s LOS criteria;
no direct impacts would occur.
Intersection Capacity Analysis (HCM Method)
Tables 5.12-8 and 5.12-13 of the DEIR show the City’s LOS goal and a summary
of the existing AM and PM peak hour LOS. As shown, all intersections are currently
operating at acceptable LOS. A project’s impact (direct impact) on the existing street
system is considered “significant” if the project’s delay increase is 1.0 second or greater
and the resulting Existing Plus Project traffic conditions LOS is “E” or “F” (Delay “> 35.0
s/v” or “> 55.0 s/v”). For “Hot Spot” intersections, a project’s impact (direct impact) on
the existing street system is considered “significant” if the project’s HCM increase is 1.0
second or greater and the resulting Existing Plus Project traffic conditions LOS is “F”
(Delay “> 50.0 s/v” or “> 80.0 s/v”).
Table 5.12-13 of the DEIR provides a comparison of existing peak hour traffic
conditions (column 4) with the addition of project related traffic (column 5), a
determination of direct project impacts (column 7). As shown, all key area intersections
are expected to continue to operate at acceptable LOS based on the City’s LOS criteria;
no direct impacts would occur.
Roadway Segment Analysis (Daily V/C Ratio Method)
Tables 5.12-9 and 5.12-14 of the DEIR show the City’s V/C ratio goal and
existing roadway segment LOS. As shown, all roadway are currently operating at
acceptable LOS. A project’s impact (direct impact) on the existing street system (major,
primary, secondary or limited secondary arterials) is considered “significant” if the
project’s V/C ratio increase is 0.010 or greater and the resulting Existing Plus Project
traffic conditions LOS is “E” or “F” (V/C > 0.900). A project’s impact (direct impact) on
the existing street system (local residential arterials) is considered “significant” if the
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 66 of 144
project’s V/C ratio increase is 0.010 or greater and the resulting Existing Plus Project
traffic conditions LOS is “D”, “E” or “F” (V/C > 0.800). For “Hot Spot” roadway segments,
a project’s impact (direct impact) on the existing street system is considered “significant”
if the project’s ICU increase is 0.010 or greater and the resulting Existing Plus Project
traffic conditions LOS is “F” (V/C > 1.000).
Table 5.12-14 of the DEIR provides a comparison of existing traffic conditions
(column 5) with the addition of project related traffic (column 6), a determination of direct
project impacts (column 8). As shown, all roadway segments are expected to continue
to operate at acceptable LOS based on the City’s LOS criteria; no direct impacts would
occur.
Existing Plus Project Plus Cumulative (Year 2020)
The Existing Plus Project Plus Cumulative traffic conditions is evaluated to
determine the project’s potential near-term cumulative impacts.
Intersection Capacity Analysis (ICU Method)
A project’s impact (cumulative impact) is considered “significant” if the project-
related ICU increment for Existing Plus Project traffic conditions minus Existing traffic
conditions is 0.010 or greater and the Existing Plus Project traffic conditions LOS is “A”,
“B”, “C” or “D” (ICU ≤ 0.900) and the Existing Plus Project Plus Cumulative (Year 2020)
traffic conditions LOS” is “E” or “F” (ICU > 0.900). For “Hot Spot” intersections, within a
cumulative traffic setting, a project’s impact (cumulative impact) is considered
“significant” if the project-related ICU increment for Existing Plus Project traffic
conditions minus Existing traffic conditions is 0.010 or greater and the Existing Plus
Project traffic conditions LOS is “A”, “B”, “C” “D” or “E” (ICU 1.000) and the Existing
Plus Project Plus Cumulative (Year 2020) traffic conditions LOS” is “F” (ICU > 1.000).
Table 5.12-12 of the DEIR shows that under the Existing Plus Project Plus
Cumulative traffic conditions (column 6), all key study intersections are expected to
continue to operate at acceptable LOS based on the City’s LOS criteria. The proposed
project would not result in any cumulative traffic impacts (column 7) to intersections
during the AM and PM peak hours.
Appendix E of the TIA (Appendix J1 of the DEIR) contains the ICU/LOS
calculation worksheets for the key signalized study intersections for the AM and PM
peak hours for the Existing Plus Project Plus Cumulative (Year 2020) Traffic Conditions.
Intersection Capacity Analysis (HCM Method)
A project’s impact (cumulative impact) is considered “significant” if the project-
related delay increment for Existing Plus Project traffic conditions minus Existing traffic
conditions is 1.0 seconds or greater and the Existing Plus Project traffic conditions LOS
is “A”, “B”, “C” or “D” (Delay “≤ 35.0 s/v” or “≤ 55.0 s/v”) and the Existing Plus Project
Plus Cumulative (Year 2020) traffic conditions LOS” is “E” or “F” (Delay “> 35.0 s/v” or
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 67 of 144
“> 55.0 s/v”). For “Hot Spot” intersections, within a cumulative traffic setting, a project’s
impact (cumulative impact) is considered “significant” if the project-related delay
increment for Existing Plus Project traffic conditions minus Existing traffic conditions is
1.0 second or greater and the Existing Plus Project traffic conditions LOS is “A”, “B”, “C”
“D” or “E” (Delay “≤ 50.0 s/v” or “≤ 80.0 s/v”) and the Existing Plus Project Plus
Cumulative (Year 2020) traffic conditions LOS” is “F” (Delay “> 50.0 s/v” or “> 80.0 s/v”).
Table 5.12-13 of the DEIR shows that under the Existing Plus Project Plus
Cumulative traffic conditions (column 6), all key study intersections are expected to
continue to operate at acceptable LOS based on the City’s LOS criteria. The proposed
project would not result in any cumulative traffic impacts (column 7) to intersections
during the AM and PM peak hours.
Appendix F of the TIA (Appendix J1 of the DEIR) contains the HCM Delay/LOS
calculation worksheets for the key study intersections for the AM and PM peak hours for
the Existing Plus Project Plus Cumulative (Year 2020) Traffic Conditions.
Roadway Segment Analysis (Daily V/C Ratio Method)
A project’s impact (cumulative impact) is considered “significant” if the project-
related V/C ratio increment for Existing Plus Project traffic conditions minus Existing
Traffic conditions for major, primary, secondary or limited secondary arterials is 0.010 or
greater and the Existing Plus Project traffic conditions LOS is “A”, “B”, “C” or “D” (V/C ≤
0.900) and the Existing Plus Project Plus Cumulative (Year 2020) traffic conditions
LOS” is “E” or “F” (V/C > 0.900). A project’s impact (cumulative impact) is considered
“significant” if the project-related V/C ratio increment for Existing Plus Project traffic
conditions minus Existing traffic conditions for local residential arterials is 0.010 or
greater and the Existing Plus Project traffic conditions LOS is “A”, “B” or “C” (V/C ≤
0.800) and the Existing Plus Project Plus Cumulative (Year 2020) traffic conditions
LOS” is “D”, “E” or “F” (V/C > 0.800). For “Hot Spot” roadway segments, within a
cumulative traffic setting, a project’s impact (cumulative impact) is considered
“significant” if the project-related V/C ratio increment for Existing Plus Project traffic
conditions minus Existing traffic conditions is 0.010 or greater and the Existing Plus
Project traffic conditions LOS is “A”, “B”, “C” “D” or “E” (V/C ≤ 1.000) and the Existing
Plus Project Plus Cumulative (Year 2020) traffic conditions LOS” is “F” (V/C > 1.000).
Table 5.12-14 of the DEIR shows that under the Existing Plus Project Plus
Cumulative traffic conditions (column 6), all roadway segments will operate at
acceptable LOS except for:
• 7. Del Obispo Street, between Camino Capistrano and Alipaz Street
In cases where a roadway exceeds the City’s LOS criteria, the City’s traffic
impact guidelines require a second tier peak hour V/C analysis to determine if in fact the
roadway is deficient. Because the peak hour reflects the most congested time of day, if
the peak hour analysis does not reflect an insufficient LOS, then the traffic engineer can
conclude that the roadway segment is not deficient. This second tier analysis is a
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 68 of 144
common approach with many lead agencies and is particularly useful in this case due to
the configuration of this roadway segment. The traffic model assumes that Del Obispo
Street between Camino Capistrano and Alipaz is a 4-lane facility. However, this
segment actually has 4 through lanes and dual left turn lanes at the signalized
intersection, which allows it to operate similar to a 6-lane facility. As demonstrated
below, under the Peak Hour analysis, the roadway segment is not deficient
Roadway Segment Analysis (Peak Hour V/C Method)
Table 5.12-15 of the DEIR summarizes the AM and PM peak hour roadway
segment LOS results at the one key roadway segment that was cumulatively impacted
on a daily bases based on the daily V/C ratio method of analysis. The LOS goal for this
roadway segment is LOS E. As shown, the roadway segment operates at acceptable
levels of service based on the peak hour V/C method of analysis under Existing,
Existing Plus Project, and Existing Plus Project Plus Cumulative conditions. The project
would not have a cumulative traffic impact based on the City’s LOS standards and
impact criteria.
Synchro 10.0 Method
The Synchro 10.0 software program is used to analyze closely spaced
intersections to determine the operating impact and potential queue. Per the City of San
Juan Capistrano requirements, a Synchro 10.0 analysis has been performed for three
(3) key intersections along Del Obispo Street that has closely-spaced signalized
intersections less than 900 feet apart. The closely-spaced signalized intersections
create substantial queuing and backup as a result of their proximity to each other. The
Synchro analysis is based on HCM Delay/LOS methodology.
Table 5.12-16 of the DEIR presents a summary of the peak hour Service Levels
at the three study intersections located at Del Obispo Street and (1) Camino Capistrano,
(2) Paseo Adelanto, and (3) Alipaz Street. As shown, all three intersections operate at
acceptable levels of service during Existing, Existing Plus Project, and Existing Plus
Project Plus Cumulative conditions. The proposed project will not directly or
cumulatively impact the three intersections.
Appendix G of the TIA (Appendix J1 of the DEIR) contains the Synchro 10.0 LOS
calculation worksheets for AM and PM peak hour near term traffic conditions.
General Plan Buildout
Intersection Capacity Analysis (ICU Method)
Table 5.12-17 of the DEIR summarizes the long-term (General Plan Buildout)
peak hour LOS results at the key study intersections based on the ICU method of
analysis and shows the proposed project’s traffic impact to the Circulation Element upon
buildout of the City’s General Plan. Table 5.12-17 indicates that under General Plan
Buildout traffic conditions (column 6), all the key signalized intersections are forecast to
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 69 of 144
operate acceptable LOS based on the City’s LOS criteria. The proposed project would
not result in any cumulative traffic impacts under General Plan Buildout conditions
(column 7) at any of the intersections during the AM and PM peak hours.
Appendix H of the TIA (Appendix J1 of the DEIR) contains the General Plan
Buildout ICU/LOS calculation worksheets for the key study intersections for the AM and
PM peak hours.
Intersection Capacity Analysis (HCM Method)
Table 5.12-18 shows that under General Plan Buildout traffic conditions (column
6) all the key study intersections are forecast to operate at acceptable LOS based on
the City’s LOS criteria. The proposed project would not result in any cumulative traffic
impacts (column 7) to intersections during the AM and PM peak hours.
Appendix J of the TIA (Appendix J1 of the DEIR) contains the General Plan
Buildout HCM Delay/LOS calculation worksheets for the key study intersections for the
AM and PM peak hours.
Roadway Segment Analysis (Daily V/C Ratio Method)
Table 5.12-19 of the DEIR shows that under General Plan Buildout traffic
conditions (column 7), all roadway segments will operate at acceptable LOS except for:
• 7. Del Obispo Street, between Camino Capistrano and Alipaz Street
In cases where a roadway exceeds the City’s LOS criteria, the City’s traffic
impact guidelines require a second tier peak hour V/C analysis to determine if in fact the
roadway is deficient. Because the peak hour reflects the most congested time of day, if
the peak hour analysis does not reflect an insufficient LOS, then the traffic engineer can
conclude that the roadway segment is not deficient. This second tier analysis is a
common approach with many lead agencies and is particularly useful in this case due to
the configuration of this roadway segment. The traffic model assumes that Del Obispo
Street between Camino Capistrano and Alipaz is a 4-lane facility. However, this
segment actually has 4 through lanes and dual left turn lanes at the signalized
intersection, which allows it to operate similar to a 6-lane facility. As demonstrated
below, under the Peak Hour analysis, the roadway segment is not deficient.
Roadway Segment Analysis (Peak Hour V/C Method)
Table 5.12-20 of the DEIR summarizes the AM and PM peak hour roadway
segment LOS results at the one key roadway segment that was cumulatively impacted
on a daily bases based on the daily V/C ratio method of analysis. The LOS goal for this
roadway segment is LOS E. As shown, the roadway segment operates at acceptable
levels of service (column 6) based on the peak hour V/C method of analysis under
General Plan Buildout conditions. The project would not have a cumulative traffic impact
(column 8) based on the City’s LOS standards and impact criteria.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 70 of 144
Synchro 10.0 Method
Table 5.12-21 of the DEIR presents a summary of the peak hour Service Levels
at the three study intersections located at Del Obispo Street and (1) Camino Capistrano,
(2) Paseo Adelanto, and (3) Alipaz Street. As shown, all three intersections operate at
acceptable levels of service during General Plan Buildout conditions. The proposed
project will not directly or cumulatively impact the three intersections.
Appendix K of the TIA (Appendix J1 of the DEIR) contains the Synchro 10.0 LOS
calculation worksheets for AM and PM peak hour near term traffic conditions.
Freeway Off-Ramps
Project-related trip generation in combination with existing and proposed
cumulative development would not result in freeway or highways exceeding acceptable
stacking/storage lengths on all off-ramps. A “turn pocket” queuing evaluation has been
conducted for the I-5 Freeway Off-Ramps at Ortega Highway to determine the minimum
required stacking/storage lengths for all off-ramp lanes. The queuing evaluation was
conducted for future conditions (Existing Plus Project Plus Cumulative (Year 2020) and
General Plan Buildout) and the Average Queue methodology, which calculates the
average queue value in terms of number of vehicles per lane. For the purposes of the
analysis, the minimum storage requirement for left-turn lanes and right-turn lanes was
calculated by taking 1.5 time the average queue length and multiplying it by an average
car length of 25 feet.
Existing Plus Project Plus Cumulative (Year 2020)
Table 5.12-22 of the DEIR identifies the minimum required stacking/storage
lengths for the off-ramp lanes at the two (2) ramp intersections of I-5 Freeway at Ortega
Highway for Existing Plus Project Plus Cumulative (Year 2020) traffic conditions. The
stacking/storage requirements shown in Table 5.12-22 are required at a minimum to
ensure that vehicles do not queue beyond the off-ramp causing interruptions to through
traffic on the mainline of the I-5 Freeway. Based on the estimated storage now provided
on the off-ramp intersections from the I-5 Freeway to Ortega Highway, there is
adequate storage for Existing Plus Project Plus Cumulative (Year 2020) traffic
conditions.
General Plan Buildout
Table 5.12-20 of the DEIR identifies the minimum required stacking/storage
lengths for the off-ramp lanes at the two (2) ramp intersections of I-5 Freeway at Ortega
Highway for General Plan Buildout traffic conditions. The stacking/storage requirements
shown in Table 5.12-23 are required at a minimum to ensure that vehicles do not queue
beyond the off-ramp causing interruptions to through traffic on the mainline of the I-5
Freeway. Based on the estimated storage now provided on the off-ramp intersections
from the I-5 Freeway to Ortega Highway, there is adequate storage for General Plan
Buildout traffic conditions.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 71 of 144
2. Congestion Management Programs
Threshold: Does the Project 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?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.12-66 of the DEIR; pages 7-8 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.12, Transportation and Traffic, Impact 5.12-4, starting on page 5.12-65 of
the DEIR, and pages 7-8 of the Tech. Memo.
Revised trip generation based on the changes associated with the Modified
Project would be less than that identified in the EIR. The EIR’s analysis forecast the
project 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. Thus, the traffic conditions and significance conclusions
below apply to the Modified Project as well.
Project-related trip generation in combination with existing and proposed
cumulative development would not result in designated road and/or highways exceeding
county congestion management agency service standards. Within the defined CMP
highway network, CMP Highway System (CMPHS) intersections are not allowed to
deteriorate to a condition which is worse than LOS E or the base year LOS, if worse
than E, without mitigation being prescribed in an acceptable deficiency plan. The CMP
requires that a traffic impact analysis be conducted for any project generating 2,400 or
more daily trips, or 1,600 or more daily trips for projects that directly access the
CMPHS. As noted in Impact 5.12.1, the proposed project is forecast to generate
approximately 2,711 daily trip-ends and thus meets the criteria requiring a CMP TIA.
There are two CMP intersections located within the study area of the proposed project:
• 1. I-5 NB Ramps at Ortega Highway
• 2. I-5 SB Ramps at Ortega Highway
A potential impact to a CMP link would occur if the project traffic would exceed
three percent of its daily LOS “E” capacity. As shown in Table 16-1 of the TIA (Appendix
J1 of the DEIR), the proposed project would only contribute 0.76 percent of the roadway
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 72 of 144
segment at Ortega Highway between the I-5 NB Ramps and the I-5 SB Ramps. This
does not exceed the three percent limit, therefore a CMP analysis is not required and
impacts are less than significant.
3. Air Traffic Patterns
Threshold: Does the Project 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?
Finding: No impact. (Page 8-9 of the DEIR; pages 7-8 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 8.13, Transportation and Traffic, page 8-9 of the DEIR, and pages 7-8 of the
Tech. Memo.
Implementation of the Modified Project would not result in a change in air traffic
patterns. The proposed project area is not within the any Airport Influence Area and
there are no private airstrips in the vicinity of the proposed project area (Airnav 2018).
Therefore, no impact would occur.
4. Emergency Access
Threshold: Does the Project result in inadequate emergency access?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.12-68 of the DEIR; pages 7-8 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.12, Transportation and Traffic, Impact 5.12-5, page 5.12-67 and 5.12-68 of
the DEIR, and pages 7-8 of the Tech. Memo.
Emergency Access
The on-site circulation layout was evaluated based on Turning Vehicle
Templates, developed by Jack E. Leisch & Associates and AutoTURN for AutoCAD
computer software that simulates turning maneuvers for various types of vehicles. The
turning templates were utilized to ensure that small service/delivery trucks (i.e., UPS,
FedEx, and trash trucks), fire trucks and passenger vehicles could properly access and
circulate through the project site. A trash truck turning template and fire truck turning
template was utilized in this evaluation. Curb return radii within the project site have
been confirmed and are adequate for passenger cars, service/delivery trucks and trash
trucks as well as a tour bus. No hazards or vehicle-pedestrian conflicts would occur.
Figures 5.12-8 and 5.12-9 of the DEIR present the turning movements required
of a trash truck and a fire truck to circulate throughout the project site, respectively. The
curb return radii are adequate for trash trucks and fire trucks, and the design of the
entry/exit points of the project driveways are adequate for expected traffic volumes. The
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 73 of 144
on-site circulation would not restrict emergency access; no impact would occur.
Evacuation Routes
The San Juan Capistrano Emergency Preparedness Plan designates Del Obispo
Street, south of the project site, as a City-designated evacuation route. Project-related
traffic would not adversely impact the City-designated evacuation route because the
project would not exceed LOS thresholds as demonstrated under Impact 5.12-1, of the
DEIR. The project would not impede with evacuation in the event of an emergency or
natural disaster; and impacts are less than significant.
5. Alternative Modes
Threshold: Does the Project conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise
decrease the performance or safety of such facilities?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.12-75 of the DEIR; pages 7-8 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.12, Transportation and Traffic, Impact 5.12-6, page 5.12-68 of the DEIR,
and pages 7-8 of the Tech. Memo.
The proposed project complies with adopted policies, plans, and programs
related to transit, bicycles, and pedestrians.
Transit
The proposed project would increase employees within a transit priority area,
since it is located within a quarter mile of the San Juan Capistrano station. There are
several bus stops in proximity to the project as well as a regional rail station, the San
Juan Capistrano station. There are 3 bus stops served by Orange County
Transportation Authority (OCTA) within walking distance to the project site:
• Two bus stops are on Del Obispo Street to the south of the project site, served
by OCTA Bus 91.
• One bus stop is at Del Obispo Street at Alipaz Street, also served by OCTA Bus
91.
Route 91 provides connections to several areas countywide, with access from
Laguna Hills to San Clemente. The project would not interrupt or displace any existing
bus stop. The project would not modify or introduce new features to any public road that
would affect OCTA facilities; therefore, no impact would occur.
Additionally, the San Juan Capistrano station is approximately 500 feet from the
project site, accessible via Los Rios Street or River Street and Paseo Adelanto. The
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 74 of 144
San Juan Capistrano station is served by the regional rail service, Metrolink, with two
lines operating from the station, the Orange County Line and the Inland Empire-OC
Line. The station is also served by Amtrak and the Pacific Surfliner passenger rail line.
The project would not interrupt or displace any rail line or interfere with the San Juan
Capistrano station. The Modified Project would not modify or introduce new features to
any public road that would affect transit in the project area; therefore, no impact would
occur.
Pedestrian
The proposed project would invite pedestrian activity through providing an
accessible, family-oriented use to the area. As described in Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2.1,
the project is envisioned as a pedestrian-oriented development, as pedestrian access
and circulation is a key component of the project. As shown in Figure 3-4 in Chapter 3,
an enhanced pedestrian entrance to the project site would be provided from Los Rios
Street, connecting to the current River Street. Historical depiction boards would also be
located in this area, providing a logical pedestrian transition from the O’Neill Museum,
which abuts the eastern site boundary. As part of the project, vehicular traffic along
River Street would be prohibited by the use of split-rail fencing to be placed just east of
the intersection with Paseo Adelanto, as well as retractable bollards in the northeastern
end of the project site where River Street intersects Los Rios Street. River Street would
be transitioned from the existing asphalt paved street to a decomposed granite path. An
enhanced pedestrian path to the proposed common area and buildings would be
provided between the Farmstead and Red Barn—the path would connect to the
decomposed granite path of the former River Street.
Patrons would also be able to safely and conveniently walk from the parking
areas to the common area and buildings via the decorative aggregate paving of the
parking areas. Additionally, a new public sidewalk would be constructed along Paseo
Adelanto. Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)-compliant parking and access
pathways would be provided throughout the site.
The Modified Project would enhance pedestrian connectivity throughout the site
and surrounding area, resulting in a beneficial impact to pedestrian facilities. No impact
to pedestrian facilities would occur.
Bicycle
The City of San Juan Capistrano promotes bicycling as a means of mobility and
a way in which to improve the quality of life within its community. As previously
described, Class I Bicycle paths in the vicinity of the project currently exist at the Robert
McCollum Memorial Bicycle Trail, Trabuco Creek Trail and San Juan Creek Trail. Class
II Bicycle routes currently exists along Del Obispo Street, Alipaz Street and Camino
Capistrano. The Los Rios Specific Plan describes that the primary bicycle access to the
area is via the Trabuco Creek trail.
The Modified Project would not encroach onto existing bicycle facilities.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 75 of 144
Additionally, the development would provide sufficient right-of-way along Paseo
Adelanto and River Street to accommodate bicyclists and access to Trabuco Creek
Trail. The project would have a beneficial impact to bicycle facilities; no impact to
bicycle facilities would occur.
Consistency with Circulation Element
The proposed project is consistent with the goals and policies discussed in the
City of San Juan Capistrano Circulation Element and the Los Rios Specific Plan
Circulation Element. The Circulation Elements are the guiding documents for planning
the circulation and mobility for the proposed project. For the reasons stated above, the
project is consistent with Circulation Goal #1 of the Los Rios Specific Plan Circulation
Element, by providing safe and convenient pedestrian access to both area residents
and visitors:
Circulation Goal #1: Create a circulation plan which provides for safe and
convenient pedestrian access for both visitors and residents to the district.
The proposed project is also consistent with policies outlined in the City’s
General Plan Circulation Element:
• Policy 1.1: Provide and maintain a City circulation system that is in balance with
the land uses in San Juan Capistrano.
• Policy 2.2: Promote new employment-producing development in areas where
public transit is convenient and desirable.
Consistency with SB 743
As stated in Section 5.12.1.1, Regulatory Setting, of the DEIR SB 743 started a
process that could fundamentally change transportation impact analysis as part of
CEQA compliance. These changes in many parts of California (if not statewide) will
include the elimination of auto delay, LOS, and similar measures of vehicular capacity
or traffic congestion as a basis for determining significant impacts. As part of the new
CEQA Guidelines, the new criteria “shall promote the reduction of greenhouse gas
emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of
land uses” (Public Resources Code Section 21099(b)(1)). Certification of the new
guidelines are expected in late 2017. However, since OPR has not yet amended the
CEQA Guidelines to implement this change, automobile delay is still considered a
significant impact, and the City of San Juan Capistrano will continue to use the
established LOS criteria.
For informational purposes, LLG obtained VMT data for the proposed project
from OCTAM (provided by LSA Associates; see Appendix J2 of the DEIR). The future
VMT is estimated to be 14,619 miles per day during the weekday, 16,173 miles per day
on Saturday, and 15,318 miles per day on Sunday; resulting in an average daily VMT of
14,941 (PlaceWorks 2018). It should be noted that the VMT calculated for the project
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 76 of 144
site overestimates the total VMT generated by the proposed development because
retail projects typically re-route travel from other retail destinations and new retail
developments of this size and type are intended to serve the immediately surrounding
residential neighborhoods.
Furthermore, the project is located within a transit priority area. The retail uses
would be available to service the captive market of commuters using transit and within
walking distance of the San Juan Capistrano station. The proposed updates to the
CEQA Guidelines (dated November 2017), which implement SB 743 and are
anticipated to be adopted by the end of 2018, state that, generally, land use projects
within a transit priority area should be presumed to result in a less than significant
transportation impact. The Modified Project is consistent with SB 743 and no impact
would occur.
Q. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
1. Wastewater Treatment Requirements, Facilities, and Capacity
Threshold: Would the Project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of
the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
Would the Project 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?
Does the Project result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in
addition to the provider's existing commitments?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.14-7 of the DEIR; page 8 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.14, Utilities and Service Systems, Impact 5.14-2, page 5.14-7 of the DEIR,
and page 8 of the Tech. Memo.
Project-generated wastewater could be adequately treated by the wastewater
service provider for the project. The type and scale of the Modified Project is smaller
than what was analyzed for the DEIR, therefore the analyses and significance
conclusions below apply to the Modified Project.
Wastewater Treatment
As discussed under Subsection 5.14.1.1 of the DEIR, the wastewater generated
the wastewater generated by the project site is treated at the JBLTP, which has a
design capacity of 13 mgd and has a remaining capacity of approximately 6.4 mgd, of
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 77 of 144
which, the City of San Juan Capistrano owns approximately 0.37 mgd. The proposed
project would generate an average daily flow of 0.02 mgd, which represents less than
one percent of the remaining capacity at JBLTP (6.4 mgd) and 5 percent of the City’s
ownership in the facility’s design capacity (0.37 mgd). Project generated wastewater is
within the City’s remaining allowable capacity at the JBLTP. There is sufficient
wastewater treatment capacity in the region for project-generated wastewater, and
project development would not require construction of new or expanded wastewater
treatment facilities. Impacts would be less than significant.
Wastewater Treatment Requirements
Wastewater treatment requirements for discharges to municipal storm drainage
systems are set forth in the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board Order No.
R9-2012-0012 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit.
Wastewater flows from the project site would not interfere with the ability of the
wastewater treatment plant to continue to meet the discharge limitations for the NPDES
permit, because wastewater flows are well within the design capacity of the JBLTP.
The proposed restaurant is expected to generate some fats, oils, and grease.
The City of San Juan Capistrano institutes a comprehensive grease control program
that requires all food facilities to install a grease control device. A grease interceptor is
the primary required device unless the City deems the installation of an interceptor
impossible; in which case an alternative device shall be required. Grease interceptors
are to be designed in accordance with the latest Uniform Plumbing Code adopted by the
City at the time of plan check and approval. Additionally, plans for water quality
protection that would be required for the proposed project—Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plans for construction projects and Water Quality Management Plans for
design and operation of projects—are discussed in Section 5.8, Hydrology and Water
Quality, as are Best Management Practices included in the project’s design. Thus,
project-generated wastewater would not adversely affect SOCWA compliance with
treatment requirements for effluent from its treatment plants. Impacts would be less than
significant.
2. New Storm Drainage Facilities
Threshold: Does the Project require or result in the construction of new storm
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
Finding: Less than significant. (Section I, Hydrology and Water Quality)
Explanation: Refer to Section I, Hydrology and Water Quality, above.
3. Water Supplies and Facilities
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 78 of 144
Threshold: Does the Project have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or
expanded entitlements needed?
Would the Project 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?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.14-16 of the DEIR; page 8 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.14, Utilities and Service Systems, Impact 5.14-3, page 5.14-15 of the DEIR,
and page 8 of the Tech. Memo.
Water supply and delivery systems are adequate to meet project requirements.
The type and scale of the Modified Project is smaller than what was analyzed for the
DEIR, therefore the analyses and significance conclusions below apply to the Modified
Project.
Water Supplies
Construction
Short-term demand for water may occur during demolition, excavation, grading,
and construction activities. Water demand for soil watering (fugitive dust control),
cleanup, masonry, painting, and other activities would be temporary and would cease
once construction activities were completed. Overall, short-term demolition and
construction activities would require minimal water and are not expected to have any
adverse impacts on the existing water supply.
Operation
An increase in long-term demand for water is anticipated to occur during the
operation of the proposed project. The City of San Juan Capistrano estimates water
demand by commercial, industrial, and school uses at 1,785 gpd per acre (Bauman
2018). The 5.86-acre project is thus estimated to use about 10,460 gpd (11.7 afy) of
water.
According to the City’s UWMP, the City has adequate supplies to serve 100
percent of its customers during normal, dry year, and multiple dry year demand through
2040 with projected population increases and accompanying increases in water
demand. The City forecasts that it will have sufficient water supplies for a net increase
of 157 afy, between 2015 and 2040 (see Table 5.14-2 above). The City projects that it
will have 8,618 afy in 2020 and 8,688 afy in 2040. The proposed project would
represent a small percentage (0.1 percent) of the City’s projected water supply in 2020.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 79 of 144
This represents just 7 percent of the anticipated increase in demand between 2015 and
2040. The City states that it has obtained the import water capacity needed to serve
continued development in the City (SJC 2018b), and projects that there is adequate
water supply for 64,900 square foot commercial and office developments. (Bauman
2018).
The proposed project is required to comply with California State law regarding
water conservation measures, including pertinent provisions of Title 24 of the California
Government Code (Title 24) regarding the use of water-efficient appliances. In addition
to complying with applicable Title 24 provisions, to further reduce water demands and
associated energy use, the project implement a Water Conservation Strategy and
demonstrate a minimum 20 percent reduction in indoor water usage when compared to
baseline water demand (total expected water demand without implementation of the
Water Conservation Strategy). Project uses would also be required to implement the
following:
• Landscaping palette emphasizing drought-tolerant plants consistent with
provisions of the State Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance and/or City of
San Juan Capistrano requirements;
• Use of water-efficient irrigation techniques consistent with City of San Juan
Capistrano requirements;
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Certified WaterSense labeled or
equivalent faucets, high-efficiency toilets (HETs), and other plumbing fixtures.
In addition, the City would require the project applicant to pay a Domestic Water
Fee, which would further reduce potential impacts related to water supplies. Therefore,
the proposed projects impact on water supply is less than significant.
Water Treatment Facilities
Water treatment facilities serving the City (the GWRP with 6.2 mgd capacity and
approximately 4.2 mgd residual capacity, and the Diemer Filtration Plant with 520 mgd
capacity) have adequate capacity for proposed project water demands, and project
development would not require construction of new or expanded water treatment
facilities. Impacts to water treatment facilities would be less than significant.
Water Delivery Systems
Figure 5.14-2, Preliminary Water Plan, shows the proposed installation of water
mains and fire hydrants. The proposed project would connect into the existing water
system along Los Rios Street and Paseo Adelanto. Specifically, the project would install
an 8-inch water main in River Street that would connect to an existing 8-inch water line
in Paseo Adelanto and a 6-inch water line in Los Rios Street. A proposed 8-inch water
main would also connect from the proposed River Street water main to the Marketplace
building, along the eastern side of the project site in the emergency/fire access drive.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 80 of 144
The project proposes two fire hydrants–one on the western boundary along Paseo
Adelanto and one at the southeast corner–and two fire hydrant easements at the north
and south end of the emergency/fire access drive.
The City of San Juan Capistrano has indicated that the City’s existing water
system adequately meets the proposed project’s maximum daily demand (42.5 gpm)
with installation of the proposed water main (SJC 2018b). A fire flow test was conducted
(see Appendix K3), demonstrating that the project had a minimum fire flow of 4,785 gpm
at 20 psi, meeting OCFA’s minimum standard of 1,875 gpm at 20 psi, and would meet
the State and OCFA’s minimum fire flow requirements.
Impacts to the City’s water delivery system would be less than significant.
4. Landfill Capacity and Solid Waste Laws
Threshold: Will the Project be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
Will the Project comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
Finding: Less than significant. (Page 5.14-24 of the DEIR; page 8 of the
Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.14, Utilities and Service Systems, Impact 5.14-4, page 5.14-23 of the DEIR,
and page 8 of the Tech. Memo.
Existing and proposed facilities would be able to accommodate project-generated
solid waste and comply with solid waste regulations. The type and scale of the Modified
Project is smaller than what was analyzed for the DEIR, therefore the analyses and
significance conclusions below apply to the Modified Project.
Construction
The proposed project would include the development and operation of 64,900
square feet of retail and commercial uses. Construction activities would involve
demolition of the existing office building and shed associated with the current
commercial nursery use resulting in a limited amount of demolition debris during grading
and site preparation. Some construction waste would be generated in the form of
excess building materials used during the construction phase. No other significant
volume of refuse would be generated by construction activities. The proposed project
would be required to comply with City of San Juan Capistrano Municipal Code Sections
6-3.08, which requires construction and demolition projects to divert at least 65 percent
of construction materials from landfills. Solid waste from construction activities would be
accommodated by the County’s existing landfills. Therefore, the proposed project would
not have the potential to cause significant impacts related to solid waste generation
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 81 of 144
during construction, and impacts would be less than significant.
Operation
Landfill Capacity
Solid waste generated by the proposed project would be collected by CR&R and
hauled to the Prima Deshecha Landfill, which currently processes an average of
approximately 1,336 tons per day, with a maximum capacity of 4,000 tons per day.
Therefore, the Prima Deshecha Landfill currently has a residual capacity of 2,664 tons
per day and is currently operating at approximately 33.4 percent of its daily design
capacity.
Project operation is estimated to generate about 671 pounds of per day (0.34
tons per day) of solid waste (Table 5.14-4). Therefore, the total solid waste generated
by the project represents 0.01 percent of the Prima Deshecha Landfill’s currently
available daily capacity; there is adequate capacity to serve the proposed project.
Additionally, CR&R has indicated that it could serve the proposed project with its
existing fleet of garbage trucks and would not need to obtain additional trucks to serve
the project (Dibley 2018). Impacts would be less than significant.
Regulatory Compliance
The proposed project would include storage areas for recyclable materials per
AB 341, including areas for storing organic matter per AB 1826. At least 50 percent of
construction and demolition debris from such projects would be recycled and/or
salvaged for reuse per CALGreen Section 5.408. Implementation of the project would
comply with regulations governing solid waste disposal and diversion, and impacts
would be less than significant.
SECTION 3
IMPACTS THAT ARE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION
INCORPORATED
The City Council hereby finds that Mitigation Measures have been identified in
the EIR and this Resolution that will avoid or substantially lessen the following
potentially significant environmental impacts to a less than significant level. The
potentially significant impacts, and the Mitigation Measures that will reduce them to a
less than significant level, are as follows:
A. AIR QUALITY
1. Air Quality Standards – Construction-related
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 82 of 144
Threshold: Would the Project violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation?
Finding: Less than significant with Mitigation Measures AQ -1 and AQ -2
Incorporated. (Page 5.2-37 of the DEIR; page 5 of the Tech.
Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.2, Air Quality, Impact 5.2-2, starting on page 5.2-28 of the DEIR, and page
5 of the Tech. Memo.
Construction activities associated with the proposed project could generate short-
term emissions in exceedance of SCAQMD’S regional construction significance
thresholds for VOC and NO X. Construction activities produce combustion emissions
from various sources, such as onsite heavy-duty construction vehicles, vehicles hauling
materials to and from the site, and motor vehicles transporting the construction crew.
Site preparation activities produce fugitive dust emissions (PM10 and PM 2.5 ) from
demolition and soil-disturbing activities, such as grading and excavation. Air pollutant
emissions from construction activities onsite would vary daily as construction activity
levels change.
As stated, the proposed project is anticipated to be constructed over an
approximately 17-month period from August 2019 through December 2020.
Construction air pollutant emissions are based on the preliminary information provided
in Table 5.2-8 of the DEIR. Construction would entail demolition of existing asphalt and
structures, site preparation and grading, off-site hauling of demolition debris and soil,
construction of the proposed buildings and surface parking lot, architectural coating, and
asphalt paving. An estimate of maximum daily construction emissions for the proposed
project is provided in Table 5.2-9, Maximum Daily Regional Construction Emissions, of
the DEIR.
VOC and NO X emissions generated from project-related construction activities
would exceed the SCAQMD’s regional construction significance threshold. The VOC
exceedance would be primarily from architectural coating activities. The NO X
exceedance would occur during the overlap of the rough grading and rough grading soil
haul activities. Additionally, the overlap of the rough grading soil hauling activities with
both the rough grading and utility trenching activities and with the latter alone, would
also result in an NOX exceedance. The primary source of VOC is from the application of
paints while the primary sources of NO X emissions would be haul trucks associated with
soil hauling activities as well as the operation of off-road construction equipment. VOC
is a precursor to the formation of O 3 . NO X is a precursor to the formation of both O 3 and
particulate matter (PM10 and PM 2.5 ). Project-related emissions of VOC and NO X would
contribute to the O 3 , PM 10, and PM 2.5 nonattainment designations of the SoCAB.
Therefore, without incorporation of mitigation, project-related construction activities
would result in potentially significant regional air quality impacts.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 83 of 144
As shown in Table 5.2-12, Maximum Daily Regional Construction Emissions with
Mitigation, of the DEIR, with incorporation of Mitigation Measures AQ -1 and AQ-2,
construction-related VOC and NOX emissions would be reduced to below the SCAQMD
regional significance threshold. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ -1 would limit
the amount of truck haul trips per day associated with the rough grading soil hauling
operations. Mitigation Measure AQ-2 would require the use of interior paints with a
maximum VOC content of 50 grams per liter (g/L) or less. Because VOC and NO X
emissions would be reduced to below their respective regional significance thresholds,
Impact 5.2-2 would be reduced to less than significant.
MM AQ-1: The construction contractor shall implement the following measure
to reduce construction exhaust emissions during soil hauling
activities associated with rough grading:
Hauling of soil generated from rough grading activities shall be
limited to a maximum of 125 trucks per day (250 one-way haul trips
per day if 16-cubic-yard trucks are used) assuming a one-way haul
distance of 20 miles. If the one-way truck haul distance for export of
soil from site preparation activities is greater than 20 miles, as
identified by the contractor(s), hauling shall be restricted to no more
than 5,000 miles per day.
These requirements shall be noted on all construction management
plans and verified by the City of San Juan Capistrano prior to
issuance of any construction permits and during the soil disturbing
phases.
MM AQ-2: During building construction, the construction contractor shall, at
minimum, use paints with a maximum volatile organic compound
(VOC) content of 50 grams per liter or less for all interior
architectural coatings. This requirement shall be noted on all
construction management plans verified by the City of San Juan
Capistrano prior to issuance of any construction permits and during
interior coating activities.
Although implementation of the project modifications could adversely impact air
quality from construction 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 be required to implement Mitigation Measures
AQ-1 and AQ-2, as with the Proposed Project, to assure that impacts would be less
than significant.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 84 of 144
2. Criteria Pollutants – Construction-related
Threshold: Would the Project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase
of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-
attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors?
Finding: Less than significant with Mitigation Measures AQ -1 and AQ -2
Incorporated. (Page 5.2-37 of the DEIR; page 5 of the Tech.
Memo.)
Explanation: See section 1. Air Quality Standards – Construction-related, above.
3. Sensitive Receptors – Construction-related
Threshold: Would the Project expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
Finding: Less than significant with Mitigation Measure AQ-3 Incorporated.
(Page 5.2-38 of the DEIR; page 5 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.2, Air Quality, Impact 5.2-4, starting on page 5.2-31 of the DEIR, and page
5 of the Tech. Memo.
Construction activities associated with the proposed project could expose
sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. The proposed project could
expose sensitive receptors to elevated pollutant concentrations during construction
activities if it would cause or contribute significantly to elevated levels. Unlike the mass
of construction and operations emissions shown in the regional emissions analysis in
Tables 5.2-9 and 5.2-10, of the DEIR, which are described in pounds per day, localized
concentrations refer to an amount of pollutant in a volume of air (ppm or µg/m3) and can
be correlated to potential health effects.
Construction-Phase LSTs
SCAQMD’s Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (LST) was applied to
determine whether the project could result in a potentially significant impact. The LST
are designed to screen for potential localized impacts, using them to screen for potential
localized impacts from a larger project—i.e., one in which emissions will be dispersed
over a larger area—is a conservative approach. The greater the size of a project site,
the higher total emissions can be without creating localized impacts. This is reflected in
the SCAQMD’s thresholds for both construction and operational impacts, which set forth
higher thresholds for larger project sites. (See DEIR, Table 5.2-6; South Coast Air
Quality Management District, Localized Significance Threshold Methodology, July
2008.) Thus, as explained in the Draft EIR, the LST can appropriately “be used for
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 85 of 144
larger projects to determine whether or not dispersion modeling may be required.”
(DEIR, p. 5.2-25.)
Screening-level LSTs (pounds per day) are the amount of project-related mass
emissions generated at which localized concentrations (ppm or µg/m3) could exceed the
AAQSs for criteria air pollutants for which the SoCAB is designated nonattainment. The
screening-level LSTs are based on the proposed project site size and distance to the
nearest sensitive receptor and are based on the California AAQS, which are the most
stringent AAQS, established to protect sensitive receptors most susceptible to further
respiratory distress.
Table 5.2-11, Maximum Daily Onsite Construction Emissions, of the DEIR,
shows the maximum daily construction emissions (pounds per day) generated during
onsite construction activities at the project site compared with the SCAQMD’s
screening-level LSTs thresholds for 1 acre or less and 1.5 acre. Although construction
would be limited to occurring only between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. per the
City’s Noise Ordinance, construction would actually occur only 8 hours or less per day,
and typically cease by 4:00 p.m. each day. Further, the modeled assumption that
equipment would operate continuously for 8 hours per day is conservative, because in
practice, each piece of equipment would not operate continuously throughout the entire
workday, but would instead operate for only portions of the day. Onsite emissions
include fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions associated with operation of off-
road construction equipment in addition to fugitive dust from haul truck loading. As
shown in the table, maximum daily construction emissions would exceed the SCAQMD
screening-level construction LSTs for PM 10 during the overlap of the asphalt demolition,
asphalt demolition debris hauling, and site preparation activities. The primary source of
PM 10 would be from fugitive dust emissions associated with the asphalt demolition
debris loading and hauling activities. Thus, construction emissions could exceed the
California AAQS and could expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations. Therefore, without incorporation of mitigation, the project-related
construction activities could result in potentially significance localized construction
impacts.
Health Risk
SCAQMD currently does not require health risk assessments to be conducted for
short-term emissions from construction equipment, and OEHHA’s new guidance for the
preparation of health risk assessments do not establish short-term acute exposure
levels for diesel PM. The proposed project is anticipated to be implemented over an
approximately 15-month period, which would limit the exposure of onsite and offsite
receptors. In addition, exhaust emissions from the operation of off-road vehicles
associated with overall project-related construction activities would not exceed the
screening-level LSTs. For these reasons, it is anticipated that construction emissions
would not pose a threat to offsite receptors near the project site, and project-related
construction health impacts would be less than significant.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 86 of 144
As shown in Table 5.2-13, Maximum Daily Onsite Construction Emissions with
Mitigation, of the DEIR, with incorporation of Mitigation Measure AQ-3, construction-
related PM 10 emissions would be reduced to below the SCAQMD screening-level LST.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-3 would limit the amount of truck hauls per
day associated with the asphalt demolition hauling operations. The primary source of
PM10 is from fugitive dust emissions associated with asphalt demolition debris loading
and hauling activities (see Draft EIR, p. 5.2-32), therefore limiting the amount of asphalt
that may be loaded and hauled away on a given day will reduce such emissions, and as
shown in Draft EIR Table 5.2-13, it will be reduced to below the LST for all phases of
construction. Because PM 10 emissions would be reduced to below the screening-level
LST, Impact 5.2-4 would be reduced to less than significant.
MM AQ-3: The construction contractor shall implement the following measure
to reduce onsite construction-related fugitive dust emissions during
asphalt demolition debris hauling activities:
Hauling of asphalt demolition debris shall be limited to a maximum
of 14 trucks per day (28 one-way haul trips per day) assuming 16-
cubic-yard trucks are used. Overall, the amount of asphalt
demolition debris material hauled off-site shall be restricted to no
more than 283 tons per day.
These requirements shall be noted on all construction management
plans and verified by the City of San Juan Capistrano prior to
issuance of any construction permits and during the asphalt
demolition hauling activities.
Although implementation of the project modifications could adversely impact air
quality from construction 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 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.
B. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
1. Sensitive Species
Threshold: Would the Project 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
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 87 of 144
plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Finding: Less than significant with Mitigation Measure BIO-1 Incorporated.
(Page 5.3-12 of the DEIR; page 5 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.3, Biological Resources, Impact 5.3-1, starting on page 5.3-8 of the DEIR,
and page 5 of the Tech. Memo.
The project site is developed, surrounded by urbanized uses, and isolated from
areas supporting suitable habitat for wildlife species. Therefore, the project site is not
available for overland wildlife movement or migration. However, the project site contains
numerous mature trees that could be used for nesting by migratory birds and sensitive
bird species. A CNDDB search documented the potential for one sensitive bird species
to nest on the project site, Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperi). The species is on
CDFW’s Watch List, which is the lowest level of protection. Cooper’s hawk prefers
closed canopies of riparian areas, however, they have become relatively common in
suburban settings, tolerant of human presence, and may find Coast live oak trees
(Quercus agrifolia) suitable nesting habitat.
Project construction would involve removal of 34 of the 41 trees mapped onsite,
including, 2 Coast Live Oak trees (Quercus agrifolia), 5 California Sycamores (Platanus
Racemosa), and 1 Mexican Elderberry (Sambucus Mexicana), all of which are
considered California natives. However, the proposed project would preserve seven
trees onsite, including one Coast Live Oak tree (Quercus agrifolia), five Jacaranda
(Jacaranda mimosifolia) trees, and a cluster of Peruvian Torch Cactus (Echinopsis
Peruviana). Tree locations are shown on the tree mitigation plan in Appendix C of this
DEIR. Three Coast live oak trees were identified onsite. One at the southwest corner of
the site, one in the south-central part of the site, and one in the east-central part of the
site. The coast live oak tree in the southwest corner of the site is one of the seven trees
that would be preserved. Additionally, the proposed project would plant 158 new trees,
including 39 specimen trees (minimum 72-inch box), 83 olive trees (48-inch box
minimum), 20 site trees (36-inch box minimum), and 16 citrus trees (24-inch box).
Plantings include two species of oaks: Coast live oak and Pasadena oak (Quercus
Englemanni). The additional new trees to be planted onsite could be used for nesting
migratory birds and the Cooper’s hawk. Long-term impacts would be less than
significant after planting of replacement trees. Implementation of the project would result
in more trees being located on site as compared to the pre-development status of the
site.
Future development would also be required to comply with the Migratory Bird
Treaty Act (MBTA) (US Code, Title 16, §§ 703–712) and state law (California Fish and
Game Code, §§ 3503 et seq.). The MBTA implements the United States’ commitment to
four treaties with Canada, Japan, Mexico, and Russia for the protection of shared
migratory bird resources. It governs the taking, killing, possession, transportation, and
importation of migratory birds, their eggs, parts, and nests. The USFWS administers
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 88 of 144
permits to take migratory birds in accordance with the MBTA.
Loss of an active nest during construction would result in a significant impact.
Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would require that the project applicant demonstrate
compliance with the MBTA and submit nesting bird surveys to the City. If active bird
nests were found during these surveys, species-specific measures would be identified
by a qualified biologist and implemented to prevent abandonment of the active nests.
Setback buffers from nesting sites would be maintained so that grading activities avoid
bird nesting until young birds have fledged. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1
would ensure compliance with the MBTA and reduce potential impacts to nesting birds
to less than significant.
MM BIO-1: Prior to issuance of permits for any construction activity, the project
applicant shall demonstrate compliance with the federal MBTA and
submit required nesting bird surveys to the City of San Juan
Capistrano. If construction is proposed between January 15th to
September 1st, a qualified biologist must conduct a nesting bird
survey(s) no more than three days prior to initiation of construction
activities to document the presence or absence of nesting birds in
or adjacent to the project site. The preconstruction survey(s) will
focus on identifying any raptors and/or passerines nests that may
be directly or indirectly affected by construction activities.
Construction outside the nesting season (between September 1st
and January 14th) does not require pre-removal nesting bird
surveys. Any nest permanently vacated for the season are not
protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. If active nests are
documented, the following measures are required:
• Species-specific measures, based upon the species found
during the survey, shall be prepared by a qualified biologist
and implemented to prevent abandonment of the active nest.
At a minimum, grading in the vicinity of a nest shall be
postponed until the young birds have fledged. A minimum
exclusion buffer of 100 feet shall be maintained during
construction, depending on the species and location. The
perimeter of the nest setback zone shall be fenced or
adequately demarcated with stakes and flagging at 20-foot
intervals, and construction personnel and activities are
restricted from the area.
• A survey report by a qualified biologist verifying that no
active nests are present, or that the young have fledged,
shall be submitted to the City of San Juan Capistrano prior to
initiation of grading in the nest-setback zone. The qualified
biologist shall serve as a biological monitor during those
periods when construction activities occur near active nest
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 89 of 144
areas to ensure that no inadvertent impacts on these nests,
or any birds dwelling in such nests, shall occur.
• A final report of the findings, prepared by a qualified
biologist, shall be submitted to the City of San Juan
Capistrano prior to construction-related activities that have
the potential to disturb any active nests during the nesting
season.
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 thansignificant.
2. Wildlife Movement
Threshold: Would the Project 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?
Finding: Less than significant with Mitigation Measure BIO-1 Incorporated.
(Page 5.3-12 of the DEIR; page 5 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: See Section 1. Sensitive Species, above.
C. CULTURAL RESOURCES
1. Archaeological Resources
Threshold: Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
Finding: Less than significant with Mitigation Measure CUL-1 Incorporated.
(Page 5.4-34 of the DEIR; page 5 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.4, Cultural Resources, Impact 5.4-2, starting on page 5.4-28 of the DEIR,
and page 5 of the Tech. Memo.
City Council Policy 601 defines a Sensitive Area as “an area that is located
immediately adjacent to known sites, and/or an area that historic maps or reference
materials indicates the presence of possible artifacts.” The results of the cultural and
paleontological record searches and literature reviews indicate that there is a high
potential for cultural artifacts (both historic and prehistoric) within the project site and
surrounding area. The development area is therefore considered a Sensitive Area and
must comply with the requirements of City Council Policy 601, including on-site
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 90 of 144
monitoring and mitigation enforcement and referral to the Cultural Heritage Commission
if artifacts are present.
Based on the results of the field surveys, literature search, local ethnographic
settlement and subsistence patterns, the prehistory and history of the area, the current
project’s proximity to San Juan Creek and Trabuco Creek, and the patterns of local
historic-era land use; the project is considered sensitive for prehistoric, ethnohistoric,
and historic-era cultural resources. The records search determined that the project site
is located within River Street (P-30-160122) which is a multicomponent site and is
adjacent to the Los Rios Historical District (P-30-160123). It has been documented that
Native Americans once resided along Los Rios Street during the Mission period and
ground disturbing actives near the site have uncovered both prehistoric and historic
habitation debris.
As part of the intensive field survey conducted for the cultural resources report
(Appendix D1), Cogstone surveyors identified a historical refuse scatter along the
eastern boundary of the site adjacent to the Los Rios Historic District and recommended
further testing. In accordance with this recommendation, Cogstone conducted an
extended phase I testing at the location of the historical refuse scatter on April 24, 2018.
The scatter consisted of 2 loci. A total of 7 shovel test pits were excavated (see Figure 4
in Appendix D2), with 3 shovel test pits being placed within Locus 1, and 4 placed within
Locus 2. Of the 7 shovel test pits excavated, 6 were positive for cultural materials.
Surface artifacts observed consisted entirely of glass shards and ceramic earthenware
sherds. Subsurface artifacts were concentrated mainly between 0 and 40 cm in depth
and included structural materials, as well as domestic and personal items. Cultural
material was most dense at Locus 2, with shovel test pit 4 having the greatest density of
those placed within the Locus. Testing found that both surface and subsurface
artifactual remains identified appear to have been disturbed by past activities, including
the planting and uprooting of trees from the Ito Nursery. Diagnostic artifacts were scarce
and suggested a relatively late deposition date range–between 1940 and 1970.
The results of the intensive field survey did not identify clearly identifiable strata
indicating an intact historically significant deposit within the project site. Instead,
artifactual constituents found both on the surface and below grade indicate considerable
past impacts to the resource. The in-field assessment found that the refuse scatter does
not have the potential to independently meet NRHP or CRHR significance criteria.
Based on these findings, no further pre-entitlement archaeological testing was
recommended.
However, given that the project’s prehistory and history and adjacency to the Los
Rios Historic District, the site is considered highly sensitive for cultural resources and
there is a potential to encounter buried prehistoric deposits. Impacts to archaeological
resources are considered potentially significant, since buried or obscured
archaeological resources may be encountered during construction.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1 would ensure the project applicant
and construction contractors are cognizant of potential cultural resources onsite and
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 91 of 144
have specified procedures to implement to ensure these potentially uncovered
resources are not damaged during grading and construction activities. The mitigation
measure requires that any archaeological resources encountered during project ground-
disturbing activities be preserved and/or recovered, evaluated, and curated, if
necessary, by a qualified archaeologist, thus reducing potential impacts associated with
archaeological resources to a level that is less than significant. Therefore, no significant
unavoidable adverse impacts relating to cultural resources have been identified.
MM CUL1: Prior to issuance of any permits allowing ground-disturbing
activities for the River Street Marketplace project, the City of San
Juan Capistrano shall ensure that an archeologist who meets the
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for professional archaeology
has been retained for the project and will monitor all grading and
other significant ground-disturbing activities. The Qualified
Archaeologist shall ensure that the following measures are followed
for the project:
• Prior to any ground disturbance, the Qualified Archaeologist,
or their designee, shall provide worker environmental
awareness protection training to construction personnel
regarding regulatory requirements for the protection of
cultural (prehistoric and historic) resources. As part of this
training, construction personnel shall be briefed on proper
procedures to follow should unanticipated cultural resources
be made during construction. Workers will be provided
contact information and protocols to follow in the event that
inadvertent discoveries are made. The training can be in the
form of a video or PowerPoint presentation. Printed literature
(handouts) can accompany the training and can also be
given to new workers and contractors to avoid the necessity
of continuous training over the course of the project.
• Prior to any ground disturbance, the applicant shall submit a
written Project Monitoring Plan (PMP) to the City’s
Development Services Director for review and approval. The
monitoring plan shall include monitor contact information,
specific procedures for field observation, diverting and
grading to protect finds, and procedures to be followed in the
event of significant finds.
• During grading or trenching activities, a Native American
monitor provided by the Juaneño Band of Mission Indians–
Acjachemen Nation shall observe all grading and trenching
activities below the original ground surface. The Native
American monitor shall consult with the archaeological
monitor regarding objects and remains encountered during
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 92 of 144
grading or trenching activities that may be considered sacred
or important.
• In the event that unanticipated cultural material is
encountered during any phase of project construction, all
construction work within 50 feet (15 meters) of the find shall
cease and the Qualified Archaeologist shall assess the find
for importance. Construction activities may continue in other
areas. If the discovery is determined to not be important by
the Qualified Archaeologist and the Native American
monitor, work will be permitted to continue in the area.
• If a find is determined to be important, additional
investigation may be warranted, or the find can be preserved
in place and construction may be allowed to proceed.
• Additional investigation work can include scientific recording
and excavation of the important portion of the find.
• If excavation of a find occurs, the Qualified Archaeologist
shall draft a report within 60 days of conclusion of excavation
that identifies the find and summarizes the analysis
conducted. The completed report shall be approved by the
City’s Development Services Director and filed with the
County and with the South Central Coastal Information
Center at California State University, Fullerton.
• Excavated finds shall be curated at a repository determined
by the Qualified Archaeologist in consultation with the Native
American monitor and approved by the City.
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.
2. Paleontological Resources
Threshold: Would the Project directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Finding: Less than significant with Mitigation Measure CUL-2 incorporated.
(Page 5.4-35 of the DEIR; page 5 of the Tech. Memo.)
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 93 of 144
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.4, Cultural Resources, Impact 5.4-3, starting on page 5.4-29 of the DEIR,
and page 5 of the Tech. Memo.
Certain geologic formations or deposits have higher potential to contain fossils
than others. Younger Holocene sediments and artificial fill present at the surface of the
project site are assigned a very low paleontological sensitivity. However, the middle to
late Quaternary older alluvium in the subsurface, as well as any subsurface Quaternary
terrace deposits present, have a moderate but patchy paleontological sensitivity
throughout. Based on the on-site soils, construction activities have the potential to
encounter paleontonlogical resources at or below a depth of 3 feet from the surface.
Planned cut depths are approximately one and a half feet deep in fill for the
majority of the project. Utilities will be five feet deep below grade, and the maximum
depth of excavation for the basement will be ten feet below grade. Because fossils may
be present at depths as shallow as 3 feet below the existing ground surface,
construction activities requiring excavations to a depth below the thickness of the
younger alluvial sediments may have an adverse impact to paleontological resources.
Impacts to paleontological resources are considered potentially significant.
Because fossils may be present at depths as shallow as 3 feet below the existing
ground surface, paleontological monitoring in these areas and areas where Quaternary
older alluvium is encountered is required. The paleontological monitor would ensure that
any paleontological finds are properly excavated and preserved and that grading is
halted within 50 feet of any discovery. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-2
would reduce potential impacts associated with paleontological resources to a level that
is less than significant. Therefore, no significant unavoidable adverse impacts relating to
cultural resources have been identified.
MM CUL-2: Prior to the issuance of any permits allowing ground-disturbing
activities for the River Street Marketplace project, the City of San
Juan Capistrano shall ensure that a paleontological monitor has
been retained for the project. The paleontologist shall prepare a
paleontological monitoring program. All grading and other
significant ground-disturbing activities more than 3 feet below the
ground surface will be monitored by a paleontological monitor. If
any evidence of paleontological resources is discovered, the
following measures shall be taken:
• All below-grade work shall stop within a 50-foot radius of the
discovery. Work shall not continue until the discovery has
been evaluated by a qualified paleontologist.
• A qualified paleontologist in coordination with the City shall
assess the find(s) and determine if they are scientifically
important. If the find(s) are of value then:
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 94 of 144
• Scientifically important fossils shall be prepared by the
paleontologist and/or his/her designee(s) to the point of
identification, identified to the lowest taxonomic level
possible, and curated in a museum repository with
permanent, retrievable storage.
• Significant paleontological resources found shall be
preserved as determined necessary by the paleontological
monitor.
• Excavated finds shall be offered to the Los Angeles County
Museum of Natural History or its designee for curation on a
first-refusal basis. After which, finds shall be offered to an
accredited and permanent scientific institution for the benefit
of current and future generations.
• Within 60 days of completion of the end of earth-moving
activities, the paleontologist shall draft a report summarizing
the finds and shall include the inspection period, an analysis
of any resources found, and the present repository of the
items.
• The paleontologist’s report shall be approved by the City.
Any resulting reports shall also be filed with the permanent
scientific institution where the resources are curated.
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
D. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC
1. Plans, Policies, and Ordinances – Construction-related
Threshold: Would the Project 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 n 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?
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 95 of 144
Finding: Less than significant with Mitigation Measure TR-1 incorporated.
(Page 5.12-78 of the DEIR; pages 7-8 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.12, Transportation and Traffic, Impact 5.12-3, starting on page 5.12-64 of
the DEIR, and pages 7-8 of the Tech. Memo.
Project-related construction traffic would not exceed traffic threshold volumes;
however, construction could result in temporary and short-term traffic detours and
disruptions. It is anticipated that construction activities will include demolition/site
preparation, grading/trenching, building construction, and asphalt paving/architectural
coatings. As described, the TIA evaluated project-related construction traffic impacts
using the construction phases that would generate the highest construction trips. The
rough grading and haul phase is anticipated to result in the highest trip generation
potential when compared to the remaining phases and thus has been selected for
analysis. During the worst case construction phase–rough grading and haul phase, the
proposed project would generate 8 worker passenger vehicles, 2 vendor passenger
vehicles, and 250 one-way truck trips per day, resulting in 760 daily truck trips with 72
truck trips forecasted during the AM peak hour (38 inbound and 34 outbound) during the
rough grading and haul phase.
Project construction-related traffic is less than the net proposed project traffic at
buildout. As determined under Impact 5.12-1, the proposed project would not result in
significant traffic impacts or exceed LOS for any of the for three scenarios analyzed: (1)
Existing Plus Project; (2) Existing Plus Project Plus Cumulative (Year 2020); and (3)
General Plan Buildout. Since the construction phase would result in less trips than the
buildout phase, impacts resulting from construction traffic would be less than significant.
Project Construction Management Plan Criteria
Project construction related trips associated with trucks and employees traveling
to and from the project site in the morning and afternoon during project construction
activities may result in some minor traffic delays. It is anticipated that a majority of the
construction-related traffic will utilize Ortega Highway and the I-5 Freeway to gain
regional access to the project site.
Temporary and short-term traffic detours and traffic disruptions could result
during project construction activities including implementation of access and circulation
improvements noted above. Accordingly, the project applicant would be responsible for
the preparation and submittal of a construction area traffic management plan (see
Section 2.2.16, Construction Traffic Management Plan, of the Specific Plan
Amendment).
Potential traffic interference caused by construction vehicles may create a
temporary/short-term impact to vehicles using the street system in the immediate area
in the morning and afternoon hours. The TIA includes further recommendations to
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 96 of 144
incorporate in the Construction Traffic Management Plan to minimize temporary traffic
impacts on the local circulation system.
Mitigation Measure TR-1 would ensure that a construction traffic management
plan is in place to eliminate the potential for conflicts related to construction equipment,
haul trips, and worker trips. The measure details the requirements of the plan to be
submitted to the City prior to the approval of grading permits and includes a number of
specific design requirements that will eliminate the potential for conflicts related to
construction equipment haul trips, and worker trips. Compliance with the construction
traffic management plan would ensure that temporary construction related traffic
impacts would be less than significant.
MM TR-1: Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall
prepare a Construction Traffic Management Plan in coordination
with the City of San Juan Capistrano City Traffic Engineer. The
Plan, at a minimum, shall include the following:
• Ingress and egress for the construction traffic would be via
Driveway 1 located along Paseo Adelanto with a flagman to
provide ingress/egress from the project site to Del Obispo
Street.
• Restrict construction traffic on all local collector streets.
• 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, etc.), to access the site, traffic controls and
detours and proposed construction phasing plan for the
project.
• Identify parking needs and parking areas for construction
related equipment and workman support.
• Specify the hours during which transport activities can occur
and methods to mitigate construction-related impacts to
adjacent streets.
• Require the Applicant 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 shall clean adjacent
streets, as directed by the City Engineer (or representative of
the City Engineer) of any material which may have been
spilled, tracked or blown onto adjacent streets or areas.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 97 of 144
• Hauling or transport of oversize loads will be allowed
between the hours of 8:30 AM and 2:30 PM only, Monday
through Friday, unless approved otherwise by the City
Engineer. Hauling or transport may be permitted/required
during nighttime hours, weekends or Federal holidays, at the
discretion of the City Engineer. An approved Haul Route
Permit will be required from the City.
• Haul trucks entering or exiting public streets shall at all times
yield to public traffic.
• If hauling operations cause any damage to existing
pavement, street, curb and/or gutter along the haul route, the
applicant will be fully responsible for repairs. The repairs
shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
• All constructed-related parking and staging of vehicles will
be kept out of the adjacent public roadways and parking lots
and will occur on-site.
• This Plan shall meet standards established in the current
California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Device
(MUTCD) as well as City of San Juan Capistrano
requirements.
Revised trip generation based on trip modifications would be less than that
identified in the EIR. The DEIR forecast that the project would 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. Thus, impacts
would be less than significant with the incorporation of mitigation.
2. Design Feature Hazards
Threshold: Does the Project substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Finding: Less than significant with Mitigation Measure TR-2 incorporated
(Page 5.12-68 of the DEIR; pages 7-8 of the Tech. Memo.)
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 98 of 144
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.12, Transportation and Traffic, Impact 5.12-5, starting on page 5.12-67 of
the DEIR, and pages 7-8 of the Tech. Memo.
Project on-site circulation improvements have been designed to adequately
address potentially hazardous geometric conditions (sharp curves, etc.), potential
conflicting uses, evacuation routes, and emergency access. Left-turn storage at Paseo
Adelanto and Del Obispo is inadequate under General Plan Buildout conditions. The
TIA evaluated the proposed site plan and circulation system to evaluate vehicle-
pedestrian conflicts, the potential for hazardous geometric conditions, and adequate
emergency access. Conflicts have the potential to occur if: 1) there is inadequate site
access; 2) the driveway throat lengths are not adequate to provide access to parking
spaces or would create vehicle stacking/queuing, 3) there is inadequate turning radii for
passenger vehicles, delivery/service/trash trucks, or fire trucks; or 4) there is inadequate
sight distance.
On-Site Circulation
As discussed in Chapter 3, Project Description, and Figure 3-4, of the DEIR
vehicular access for the project site would be provided via a full-access (all turning
movements permitted) unsignalized driveway off Paseo Adelanto. A smaller, secondary
full-access unsignalized driveway would be provided off Los Rios Street. Restricted,
emergency-only access would be provided along the eastern boundary of the site, via
gated entries from both River Street and from the southern parking pool. To ensure that
patrons and delivery vehicles cannot access this road, a Knox Box or similar locking
device would give fire personnel exclusive access. The internal drive aisles for the
parking areas would be paved with decorative aggregate of a sand/limestone color.
Site Access
Intersection LOS at the two project driveways were evaluated for Existing Plus
Project, Existing Plus Project Plus Cumulative (Year 2020), and General Plan Buildout
traffic conditions using HCM methodology. As shown in Table 15-1 of the TIA (Appendix
J1 of the DEIR), both project driveways are forecast to operate at acceptable, LOS “A”
during the AM and PM peak hours under all three scenarios. No impact related to site
access would occur.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 99 of 144
Stacking/Queuing/Sight Distance
Based on LLG’s review of the proposed site plan, the overall layout does not
create significant vehicle-pedestrian conflict points and the driveway throat lengths are
sufficient such that access to parking spaces is not impacted by internal vehicle
queuing/stacking. Based on a review of the site plan, the alignment, spacing and throat
length of the project driveways are also deemed adequate as they do now and/or will
align to logical connection points on the street system. The circulation around the
buildings is adequate with sufficient sight distance along the drive aisles. The proposed
throat lengths at the project driveways are sufficient for storing potential queuing
vehicles. As such, motorists entering and exiting the project site from these driveways
will be able to do so comfortably, safely, and without undue congestion. No impact
related to vehicle-pedestrian conflicts would occur.
Turning Radii
The on-site circulation layout was evaluated based on Turning Vehicle
Templates, developed by Jack E. Leisch & Associates and AutoTURN for AutoCAD
computer software that simulates turning maneuvers for various types of vehicles. The
turning templates were utilized to ensure that small service/delivery trucks (i.e., UPS,
FedEx, and trash trucks), fire trucks and passenger vehicles could properly access and
circulate through the project site. A trash truck turning template and fire truck turning
template was utilized in this evaluation. Curb return radii within the project site have
been confirmed and are adequate for passenger cars, service/delivery trucks and trash
trucks as well as a tour bus. No hazards or vehicle-pedestrian conflicts would occur.
Figures 5.12-8 and 5.12-9 present the turning movements required of a trash
truck and a fire truck to circulate throughout the project site, respectively. The curb
return radii are adequate for trash trucks and fire trucks, and the design of the entry/exit
points of the project driveways are adequate for expected traffic volumes. The on-site
circulation would not restrict emergency access; no impact would occur.
Off-Site Circulation
A queuing evaluation was conducted for future conditions (General Plan
Buildout) to address stacking/storage concerns at the intersection of Paseo Adelanto at
Del Obispo Street. The queuing analysis was based on the Average Queue
methodology, which calculates the average queue value in terms of number of vehicles
per lane. For the purposes of this traffic analysis, the minimum storage requirement for
left-turn lanes and right-turn lanes was calculated by taking 1.5 time the average queue
length and multiplying it by an average car length of 25 feet.
Two approaches/turning movements of the intersection of Paseo Adelanto and
Del Obispo were evaluated:
• The southbound approach of the intersection was evaluated to ensure that
adequate storage is provided for the existing southbound left-turn lane and
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 100 of 144
shared through/right-turn lane and that vehicles will not queue beyond the
proposed project driveway along Paseo Adelanto.
• The stacking/storage requirement for the existing single eastbound left-turn lane
at the intersection was evaluated to ensure that vehicles will not queue back into
the through lanes along Del Obispo Street and inhibit through traffic flow.
Table 5.12-24 of the DEIR summarizes the results of the queuing analysis at the
intersection of Paseo Adelanto and Del Obispo Street for existing intersection lane
configurations and traffic signal operations under General Plan Buildout traffic
conditions. Under current intersection configurations, adequate storage is provided for
the southbound approach on Paseo Adelanto. However, forecast vehicular queues in
the existing single eastbound left-turn lane storage is anticipated to be inadequate
under General Plan Buildout traffic conditions in the PM peak hour. This is a significant
impact.
Mitigation Measure TR-2 would require improvements to Paseo Adelanto and Del
Obispo Street, which would enhance vehicular stacking for the eastbound-left turn
movement providing ingress to the project site, and ensuring that adequate storage is
provided for the southbound approach and vehicles will not queue beyond the project
driveway along Paseo Adelanto. Table 5.12-25 of the DEIR shows the stacking/queuing
distance with implementation of Mitigation Measure TR-2. Appendix M of the TIA
(Appendix J1 of the DEIR) contains the queuing calculation worksheets for Paseo
Adelanto at Del Obispo Street for the AM and PM peak hours for General Plan Buildout
Traffic conditions.
As shown, implementation of Mitigation Measure TR-2 would ensure adequate
storage will be provided for the proposed southbound shared left/through/right-turn lane
and proposed dual eastbound left-turn lanes at Paseo Adelanto and Del Obispo Street
based on the existing and proposed left-turn pocket lengths. Therefore, impacts to
through traffic on Paseo Adelanto and Del Obispo Street would be less than significant.
The anticipated queue along the southbound approach on Paseo Adelanto is not
expected to block access to and from the site at the project driveway, and impacts
would be less than significant.
MM TR-2: Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, the project applicant
shall implement the following improvement to the Paseo Adelanto
and Del Obispo Street intersection:
• Restripe the southbound approach on Paseo Adelanto to
provide a southbound (outbound) 18-foot shared
left/through/right-turn lane and two (2) departure (inbound)
lanes (one 12-foot lane and one 10-foot lane); and
• Restripe the eastbound approach on Del Obispo Street to
provide dual eastbound left-turn lanes with a minimum
storage of 70-feet each lane and a 50-foot transition.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 101 of 144
In order to accommodate the recommended dual eastbound left-
turn lanes on Del Obispo Street via the provision of two (departure)
northbound receiving lanes on Paseo Adelanto, the one of two
options shall be implemented:
• Option 1: Eliminate the proposed on-street angled parking
south of the proposed project driveway along Paseo
Adelanto, and sign and stripe the curb lane as a right-turn
lane into the project driveway.
• Option 2: Widen the street along the west side of Paseo
Adelanto, as necessary, and sign and stripe the curb lane as
a right-turn lane into the project driveway to maintain the
proposed on-street angled parking south of the proposed
project driveway along Paseo Adelanto and/or existing lane
configuration on the southbound approach of Paseo
Adelanto at Del Obispo Street. Any additional right-of-way
within the Orange County Flood Control parcel required to
implement this improvement option, beyond that already
proposed to construct a traffic circle at Paseo Adelanto and
River Street, will require the project applicant to obtain
approval from the Orange County Flood Control District.
Re-striping of the Del Obispo Street at Paseo Adelanto intersection
and improvements to Paseo Adelanto are subject to review and
approval of the City of San Juan Capistrano Public
Works/Engineering Department.
E. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
1. Tribal Cultural Resources
Threshold: Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public
Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place,
cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size
and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural
value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
- Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as
defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
- A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and
supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to
criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code
section 5024.1?
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 102 of 144
Finding: Less than significant with Mitigation Measure CUL-1 incorporated
(Page 5.13-11 of the DEIR; page 8 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.13, Tribal Cultural Resources, Impact 5.13-1, starting on page 5.13-6 of the
DEIR, and page 8 of the Tech. Memo.
Grading activities associated with the proposed project have the potential to
encounter tribal cultural resources. In accordance with AB 52 and SB 18 requirements,
NAHC provided a list of tribal representatives who may have knowledge of tribal cultural
resources in the project area. The City sent invitation letters to representatives of the
Native American contacts provided by the NAHC on January 19, 2017, formally inviting
tribes to consult with the City on the proposed project. The intent of the consultations
was to provide an opportunity for interested Native American contacts to work together
with the City during the project planning process to identify and protect tribal cultural
resources. Letters were sent to 11 Tribes. Two Tribes responded to the City’s request
for consultation–Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and Juaneño Band of Mission
Indians–Acjachemen Nation.
• Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians: Deferred input to the local tribe.
• Juaneño Band of Mission Indians–Acjachemen Nation: Requested formal
consultation with the City. Joyce Perry, Tribal Manager of Juaneño Band of
Mission Indians–Acjachemen Nation met with the City on February 13, 2017. Ms.
Perry provided an oral history of the site and indicated that the site is historically
and culturally sensitive. Ms. Perry inquired as to who lived on the nursery
property and whether the artifact collection from the nursery will go to the Historic
Society. She stated her desire that the development be environmentally
responsible and that conditions need to be placed on the project requiring
archaeological and Native American monitoring. Ms. Perry requested a copy of
the sacred lands file when it became available. Following consultation with the
City, Cogstone provided Ms. Perry with the data previously requested–the sacred
lands file and the cultural and paleontological assessment. Ms. Perry also
provided a Native American monitor during the XPI investigations (see Appendix
D2). She indicated that that Native American monitoring should occur during
construction for development of the project.
Joyce Perry, Tribal Manager of the Juaneño Band of Mission Indians–
Acjachemen Nation identified that there are tribal cultural resources in the vicinity of the
project site, and that there is a potential to encounter buried prehistoric deposits on the
project site. Buried or obscured archaeological resources may be encountered during
construction, and development of the project site through grading and excavation
activities could impact previously undisturbed prehistoric archaeological resources.
Impacts to tribal cultural resources are potentially significant.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1, identified above and incorporated
herein, would ensure the project applicant and construction contractors are cognizant of
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 103 of 144
potential tribal cultural resources onsite and have specified procedures to implement to
ensure these potentially uncovered resources are not damaged during grading and
construction activities. The mitigation measure requires that any archaeological
resources encountered during project ground-disturbing activities be recovered,
evaluated and curated, if necessary, by a qualified archaeologist, thus reducing
potential impacts associated with tribal cultural resources to a level that is less than
significant. Tribal cultural resources impacts to landscapes, sacred places, or objects
with cultural value to a California Native American tribe would be the same for the
Modified Project, 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).Therefore, no significant unavoidable adverse impacts relating to tribal
cultural resources have been identified.
F. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
1. New Wastewater Treatment Facilities
Threshold: Does the Project 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?
Finding: Less than significant with Mitigation Measure USS-1 incorporated.
(Page 5.14-9 of the DEIR; page 8 of the Tech. Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.14, Utilities and Service Systems, Impact 5.14-1, starting on page 5.14-3 of
the DEIR, page 8 of the Tech. Memo.
Project-generated wastewater would require an upgrade to the existing sewer
system. Tetra Tech conducted hydraulic modeling to determine the impact of
wastewater flows generated by the proposed project on the City’s sewer collection
system. Tetra Tech was provided with information from Valley Civil Design Group, a
preliminary utility plan, the proposed manhole tie in point, and anticipated wastewater
flow data. The proposed project is estimated to generate an average flow of 23,700 gpd
and peak flow of 81,823 gpd of wastewater.
A City sewer is considered to be hydraulically deficient if it exceeds the maximum
depth to diameter (d/D) ratio established in the City’s 2004 Master Plan criteria. For
pipes 12 inches and less, the d/D ratio for the dry weather design flow should not
exceed 0.5, and for pipes 15 inches and larger, the maximum ratio is 0.75. For wet
weather flows, the maximum sewer capacity is a d/D ratio less than or equal to 1.0 (e.g.,
depth of 8 inches for an 8-inch diameter sewer). Note that wet weather flow is the rain
water that enters the sewer from a 4-year storm event.
The capacity and hydraulic conditions in the existing 8-inch sewer line
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 104 of 144
immediately downstream of the flow input along Paseo Adelanto, Del Obispo Street and
for the remainder of the trunk line along San Juan Creek were evaluated. Average and
peak flows as well as d/D ratios for both dry weather and wet weather conditions were
also reviewed. Hydraulic model results were determined for three locations (see Tables
1 and 2 of Appendix K1 of the DEIR):
• 8-inch sewer line segment immediately downstream of the manhole connection
point
• 8-inch sewer on Camino Capistrano at the junction of the 8-inch sewer from Del
Obispo Street
• 24-inch sewer trunk line as the last City segment running parallel to San Juan
Creek
For the 8-inch sewer lines immediately downstream of the flow connection point,
the d/D ratio will increase by about 0.15 for the current and master plan peak daily dry
weather flow conditions and would not result in a significant impact on the sewer
system.
Pipe segment D15704, (between manholes D10135 and D11155), which is the 8-
inch sewer line that combines flows from Camino Capistrano and Del Obispo Street was
identified in the 2004 Sewer Master Plan as having exceeded the d/D ratio of 0.5 for
peak dry weather flows. The proposed project will result in an increase in the d/D ratio in
peak flow from 0.70 to 0.76 and average flows would result in a d/D ratio increase from
0.44 of 0.48 for this segment. Therefore, flows from the proposed project would exceed
the peak hour flow d/D ratio for this segment, which requires upsizing this segment of
sewer line from 8 inch to 12 inch pipe. This pipe segment is approximately 160 feet
length along Los Rios Street from Del Obispo Street to the project site’s southern
boundary. Since this line is inadequate for the current flows, it must be increased in size
before any additional development loading is placed on it. This pipe segment was not
included in the original hydraulic system improvements in the 2004 Master Plan.
The remainder of the City’s downstream trunk sewer line did not indicate any
deficiencies with either the pipe capacity or the d/D ratio.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure USS-1 would replace pipe segment
D15704, between manholes D10135 and D11155, with a 12-inch diameter pipe.
Upsizing this segment would decrease the d/D ratio for peak flows from 0.76 to 0.38,
which would ensure that the sewer system would adequately convey wastewater from
the proposed project. Therefore, no significant unavoidable adverse impacts relating to
wastewater would occur.
MM USS-1: Prior to issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall
upsize pipe segment D15704 between manhole D10135 on Los
Rios Street and manhole D11155 on Del Obispo, from 8 inch to 12
inch diameter pipe. Prior to upsizing the line, the project applicant
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 105 of 144
and the City shall enter into a development reimbursement
agreement for said improvements such that the applicant will be
reimbursed for costs incurred in exceedance of its fair share
contribution.
The type and scale of the Modified Project is smaller than what was analyzed for
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.
SECTION 4
IMPACTS THAN CANNOT BE FULLY MITIGATED AND REMAIN SIGNIFICANT AND
UNAVOIDABLE
The City Council hereby finds that, despite the incorporation of all feasible
Mitigation Measures identified in the EIR and in this Resolution, the following
environmental impacts cannot be fully mitigated to a less than significant level and a
Statement of Overriding Considerations is therefore included herein:
A. NOISE
1. Noise Standards – Construction-related and Temporary Increase in
Ambient Noise
Threshold: Would the Project result in the exposure of persons to or generation
of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
Would the Project result in a substantial temporary or periodic
increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels
existing without the project?
Finding: Significant and Unavoidable. (Page 5.10-27; page 7 of the Tech.
Memo.)
Explanation: Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed
in Section 5.10, Noise, Impact 5.10-1, starting on page 5.10-14 of the DEIR, and page 7
of the Tech. Memo.
The proposed project includes demolition of existing buildings and structures and
removal of various landscape and hardscape improvements associated with the
commercial nursery that currently operates at the site. Development of the proposed
project includes site work and construction of commercial and office space in multiple
buildings. Total project construction is expected to take approximately 17 months.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 106 of 144
As significant construction noise impact would occur if noise levels exceed 85
dBA Leq or 105 dBA Lmax at residential receptors near the project site. Existing land
uses surrounding the project site would be exposed to temporary construction noise.
Two types of short-term noise impacts could occur during construction: (1) mobile-
source noise from transport of workers, material deliveries, and debris and soil haul and
(2) stationary-source noise from use of construction equipment; discussed separately
below.
Construction Vehicles
The transport of workers and equipment to the construction site would
incrementally increase noise levels along site access roadways. Delivery and haul
trucks would access the site along Paseo Adelanto via Del Obispo Street. (Paseo
Adelanto is a minor roadway with low traffic volume; there are no receptors along Paseo
Adelanto that would be affected by project-related construction traffic.)
The highest construction-related traffic increases would occur during the rough-
grading / soil-haul phase, which is expected to last approximately six days and would
generate approximately 22 truck trips per day. This increase would be negligible
compared to the existing vehicle flows along Del Obispo Street, which has average daily
traffic of approximately 33,343 (LLG 2018). Construction vehicles would produce less
than a 0.1 dB noise increase in the daily traffic-generated noise levels, which would be
inaudible at sensitive receptors and therefore would have a less than significant impact.
Individual construction vehicle pass-bys may create perceptible noise increases
on residential uses along roadways, and momentary noise levels of up to 85 dBA
(Lmax) at 50 feet from the vehicle may be experienced along haul routes. However,
these truck trips would be spread throughout the daytime hours (and only during the
allowable work periods), would generally be infrequent, and would be short-lived (i.e., a
few seconds for each pass-by). Therefore, because these vehicle pass-by events would
be sporadic and short-term and would occur during weekday daytime hours (i.e., the
least sensitive hours during the day), noise impacts from construction-related truck
traffic would not significantly affect the traffic noise environment at noise-sensitive
receptors along the construction haul routes (either in terms of hourly Leq levels or daily
CNEL levels). Thus, noise impacts from construction vehicles would be less than
significant.
Construction Equipment
Noise generated by onsite construction equipment is based on the type of
equipment used, its location relative to sensitive receptors, and the timing and duration
of noise-generating activities. Each stage of construction involves different kinds of
equipment and has distinct noise characteristics. Noise levels from construction
activities are typically dominated by the loudest piece of equipment. The dominant
equipment noise source is the engine, although work-piece noise (such as dropping of
materials) can also be noticeable.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 107 of 144
The noise produced at each construction stage is determined by combining the
Leq contributions from each equipment item used at a given time, while accounting for
the ongoing time-variations of noise emissions (commonly referred to as the usage
factor). Heavy equipment, such as a dozer or loader, can have maximum, short-duration
noise levels in excess of 80 to 85 dBA at 50 feet. However, overall noise emissions vary
considerably depending on the specific activity performed at any given moment. Noise
attenuation due to distance, the number and type of equipment, and the load and power
requirements to accomplish tasks at each construction phase would result in different
noise levels at a given sensitive receptor. Since noise from construction equipment is
intermittent and diminishes at a rate of at least 6 dB per doubling distance
(conservatively ignoring other attenuation effects from air absorption, ground effects,
and/or shielding/scattering effects), the average noise levels at noise-sensitive
receptors could vary considerably, because mobile construction equipment would move
around the site with different loads and power requirements.
Construction activities associated with the proposed project would include
equipment such as loaders/backhoes, paving equipment, excavators, rubber-tired
dozers, graders, concrete saws, forklifts, rollers, concrete trucks, air compressors, and a
crane (see Table 3-3). Individual construction activities such as demolition, site
preparation, and grading usually generate the highest noise levels since they involve
the largest and most powerful equipment. However, the loudest periods during project
construction would be the periods when multiple construction activities are concurrent.
For example, there is expected to be a brief period when building demolition, site
preparation, and rough grading occur at the same time (see Table 3-3). Though building
demolition is estimated to last approximately six days, this worst-case overlap period
would last approximately two days. To accurately represent the loudest and most
intrusive periods, this construction noise analysis presents the worst-case overlap
periods in addition to the longest-duration construction activities (e.g., the building
construction phase by itself is expected to generate relatively low levels of construction
noise, but it would last for over a year and therefore is expected to be intrusive to
nearby receptors). Individual construction activities not included in Table 5.10-5 would
generally last longer than the worst-case overlap periods, but would generate markedly
less noise. Total project construction is expected to take approximately 17 months.
Using information provided by the applicant and methodologies and inputs employed in
the air quality assessment, the expected construction equipment mix was estimated and
categorized by the most intrusive periods of construction.
The sensitive receptors surrounding the proposed project site consist of
residential and commercial uses. Noise levels from project-related construction activities
were calculated from the simultaneous use of all applicable construction equipment at
spatially averaged distances (i.e., from the center of the proposed construction
activities) to the property line of the nearest receptors. Although construction may occur
across the entire project site, the area around the center best represents the potential
average construction-related noise levels at the various sensitive receptors. The
associated, aggregate sound levels (in the energy-average, Leq noise level metric)
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 108 of 144
during the most intrusive periods of construction are summarized in Table 5.10-7 of the
DEIR.
Construction activities would increase noise levels at and near the proposed area
of improvements. As described above, the daytime ambient noise level around the
proposed project site (represented by the short-term measurements ) is in the range of
59 to 60 dBA Leq. Due to proximity, the highest expected construction-related noise
levels—up to approximately 79 dBA Leq—would be at the residential receptors to the
east. This result would exceed the impact threshold of 55 dBA Leq described above.
The nearest measurement location, ST-4, recorded an ambient noise level of 59 dBA
Leq. Thus, short-term and intermittent noise levels could increase by up to 20 dB (in the
A-weighted Leq metric) during the loudest periods of construction at the residences
along Los Rios Street, depending on equipment location, power level, and activity
duration. For individual equipment items that could be used very near a project site
boundary, construction activity noise levels could potentially be higher than the values in
the table and could exceed an increase of 20 dB above average levels.
It should be noted that the residences to the east (near location ST-4) experience
regular train noise events of up to 77 dBA Leq, and construction noise levels would
therefore be comparable to the levels that are experienced on a daily basis from train
pass-by events. Nonetheless, although all construction would occur during the City of
San Juan Capistrano’s allowable hours of construction and although project-related
construction activities are exempt from the provisions of the municipal code, the
duration of overall construction activities and daily occurrences of elevated noise levels
from these activities could result in notable construction noise annoyance at the nearest
residential receptors. It is also possible that close-proximity activities could result in
sporadic substantial increases in noise volumes. Construction noise impacts at the
nearest receivers would be potentially significant.
Construction activities are expected to occur over approximately 17 months and
would result in temporary noise increases in the vicinity of the proposed project. The
highest expected construction-related noise levels would 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. The
mitigation measure identified above would reduce potential impacts associated with
construction noise to the extent feasible. The temporary noise barrier/curtain between
residential receptors can conservatively provide noise level reduction of 5 dBA.
Therefore, even with the incorporation of best management practices and a temporary
noise barrier required by Mitigation Measure N-1, construction related noise levels could
be approximately 75 dBA Leq. This would result in a substantial increase in noise levels
above ambient conditions. Although construction-related noise impacts are temporary
and would occur during the least noise-sensitive portion of the day, the proposed project
would exceed the 55 dBA Leq speech interference threshold and would result in a
significant unavoidable adverse impact.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 109 of 144
MM N-1: Prior to the issuance of demolition, grading, and/or building permits,
a construction noise mitigation plan shall be prepared, reviewed,
and approved by the City of San Juan Capistrano Director of
Development Services and shall be noted on plans. The project
applicant shall be responsible for requiring contractors to implement
the following measures to limit construction-related noise:
• Construction activity is limited to the daytime hours between
7 AM and 6 PM (Monday through Friday) or between 8:30
AM and 4:30 PM (Saturdays) or at no time on Sundays or
national holidays, as prescribed in the Municipal Code.
• At least 30 days prior to commencement of demolition,
notification of planned construction activities and scheduling
shall be given to all residents or commercial entities adjacent
to the project site. The notification shall include a brief
description of the project, the activities that would occur, and
the durations/hours of construction. The notification shall
also include the phone number of the construction
superintendent. If the superintendent receives a complaint,
the superintendent shall investigate, take appropriate
corrective action, and report the action to the reporting party
and the City of San Juan Capistrano Director of
Development Services.
• A sign shall be posted on construction-zone fencing that is
clearly visible to site passers-by and that includes a contact
name and telephone number of the construction
superintendent. If the superintendent receives a complaint,
the superintendent shall investigate, take appropriate
corrective action, and report the action to the reporting party
and the City of San Juan Capistrano Director of
Development Services.
• Erect a temporary noise barrier/curtain between residential
receptors that (a) share a boundary with the project site and
any project construction zones within 100 feet of the shared
boundary and (b) when such a nearby construction zone will
use any equipment items rated at 60 dBA or above per FTA
Manual Table 12-1. The sound barrier shall be free of gaps
and holes and must achieve a Sound Transmission Class
(STC) of 35 or greater. The barrier can be (a) a ¾-inch-thick
plywood wall or (b) a hanging blanket/curtain with a surface
density or at least 2 pounds per square foot. For either
configuration, the construction side of the barrier shall have
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 110 of 144
an exterior lining of sound absorption material with a Noise
Reduction Coefficient (NRC) rating of at least 0.7.
• All internal combustion engines on construction equipment
and trucks are fitted with properly maintained mufflers, air
intake silencers, and engine shrouds that are no less
effective than as originally equipped by the manufacturer.
• Stationary construction equipment and material delivery
(loading/unloading) areas shall be located as far as
practicable from the residences.
• Material stockpiling, staging of equipment and construction
trailers/offices shall be located as far as feasible from the
residences.
• Unnecessary engine idling shall be curtailed to no more than
10 minutes, to the extent feasible.
• “Smart” back-up alarms, which automatically adjust the
alarm level based on the background noise level, shall be
employed on all trucks and construction vehicles or back-up
alarms shall be disabled and replaced with human spotters.
• The use of public address systems shall be limited to the
extent feasible.
• Grade-surface irregularities on the construction sites shall be
minimized to the extent feasible.
• Construction traffic shall be limited to the haul routes
established by the City.
The Modified Project would still generate construction-related and operational
noise. The highest expected construction-related noise level described in the DEIR is up
to approximately 79 dBa Leq at residential receptors to the east. The Modified Project
would result in similar peak construction-related noise levels. 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 the impacts described in the DEIR, but tese impacts would
nonetheless remain significant and unavoidable.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 111 of 144
SECTION 5
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The City hereby finds as follows:
Aesthetics
Aesthetic/Visual Character
Aesthetic impacts are localized to the project site and its immediate
surroundings. No development or redevelopment projects are approved, planned, or
anticipated for the general vicinity of the project site in the near future. Additionally, of
the 20 “related projects” contemplated by the traffic impact analysis (see Appendix J1 of
the DEIR) and shown on Figure 4-1, none are close enough to the project site to create
cumulative impacts when combined with the proposed project. Furthermore, the parcels
adjacent to and surrounding the project site are largely built out, are generally small in
size, and in many cases contain buildings with historical significance. For these
reasons, it is unlikely that they will be redeveloped with more intense development in
the near future or that a cumulative shift in neighborhood character would occur. In
consideration of these factors, the project’s contribution to cumulative aesthetic impacts
is less than considerable and, therefore, less than cumulatively significant.
Shade and Shadow
The relative effects of shading from structures are site specific. As concluded
above, shade/shadow impacts of the proposed project would not be significant. There
are no planned projects near the project site that would, with the proposed project,
result in a cumulatively significant impact related to shade and shadow. Therefore, the
proposed project’s contribution to cumulative shade and shadow impacts is less than
considerable and is therefore less than cumulatively significant.
Light and Glare
Due to the highly developed nature of central San Juan Capistrano and the
existence of light and glare from existing commercial and residential uses on the
surrounding properties, the proposed project is not anticipated to add significantly to the
creation of nighttime light and glare in the project vicinity. As stated above, there are no
additional development or redevelopment projects proposed in the nearby vicinity that
would generate impacts that would combine with those of the proposed project.
Therefore, the proposed project’s contribution to cumulative light and glare impacts is
less than considerable, and therefore is less than cumulatively significant.
Air Quality
In accordance with SCAQMD’s methodology, any project that produces a
significant project-level regional air quality impact in an area that is in nonattainment
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 112 of 144
contributes to the cumulative impact. Cumulative projects in the local area include new
development and general growth in the project area. The greatest source of emissions
in the SoCAB is mobile sources. Due to the extent of the area potentially impacted from
cumulative project emissions (i.e., the SoCAB), SCAQMD considers a project
cumulatively significant when project-related emissions exceed the SCAQMD regional
emissions thresholds shown in Table 5.2-4 of the DEIR. No significant cumulative
impacts were identified with regard to CO hotspots.
Construction
The SoCAB is designated nonattainment for O3 and PM2.5 under the California
and National AAQS and nonattainment for PM10 and lead (Los Angeles County only)
under the National AAQS. Construction of cumulative projects will further degrade the
regional and local air quality. Air quality will be temporarily impacted during construction
activities. The proposed project’s contribution to cumulative air quality impacts would be
cumulatively considerable and significant. However, implementation of Mitigation
Measures AQ-1, AQ-2, and AQ-3 would reduce project-related construction emissions
to below the SCAQMD significance thresholds on a project and cumulative basis.
Operation
For operational air quality emissions, any project that does not exceed or can be
mitigated to less than the daily regional threshold values is not considered by SCAQMD
to be a substantial source of air pollution and does not add significantly to a cumulative
impact. Operation of the project would not result in emissions in excess of the SCAQMD
regional emissions thresholds. Therefore, the air pollutant emissions associated with the
proposed project would not be cumulatively considerable, and impacts would be less
than significant.
Biological Resources
Construction activities associated with implementation of the proposed project
could result in the removal and/or replacement of trees onsite. In addition, other projects
in the City would remove or disturb trees that could be used for nesting by migratory or
sensitive birds protected under federal and state laws. However, construction of the
proposed project and other cumulative projects would adhere to regulations
implementing the federal MBTA, which would mitigate impacts to less than significant.
Compliance with the MBTA (see Mitigation Measure BIO-1) would ensure that the
project’s contribution to disturbance of sensitive birds would be less than significant and
would not be cumulatively considerable.
Cultural Resources
Potential impacts related to historical, archaeological, and paleontological
resources would be reduced to a level that is less than significant through the
implementation of existing requirements and mitigation measures to ensure proper
identification, treatment, and preservation of cultural resources on the project site.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 113 of 144
Future construction activities in the project area could lead to degradation of the
cultural resources. However, each development proposal received by the City
undergoes environmental review and would be subject to the same resource protection
requirements as the proposed project. If there is a potential for significant impacts on
cultural or paleontological resources, an investigation will be required to determine the
nature and extent of the resources and identify appropriate mitigation measures,
including City Policy 601. Such investigations would identify resources on the affected
project sites that are or appear to be eligible for listing on the NRHP CRHR. Such
investigations would also recommend mitigation measures to protect and preserve
cultural resources. Additionally, cultural resources impacts are site specific and
generally do not combine to result in cumulative impacts. Although there have been
several cultural resources discovered in the surrounding area, no significant cultural
resources were identified that if altered could combine with the effects of the project to
result in a cumulatively significant impact to cultural resources.
Neither the proposed project, nor other cumulative development in the City, are
expected to result in significant impacts to cultural or paleontological resources provided
site-specific surveys and test and evaluation excavations are conducted to determine
whether the resources are “unique archaeological resources” or “historical resources,”
and appropriate mitigation including, but not limited to, compliance with existing
requirements. Implementation of these measures would reduce the potential for adverse
impacts on cultural resources both individually and cumulatively. As such, no significant
cumulative impacts to cultural resources are expected to occur from the proposed
project.
Geology and Soils
Geology and soils impacts are site specific and generally do not combine to
result in cumulative impacts. Similar to the proposed project, future development
projects would be required to comply with applicable state and local building regulations
including the CBC and City of San Juan Capistrano Municipal Code Chapter 8-2. Site-
specific geologic hazards would be addressed in each project’s geotechnical
investigation. Therefore, with implementation of Municipal Code Chapter 8-2,
cumulative geology and soils impacts would be less than significant.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Project-related GHG emissions are not confined to a particular air basin, but are
dispersed worldwide. Therefore, impacts under Impact 5.5-1 are not project-specific
impacts to global warming, but the proposed project’s contribution to this cumulative
impact. As discussed under Impact 5.6-1 of the DEIR, buildout of the proposed project
would result in annual emissions that would not exceed SCAQMD’s bright-line
threshold. Therefore, project-related GHG emissions and their contribution to global
climate change are not cumulatively considerable, and GHG emissions impacts would
be less than significant.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 114 of 144
The area considered for cumulative impacts is Orange County, the service area
for EHD, the affected CUPA. The population of Orange County is forecast to increase
from about 3.07 million in 2012 to 3.46 million in 2040, and employment in the County is
forecast to increase from about 1.53 million to 1.90 million over the same period (SCAG
2016). Other projects would use, store, transport, and dispose of increased amounts of
hazardous materials; and thus could pose substantial risks to the public and the
environment. However, hazards and hazardous waste impacts are typically unique to
each site and do not usually contribute to cumulative impacts. Cumulative development
projects would be required to assess potential hazardous materials impacts on the
development site prior to grading. The project and other cumulative projects would be
required to comply with laws and regulations governing hazardous materials and
hazardous wastes used and generated as described above in Section 5.7-1. Therefore,
cumulative impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials would be less than
significant after regulatory compliance.
Hydrology and Water Quality
The area considered for cumulative hydrology, drainage, and flood hazard
impacts is the San Juan Creek Watershed. The area considered for cumulative water
quality impacts is the part of Orange County in the San Diego Basin and thus subject to
the MS4 Permit covering the project site.
New projects in the area, both individually and cumulatively, could increase the
impervious surface areas, increase the volume of stormwater runoff, and contribute to
pollutant loading in the storm drain system with discharge to Trabuco Creek, then San
Juan Creek and ultimately to the Pacific Ocean. However, as with the proposed project,
future projects within the City and Orange County would be required to comply with
drainage and grading regulations and ordinances that control runoff and regulate water
quality at each development site. New development and redevelopment projects would
be required to demonstrate that stormwater volumes could be managed by onsite and
downstream conveyance facilities and would not induce flooding. New projects also
would be required to comply with the MS4 permit. Each project that disturbs more than
one acre of land would be required to develop a SWPPP, and all regulated projects
would be required to develop a WQMP.
The projects would be subject to review and approval by the appropriate City to
ensure that appropriate BMPs and treatment measures are implemented to reduce
pollutants in stormwater and avoid adverse impacts to surface water quality. The
county’s MS4 permit and LID Ordinance also require new development and certain
redevelopment projects to retain a specified volume of stormwater runoff onsite through
incorporation of LID BMPs so that stormwater volumes are reduced to at or below
existing conditions. As described above, the proposed project would result in a net
reduction in the amount of stormwater runoff and pollutants currently entering the storm
drain system from this project site under existing baseline conditions with the
implementation of required LID and stormwater treatment measures.
Other cumulative projects may be proposed in 100-year flood zones. Local
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 115 of 144
jurisdictions regulate development in such zones both for public safety and to prevent
changes to flood flows. Therefore, cumulative impacts to hydrology and water quality
would not be cumulatively considerable and would be less than significant.
Land Use and Planning
As shown in Section 4.4, Assumptions Regarding Cumulative Impacts, of the
DEIR, a number of development projects are under construction, have been approved,
or are under review in San Juan Capistrano. However, most of these projects are not
located near the project site; most are west of Trabuco Creek or east of Camino
Capistrano. None are located adjacent to the project site or near enough to the site to
generate adverse land use impacts when combined with the proposed project. As with
the proposed project, cumulative projects would be subject to compliance with the
regional and local plans discussed in this section, including provisions of the City’s
General Plan, Los Rios Specific Plan and HTCMP. Therefore, implementation of
cumulative development in accordance with the proposed project would not combine
with the proposed project to result in cumulatively considerable land use impacts.
Noise
Construction Noise and Vibration
Construction noise and vibration impacts are confined to a local area and would
last for approximately 17 months. Cumulative impacts would only occur if other projects
were being constructed in the vicinity of the project site at the same time as the project.
Since the adjoining areas are already built out and only residential remodeling would be
reasonably foreseeable in these areas, there would be a very low probability of
simultaneous and notable construction projects. Thus, the project’s construction noise
impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.
Mobile-Source Noise
The cumulative traffic noise levels would not increase by a noticeable amount (3
dB) along the roadways analyzed, even with full buildout of the General Plan. Therefore,
significant cumulative increases in traffic noise levels would not occur, and impacts
would not be cumulatively considerable.
Stationary-Source Noise
Potential impacts of stationary-source noise generated by the project would be
limited to noise-sensitive receptors in relatively close proximity to the project site. This
holds true for other, nearby (existing or future) stationary sources also. Thus, noise
levels from project-related stationary sources would not combine with nearby stationary
noise sources to result in significant increases or municipal code violations at the
nearest receptors (to the project site). The project’s stationary noise impacts would not
be individually or cumulatively considerable.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 116 of 144
Public Services
Fire Protection
The area considered for cumulative impacts is OCFA’s service area consisting of
23 incorporated cities contracting with OCFA for fire protection and all of the
unincorporated area in Orange County. The service area spans 571 square miles with a
population of about 1.8 million. OCFA operates 72 fire stations with daily staffing of 331
sworn firefighters and firefighter/paramedics on each of three shifts. Ten other cities in
Orange County operate their own fire departments, and the Los Angeles County Fire
Department serves the City of La Habra. OCFA and all fire departments in Orange
County participate in an automatic aid agreement to ensure that the closest resources
are dispatched to an emergency.
Regional growth would increase demands for fire protection and emergency
medical services. The population of Orange County is forecast to increase from about
3,157,000 in 2015 to 3,461,000 in 2040, a net increase of 304,000 or about 9.6 percent.
Employment in the County is projected to increase from approximately 1,633,000 in
2015 to 1,899,000 in 2040, a net increase of 266,000 or about 16.3 percent (SCAG
2016). Cumulative growth anticipated in the region would generate increased tax
revenues to cities and Orange County. Some of those revenues would be available to
fund construction of new or expanded fire stations; purchase additional apparatus;
and/or hire additional staff. Such additional revenue would offset potentially adverse
impacts of increased development. In addition, similar to the proposed project, each of
the cumulative projects would be subject to Title 24 Building Code regulations and
individually subject to OCFA review and compliance with all applicable construction-
related and operational fire safety requirements. Cumulative impacts would be less than
significant, and project impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.
Police Protection
The area considered for cumulative impacts to police protection is OCSD’s
service area consisting of all the unincorporated County areas plus 13 incorporated
cities. Total OCSD staffing is 3,498 organized into four commands; patrol and traffic
deputies and detectives work in one of those commands (Field Operations &
Investigative Services) (Orange County 2017). OCSD stations are in Santa Ana,
Stanton, Aliso Viejo, Lake Forest, and San Clemente.
The project in combination with continued growth and intensification in land uses
in OCSD’s service area would contribute to a cumulative impact on their resources and
operations. Over time, such increased demands are expected to require additional
deputies, civilian personnel, and equipment, including vehicles, weaponry,
communications equipment, and office furniture. However, other projects would
generate increased tax revenues to cities and Orange County. Some of those revenues
would be available to fund construction of new or expanded Sheriff’s stations; purchase
additional equipment; and/or hire additional staff. Similar to the proposed project, each
of the cumulative projects would be subject to review from the applicable law
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 117 of 144
enforcement agency and would be required to comply with all applicable safety
requirements of the law enforcement agency and the applicable city in order to
adequately address police protection service demands. As a result, cumulative impacts
to law enforcement services would not be cumulatively considerable and would be less
than significant.
Transportation and Traffic
assessed using forecast traffic conditions in the Existing Plus Project Plus
Cumulative (Year 2020) and General Plan Buildout scenarios. As discussed in Impact
5-12-1, and 5.12.2, the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact.
However, forecast vehicular queues in the existing single eastbound left-turn lane
storage at Paseo Adelanto and Del Obispo Street is anticipated to be inadequate under
General Plan Buildout traffic conditions in the PM peak hour. Therefore, as discussed in
Impact 5.12-5, of the DEIR, this is a potentially significant impact.
Tribal Cultural Resources
Cumulative impacts to cultural resources would occur when the impacts of the
proposed project, in conjunction with other projects and development in the region,
result in multiple and/or cumulative impacts to tribal cultural resources in the area. No
prehistoric sites have been recorded on the project site, however, one sacred site has
been documented within or adjacent to the project site, and 69 have been recorded
within a half-mile radius of the site. It is possible that buried prehistoric artifacts or tribal
cultural resources could be present within the area. Each future project considered for
approval by the City would be required to comply with Policy 601 and include measures
to protect these resources if they are uncovered during grading activities. The proposed
project also includes mitigation measures to ensure proper identification, treatment, and
preservation of tribal cultural resources. Implementation of these measures would
reduce the potential for adverse impacts on tribal cultural resources both individually
and cumulatively. Therefore, cumulative impacts to cultural resources would be less
than significant.
Utilities, Service Systems, and Energy
Wastewater Treatment and Collection
The area considered for cumulative impacts to wastewater treatment is
SOCWA’s service area, 220 square miles in south Orange County with population of
about 550,000. Recycled water supplies, from wastewater treatment facilities’ effluents,
are forecast to be about 26.5 mgd in the South OC Watershed Management Area—
generally similar to SOCWA’s service area—in 2035 (OCPW 2013). SOCWA’s three
facilities have combined capacity of about 31.7 mgd and treat a total of approximately
17.3 mgd, for combined residual capacities of 14.4 mgd or about 83 percent of existing
wastewater flows.
Other projects would increase numbers of residents and workers in the region,
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 118 of 144
thus increasing wastewater generation. The service population of an area of South
Orange County area, which is slightly larger than SOCWA’s service area, is forecast to
increase from about 886,495 in 2020 to approximately 951,051 in 2040, an increase of
64,556 or about 7.3 percent. The South Orange County region consists of two Regional
Statistical Areas, C-43 and D-40, designated in the Orange County Projections 2014-
Modified issued by the Center for Demographic Research at California State University,
Fullerton and approved by the Orange County Council of Governments in June 2016.
As stated previously, the JBLTP treatment plant has a residual capacity of about 6.4
mgd. Using the percentage growth in service population for the South Orange County
area, a proportional 7.3 percent increase wastewater discharge would result in a
cumulative net increase of approximately 0.5 mgd of wastewater, which is within the
remaining residual capacity of the JBLTP. Since there is sufficient residual capacity at
the wastewater treatment facility serving SOCWA’s service area, cumulative impacts
related to treatment capacity would be less than significant.
Cumulative impacts related to wastewater conveyance depend on the location
and size of individual cumulative projects as well as phasing. All future development
within the City of San Juan Capistrano and SOCWA service area would be reviewed on
a project-by-project basis to verify that existing capacity exists to convey the wastewater
generated with the new development. In addition, development projects would be
subject to payment of fees prior to connecting to the City’s or SOCWA’s facilities. As
stated under Impact 5.14-1, the project would contribute flows to pipe segment D15704,
resulting in an increase in peak flows from 0.70 to 0.76 and average flows from 0.44 to
0.48. Since this pipe segment is currently deficient, future development would exceed
the capacity for this pipe segment, which would require upsizing from an 8-inch to 12-
inch pipe.
The proposed project would cumulatively contribute to a deficiency for pipe
segment D15704 and would be potentially significant.
Water Supply and Distribution Systems
The area considered for cumulative impacts is the City of San Juan Capistrano.
Other projects in the service area would increase water demands. SCAG projections of
population and employment growth in the City between 2012 and 2040 are assumed in
the water demand projected in Table 5.14-2. The description of City water supplies and
demands in Section 5.14.2.1 above addresses cumulative conditions. The City
forecasts that it will have sufficient water supplies over the 2020-2040 period to meet
water demands. Other projects of certain sizes and types would be required to have
water supply assessments prepared. If the City did not already have sufficient projected
water supplies for such projects, it would be required to provide its plans for acquiring
the needed supplies, including the cost and timeframe needed. The City would be
required to consider the results of water supply assessments in its CEQA findings on
such projects. Cumulative impacts would be less than significant, and project impacts
would not be cumulatively considerable.
Solid Waste
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 119 of 144
The area considered for cumulative impacts is Orange County, the service area
of the three landfills operated by OC Waste & Recycling. Other projects in the County
would increase solid waste generation. The population of the County is forecast to
increase from about 3.07 million in 2012 to 3.46 million in 2040, and employment in the
County is forecast to increase from about 1.53 million to 1.90 million over the same
period (SCAG 2016). Solid waste generation is anticipated to be proportional to service
population—that is, population and employment combined. Other projects would recycle
and compost parts of their solid waste in accordance with the California Integrated
Waste Management Act (AB 939), AB 341, AB 1826, and CALGreen Section 5.408. AB
939 requires the County to maintain 15 years of available countywide solid waste
disposal capacity. The Orange County landfill system has sufficient capacity to
accommodate the project and future development within the County. Cumulative
impacts would be less than significant after compliance existing regulations, and project
impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.
SECTION 6
FINDINGS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL
CHANGES AND ENERGY USE
Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes
The State CEQA Guidelines require that EIRs reveal the significant
environmental changes that would occur as a result of a proposed project. CEQA also
requires decisionmakers to balance the benefits of a project against its unavoidable
environmental risks in determining whether to approve a project. This section addresses
non-renewable resources, the commitment of future generations to the proposed uses,
and irreversible impacts associated with the Project. (DEIR Section 9, Significant
Irreversible Changes Due to the Proposed Project.)
Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed in Section 9,
Significant Irreversible Changes Due to the Proposed Project, starting on page 9-1 of
the DEIR. In the case of the proposed project, its implementation would involve a land
use, development, and implementation framework to support 64,900 square feet of
commercial and office uses in five buildings. Significant irreversible changes that would
be caused by implementation of the project would be:
• Construction activities that would entail the commitment of nonrenewable and/or
slowly renewable energy resources; human resources; and natural resources
such as lumber and other forest products, sand and gravel, asphalt, steel,
copper, lead, other metals, water, and fossil fuels.
• Operation that would require the use of natural gas and electricity, petroleum-
based fuels, fossil fuels, and water. The commitment of resources required for
the construction and operation of the project would limit the availability of such
resources for future generations or for other uses during the life of the project.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 120 of 144
• An increased commitment of social services and public maintenance services
(e.g., police, fire, sewer, and water services) would also be required. The energy
and social service commitments would be long-term obligations in view of the low
likelihood of returning the land to its original condition once it has been
developed.
• Employment growth related to project implementation would increase vehicle
trips over the long term. Emissions associated with such vehicle trips would
continue to contribute to the South Coast Air Basin’s nonattainment designations
for ozone, and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) under the California and
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS), and nonattainment for nitrogen
dioxide (NO2) under the California AAQS.
• Long-term irreversible commitment of vacant parcels of land or redevelopment of
existing developed land in the city of San Juan Capistrano
Given the low likelihood that the land would revert to lower intensity uses or to its
current form, the proposed project would generally commit future generations to these
environmental changes. However, the project area is already developed; therefore, the
use of existing infrastructure is possible, and environmental impacts can be minimized.
Additional development intensities can be more readily accommodated with minimal
physical impact, relieving development pressure from other areas where more intensive
use of nonrenewable resources would be necessary. The commitment of resources to
the proposed project is not unusual for or inconsistent with projects of this type and
scope. However, once these commitments are made, it is improbable that the project
area would revert back to its current condition. Thus, the proposed project would result
in significant irreversible changes to the environment throughout the lifespan of the
structures.
Energy Use
Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed in Section
5.14, Utilities and Service Systems, Impact 5.14-5, starting on page 5.14-30 of the
DEIR. The proposed project would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, nor conflict with an energy efficiency plan.
Short-Term Construction
Construction of the proposed project would create temporary increased demands
for electricity and vehicle fuels compared to existing conditions and would result in
short-term transportation-related energy use. During construction, haul of some soil will
be required. Construction of the proposed project is expected to require off-site haul of
approximately 19,500 cubic yards (cy) of import and 2,864 cy of export. Project
completion is expected by the end of 2020.
Electrical Energy
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 121 of 144
Construction of the proposed project would require electricity use to power the
construction equipment. The electricity use during construction would vary during
different phases of construction, where the majority of construction equipment during
demolition and grading would be gas-powered or diesel-powered, and the later
construction phases would require electricity-powered, such as interior construction and
architectural coatings. The amount of electricity usage by type during construction has
been calculated using outputs from the CalEEMod Air Quality Computer Model and is
shown in Table 5.14-5. Project construction would occur at one time and would result in
a demand of 855 kWh of electricity. Electricity consumption during construction would
be temporary through the approximate 17 month construction phase. As the project site
is already served by onsite electrical infrastructure, adequate infrastructure capacity is
available to accommodate the electricity demand during construction would not require
additional or expanded electrical infrastructure.
The construction contractors are anticipated to minimize idling of construction
equipment during construction, as required by 13 California Code of Regulations (CCR)
Section 2499, restricting nonessential idling of construction equipment to five minutes or
less. Additionally, the project will be constructed in accordance with the City’s Green
Building Standards Code and Municipal Code Sections 6-3.08 et seq., which requires a
minimum of 65 percent of construction and demolition debris to be diverted from landfills
and recycled. Such required practices would limit wasteful and unnecessary electrical
energy consumption.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 122 of 144
Gas Energy
The construction-related equipment would not be powered by natural gas and no
natural gas demand is anticipated during construction. As a result, natural gas
consumption during construction would be reduced as compared to existing conditions.
No new or expanded natural gas facilities or supply are anticipated.
Transportation Energy
Transportation energy use depends on the type and number of trips, vehicle
miles traveled, fuel efficiency of vehicles, and travel mode. Transportation energy use
during construction would come from the transport and use of construction equipment,
delivery vehicles and haul trucks, and construction employee vehicles that would use
diesel fuel and/or gasoline. The use of energy resources by these vehicles would
fluctuate according to the phase of construction and would be temporary throughout the
approximate 17 month duration of construction. The majority of construction equipment
during demolition and grading would be gas-powered or diesel-powered, and the later
construction phases would utilize electricity-powered equipment. As discussed above,
the project would be required to restrict nonessential idling to construction equipment to
five minutes or less pursuant to CCR Section 2499.
The amount of fuel usage by type during construction has been calculated using
outputs from the CalEEMod Air Quality Computer Model and is shown in Table 5.14-5
of the DEIR.
Over the 17 months of construction, total fuel consumption is estimated to be
approximately 47,994 gallons. Impacts related to transportation energy use during
construction would be temporary and would not require ongoing or permanent
commitment of energy resources. Project construction would not require expanded
energy supplies or the construction of new infrastructure.
Long-Term Operational and Maintenance Impacts
Operation of the proposed project would create additional demands for electricity
and natural gas compared to existing conditions, and would result in increased
transportation energy use. Operational use of energy would include heating, cooling,
and ventilation of buildings; water heating; operation of electrical systems, security and
control center functions, use of on-site equipment and appliances; and indoor, outdoor,
perimeter, and parking lot lighting. Proposed energy consumption for the project site is
shown in Table 5.14-6 of the DEIR.
Electrical Energy
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 123 of 144
Ito Nursery currently operates on site and generates limited demand for
electricity, for various purposes, such as heating, cooling, building ventilation, lighting,
use of onsite equipment, etc. As shown in Table 5.14-6, the proposed project would
result a total electricity demand of 1,767,933 kWh/year. SDG&E has demonstrated
adequate capacity to handle the increase in electrical demand. Forecasted growth for
SDG&E’s service area is based on population and economic growth in addition to such
physical variables as average temperature and water supplies (important to
hydroelectric generation) in a given year. Based on CEC projections for the SDG&E
service area in 2028, demand is projected to reach between 24,179 gwh in the low-
demand scenario and 25,649 gwh in the high-demand scenario by 2028; and increase
of between 2,321 gwh and 3,475 gwh over existing demands. The maximum project-
related annual consumption would represent less than a tenth of a percent of the
forecasted net energy demand. Based on these estimates, sufficient transmission and
distribution capacity exists, and off-site improvements would not be necessary.
Furthermore, any increase in electrical demand from the project is incremental in
comparison to the regional growth projects and electrical demand.
The proposed project would be required to comply with the California Green
Building Standards Code (CALGreen; CCR, Title 24, Part 11). The project would also
incorporate design features and attributes promoting energy efficiency and
sustainability:
• Redevelopment and revitalization of the project site promotes efficient use of
scarce real property. Further, redevelopment and reuse of the site supports
sustainable and efficient use of resources by taking advantage of currently
available utilities and public services.
• To reduce water demands and associated energy use, the project uses would be
required to implement a water conservation strategy and demonstrate a minimum
20 percent reduction in indoor water usage when compared to baseline water
demand (total expected water demand without implementation of the water
conservation strategy). Project uses would also be required to implement:
• A landscaping palette emphasizing drought-tolerant plants consistent with
provisions of the State Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance and/or City
requirements.
• Water-efficient irrigation techniques consistent with City requirements.
• US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Certified WaterSense or equivalent
faucets, toilets, and other plumbing fixtures
The proposed project would be consistent with the requirements of these energy-
related regulations, and would not result in wasteful or unnecessary electricity demands.
Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a significant impact.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 124 of 144
Gas Energy
Development pursuant to the proposed project would result in a total natural gas
demand of 7,777,493 kBTU/year. The project site is already served by SCG and gas
service would be added to the existing system by SCG as necessary to meet the
project’s demand. There is extensive and reliable gas services in the area, and the
improvements would occur in accordance with the SCG’s policies and extension rules
on file with the Public Utilities Commission (PUC). The availability of natural gas service
is based on present gas supply and regulatory policies. As a public utility, SCG is under
the auspices of the PUC and federal regulatory agencies. Should these agencies take
any action that affects gas supply or the conditions under which service is available, gas
service would be provided in accordance with revised conditions. No significant impacts
are anticipated.
Transportation Energy
The proposed project would consume transportation energy during operations
from the use of motor vehicles. Because the efficiency of the motor vehicles in use,
such as the average miles per gallon for motor vehicles involved with the proposed
project is unknown, estimates of transportation energy use is assessed based on the
overall VMT and related transportation energy use. The project-related VMT would
come from employees, patrons, and delivery/supply trucks, and trips by maintenance
and repair crews.
Operation-related fuel usage data was calculated based on EMFAC2017, v1.0.2,
fuel usage data for 2020 and the trip generation and average trip distance information
provided LLG (see Appendix J of the DEIR). The proposed project would increase total
annual VMT by 5,438,427–5,383,172 for passenger vehicles and 55,255 for trucks
(vendor and delivery). At buildout, the proposed project would consume an estimated
151,284,221 gallons per year of gasoline and diesel fuel. Over time, the consumption of
gasoline and diesel fuel will decrease because of the increase in the average corporate
fuel economy of vehicles as a result of state and federal laws, including the Pavley
Advanced Clean Cars program, as well as vehicle turn over that improves the overall
fuel economy of California’s vehicle fleets.
The project site is in an ideal location for new development because it is
proximate to synergistic land uses–office, residential, downtown retail and restaurant
establishments–and alternative modes of transportation. The proposed development
encourages the use of the region’s public transportation system by creating retail and
office opportunities for employment and visitors within a transit priority area, a quarter
mile of the San Juan Capistrano Metrolink Station. The proposed project also provides a
needed amenity for the surrounding residential uses, which are within walking distance
to the project site.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 125 of 144
The City of San Juan Capistrano and its surrounding area are urbanized with
numerous gasoline and diesel fuel facilities and infrastructure. Consequently, the
proposed project would not result in a substantial demand for energy that would require
expanded supplies or the construction of other infrastructure or expansion of existing
facilities. Compared to uses of similar scale and configuration, the project does not
propose uses or operations that would inherently result in excessive and wasteful
vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled, nor does it propose uses that are associated
with excess and wasteful vehicle energy consumption.
SECTION 7
GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS
Section 15126(d) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires a discussion of a
proposed project’s potential to foster economic or population growth, including ways in
which a project could remove an obstacle to growth. Growth does not necessarily create
significant physical changes to the environment. However, depending upon the type,
magnitude, and location of growth, it can result in significant adverse environmental
effects if it requires new development or infrastructure to support it. The proposed
Project's growth effects would be considered significant if they could result in significant
physical effects in one or more environmental issue areas. The most commonly cited
example of how an economic effect might create a physical change is where economic
growth in one area could create blight conditions elsewhere by causing existing
competitors to go out of business and the buildings to be left vacant.
Support for this environmental impact conclusion is fully discussed in Section 10,
Growth–Inducing Impacts of the Proposed Project, starting on page 10-1 of the DEIR,
page 2-92 of the FEIR, and Appendix B, herein.
Remove Obstacles to Growth. As discussed in Section 5.14, Utilities, Service
Systems, and Energy, expand one or more public services the project site and
surrounding area are already serviced with existing utility and service systems. Although
connections, an upsizing of one sewer segment, and an additional 8-inch water main
under River Street are necessary, major infrastructure is already present. The adopted
Los Rios Specific Plan permits Low Density Commercial development on the site,
therefore, the existing commercial nursery operation could continue or new Low Density
Commercial development could occur under the adopted specific plan. Approval of the
proposed project would not remove an existing regulatory obstacle to growth, but it
would redefine the scale of development allowed on this site. Therefore, the proposed
project is not considered to be growth inducing with respect to removal of obstacles to
land development.
Expand One or More Public Services. The project site is in an urbanized area
and public services are currently provided to the site. As discussed in Section 5.11,
Public Services, of the DEIR the increase in commercial intensity at the site would result
in a small increase in calls for service for fire protection and police services. However,
the additional demand can be met by the existing service levels and no expansion of
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 126 of 144
public services facilities would be required. Impacts to public services were determined
to be less than significant. The project would not result in an increase in residents at the
project site or within its vicinity, given that employment demand can be met through
existing residents and therefore there would be no increased demand for public schools,
parks, and libraries.
Encourage or Facilitate Economic Effects. During project construction, a number
of design, engineering, and construction-related jobs would be created. This would last
until the project is constructed over two years. Construction related jobs would not result
in a significant population increase because they would be filled by workers in the
region. The construction phase would be temporary and the buildings are being
developed based on market demand.
The intent of the specific plan amendment is to increase the City’s revenue-
generating tax base, generate new employment and promote business activity in the
Los Rios Specific Plan area. The increased number of employees and visitors to the
area could also spur new economic investment in commercial uses serving the project
site and surrounding area. This would represent an increased demand for economic
goods and services and could, therefore, encourage the creation of new businesses
and/or the expansion of existing businesses that address these economic needs. Actual
growth would depend on future market demand, site constraints, and property owners’
willingness to take advantage of new development opportunities. However, the creation
or expansion of new businesses in the area may have both direct and indirect economic
effects that could significantly affect the environment. The impacts from this effect would
be analyzed and any appropriate mitigation imposed on a project-by-project basis.
Precedent-setting action. The proposed project would require approval of
discretionary actions, including a specific plan amendment; however, the project would
not set a precedent for future projects with similar characteristics. The Los Rios Specific
Plan was originally adopted by City Council Resolution 78-02-15-06, and amended
three times (Resolutions 99-11-16-04, 03-01-21-03, and 12-09-04-02) prior to this
proposed specific plan amendment. Approval of the proposed project would not involve
a precedent-setting action that would encourage and/or facilitate other activities that
could significantly affect the environment.
Urban Decay. The project will not create urban decay impacts. Urban decay can
occur where large big box format discount retailers (e.g., WalMart) come into a market
place and undercut local independent merchants. The City’s downtown and the River
Street Marketplace provide intimate artisanal retail and dining offerings that do not
compete with but rather complement each other. The project will not create or contribute
to urban decay (page 2-92 of the FEIR, and Attachment A, River Street Marketplace
Economic Impact, herein).
SECTION 8
ALTERNATIVES
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 127 of 144
A. Background
Where significant impacts are identified, section 15126.6 of the State CEQA
Guidelines requires EIRs to consider and discuss alternatives to the proposed actions.
Subsection (a) states:
(a) An EIR shall describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the
project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain
most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or
substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and
evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. An EIR need not
consider every conceivable alternative to a project. Rather it must
consider a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives that
will foster informed decision-making and public participation. An EIR
is not required to consider alternatives which are infeasible. The lead
agency is responsible for selecting a range of project alternatives for
examination and must publicly disclose its reasoning for selecting
those alternatives. There is no ironclad rule governing the nature or
scope of the alternatives to be discussed other than the rule of
reason.
Subsection 15126.6(b) states the purpose of the alternatives analysis:
(b) Because an EIR must identify ways to mitigate or avoid the
significant effects that a project may have on the environment (Public
Resources Code Section 21002.1), the discussion of alternatives
shall focus on alternatives to the project or its location which are
capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects
of the project, even if these alternatives would impede to some
degree the attainment of the project objectives, or would be more
costly.
In subsection 15126.6(c), the State CEQA Guidelines describe the selection
process for a range of reasonable alternatives:
(c) The range of potential alternatives to the proposed project shall
include those that could feasibly accomplish most of the basic
objectives of the Project and could avoid or substantially lessen one
or more of the significant effects. The EIR should briefly describe the
rationale for selecting the alternatives to be discussed. The EIR
should also identify any alternatives that were considered by the lead
agency but were rejected as infeasible during the scoping process
and briefly explain the reasons underlying the lead agency’s
determination. Additional information explaining the choice of
alternatives may be included in the administrative record. Among the
factors that may be used to eliminate alternatives from detailed
consideration in an EIR are: (i) failure to meet most of the basic
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 128 of 144
project objectives, (ii) infeasibility, or (iii) inability to avoid significant
environmental impacts.
The range of alternatives required is governed by a “rule of reason” that requires
the EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice. The
EIR shall include sufficient information about each alternative to allow meaningful
evaluation, analysis, and comparison with the proposed Project. Alternatives are limited
to ones that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the
Project. Of those alternatives, the EIR need examine in detail only the ones that the
lead agency determines could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the Project.
B. The Project Objectives
The following objectives have been established for the Project (Page 7-2 of the
DEIR):
1. Objective 1: Revise the Los Rios Specific Plan to add a Commercial Core
Planning Area to encourage the development of commercial opportunities
that honor the rich history of the Los Rios neighborhood and surrounding
uses.
2. Objective 2: Redevelop the project site with a complementary mix of
commercial and office uses.
3. Objective 3: Provide retail and office opportunities for residents and
visitors to San Juan Capistrano that are compatible with the surrounding
land uses.
4. Objective 4: Establish contemporary family-oriented uses that increase the
City’s revenue-generating tax base through new sales tax and increased
property tax revenues.
5. Objective 5: Promote business activity in the Los Rios Specific Plan area
through creation of facilities responsive to community needs.
6. Objective 6: Implement employment-generating land uses that would
create new jobs available to City residents.
7. Objective 7: Encourage alternative modes of travel through enhancement
of bicycle and pedestrian connectivity, and increasing the number of
employees within a transit priority area within a quarter mile of the San
Juan Capistrano Metrolink Station.
8. Objective 8: Incorporate sustainable development practices addressing
energy efficiency, including compliance with green building standards, the
state model water efficient landscape ordinance, and water and energy
efficient design elements.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 129 of 144
9. Objective 9: Enhance the visual attributes of the project site and the
greater Los Rios area through implementation of design guidelines,
landscape design, and signage requirements
The following alternatives were considered but rejected as part of the
environmental analysis for the Project (Section 7.3, Alternatives Considered and
Rejected during the Scoping/Project Planning Process, starting on Page 7-3 of the
DEIR).
1. Alternative Development Areas: CEQA requires that the discussion of
alternatives focus on alternatives to the project or its location that are
capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the
project. The key question and first step in the analysis is whether any of
the significant effects of the project would be avoided or substantially
lessened by putting the project in another location. Only locations that
would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the
project need be considered for inclusion in the EIR (CEQA Guidelines §
15126[5][B][1]).
Three alternative sites were considered–(1) the Camino Real Playhouse,
(2) the Mission Grill, and (3) the Hotel Capistrano sites.
- Camino Real Playhouse: The Camino Real Playhouse site would
require additional demolition activities resulting in increased significant
construction-related impacts to air quality, noise, and traffic.
Additionally, the City is currently under an exclusive negotiating
agreement to develop the site for a mix of uses, including theater,
commercial and office uses.
- The Mission Grill: The approximate one-third acre Mission Grill site at
31681 Camino Capistrano, lacks adequate acreage to accommodate
the proposed project. Additionally, the project site is within close
proximity to a sensitive receptor. The Mission Grill site is about 70 feet
directly west and across Camino Capistrano from Mission San Juan
Capistrano Historic Landmark and Museum. The church at the mission
is the oldest building in California still in use. Visitors to the Mission
and museum expect a quiet noise environment to experience
enjoyment and contemplation of this religious and historical landmark.
Due to the site’s proximity to sensitive receptors, development of the
proposed project at this location would not eliminate the one significant
and unavoidable impact (construction-related noise) associated with
the project.
- Hotel Capistrano: The 3.16-acre Hotel Capistrano site is at 31872,
31878, and 31882 Camino Capistrano. Although land use designations
for this site would allow uses contemplated by the proposed project,
the project is not under the ownership or control of the project
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 130 of 144
applicant. Furthermore, substantial increases in noise levels due to
construction noise would be similar to the proposed project, since the
nearest receptors in the vicinity of the Hotel Capistrano site are the
Egan House, within 25 feet of the project boundary, and the Esslinger
Building, approximately 50 feet from the project boundary.
The three alternative sites were eliminated from further consideration
because they either do not have the ability to accommodate the project or
would not eliminate significant and unavoidable adverse impacts.
2. Reduced Construction Noise Alternatives: The proposed project would
result in one significant and unavoidable short-term construction noise
impact. Noise levels during construction would reach a maximum of 79
dBA Leq at 115 feet from the source, increasing noise levels over ambient
conditions by 20–27 dBA Leq during the loudest periods of construction.
All feasible mitigation measures (see Mitigation Measure N-1) have been
incorporated into the proposed project, which will substantially reduce
temporary noise impacts at sensitive receptors during construction
activities. A temporary noise barrier would reduce construction-related
noise by approximately 10 dBA for ground-level receptors with no line-of-
site to construction activity. Therefore, maximum noise levels with
mitigation can be reduced to approximately 69 dBA at 115 feet.
Project alternatives were evaluated to determine if any development
alternative at the project site could eliminate the significant and
unavoidable construction noise impact. An alternative project design or
layout would not substantially reduce this impact, because there is no
commercial and office development of a size or distance from sensitive
receptors that would eliminate the substantial periodic increase in ambient
noise levels during construction. The existing ambient noise levels in the
study area are relatively low for an urban community at 52-59 dBA Leq
(see Table 5.10-5), therefore, the threshold to achieve a substantial
increase in noise levels from construction is lower than most urbanized
neighborhoods. Furthermore, single family residential development is
adjacent to the project’s eastern boundary, which is approximately 300–
350 feet from the site’s western boundary. At a distance of 325 feet,
sensitive receptors would still experience substantial periodic noise levels
of up to 70 dBA Leq, which is 11–18 dBA Leq above ambient conditions.
A phased or shortened construction schedule was also evaluated to
potentially reduce substantial periodic noise levels. However, substantially
shortening the project’s 17-month construction schedule would result in a
significant increase in construction-related air quality emissions due to the
need for additional construction vehicles/equipment and conflicts with
Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2 (limiting the daily haul trips). There
are no other project alternatives that would result in a substantial reduction
in construction-related noise levels.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 131 of 144
The alternatives selected for review pursuant to the EIR focus on alternatives
that could reduce environmental impacts to an even lesser level of insignificance,
consistent with the Project objectives (i.e., the alternatives could impede to some
degree the attainment of Project objectives). Those alternatives include (Section 7.4,
Alternatives Selected for Further Analysis, starting on Page 7-5 of the DEIR):
• Alternative 1: No Project/No Build Alternative
• Alternative 2: No Project/Existing Los Rios Specific Plan Alternative
• Alternative 3: Reduced Intensity Alternative
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 132 of 144
C. Evaluation of Alternatives Selected for Further Analysis
1. Alternative 1: No Project/No Build Alternative
Description: CEQA requires an analysis of the No Project Alternative in
accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e). This alternative evaluates what
would occur if the project is not approved, and is based upon existing conditions and
available infrastructure. The No Project/No Build Alternative assumes that the proposed
amendment to the Los Rios Specific Plan would not be adopted and no new
development would occur. The current nursery uses would continue to operate and no
demolition of the existing structures would occur. (Section 7.5, No Project/No Build
Alternative, of the DEIR)
Analysis
Avoid or Substantially Lessen Project Impacts. The No Project/No Build
Alternative would lessen environmental impacts in the areas of air quality, biological
resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, GHG emissions, noise, public
services, transportation and traffic, tribal cultural resources, and utilities, service
systems, and energy. This alternative would have greater environmental impacts related
to aesthetics and hydrology and water quality and have similar impacts in the area of
hazards and hazardous materials and land use and planning. Additionally, this
alternative would eliminate the proposed project’s significant and unavoidable impact to
construction-related noise. Therefore, overall this alternative is considered
environmentally superior when compared to the proposed project.
Attainment of Project Objectives. Implementation of the No Project/No Build
Alternative would ultimately stop any new development from occurring within in the
project site beyond what is already on the ground. Therefore, none of the project
objectives would be achieved under this alternative.
Comparative Merits. Compared to the proposed Project, The No Project/No Build
Alternative would not provide any of the project benefits that would occur with adoption
of the amendment to the Specific Plan, including encouraging ridership within a transit
priority area, enhancement of character and design, improved mobility and connectivity,
water quality enhancement, sustainable development and design, and economic
revitalization.
Finding: The City Council rejects the No Project/No Build Alternative on the following
grounds, each of which individually provides sufficient justification for rejection of this
alternative: (1) its failure to meet any of the project objectives; and (2) . specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of
employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible this project
alternative identified in the EIR. Therefore, the City Council hereby rejects the No
Project/No Build Alternative.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 133 of 144
2. Alternative 2: No Project/Existing Los Rios Specific Plan Alternative
Description: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(3)(A), when a
project is the revision of an existing regulatory plan, the “no project” alternative assumes
continuation of the existing plan, policy, or operation into the future. Therefore, under
the No Project/Existing Los Rios Specific Plan Alternative, the current general plan land
uses and zoning would remain in effect. The current Specific Plan designates the site as
Low Density Commercial (LDC) development, which allows land uses such as
nurseries, open markets, and arts and crafts workshops, display and retail, and office
uses fronting Del Obispo. The No Project/Existing Los Rios Specific Plan Alternative
assumes that the project site would be developed with an approximate 36,000 square
foot nursery/garden center with a building height of up to 30 feet. This alternative would
generate 2,452 daily, 87 AM peak hour, and 250 PM peak hour trips (ITE Trip
Generation Manual 10th Edition, Nursery (Garden Center), ITE Code 817. (Section 7.6,
No Project/Existing Los Rios Specific Plan Alternative, of the DEIR).
Analysis
Avoid or Substantially Lessen Project Impacts. The No Project/Existing Los Rios
Specific Plan Alternative would lessen environmental impacts in the areas of aesthetics,
air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, GHG emissions, noise, tribal cultural
resources, and utilities and service systems. However, significant and unavoidable
construction-related noise impacts would remain. This alternative would result in an
increase in traffic impacts during the PM peak hour and would exacerbate the queuing
impact at Paseo Adelanto and Del Obispo under General Plan Buildout conditions. This
alternative would have similar impacts in the area of geology and soils, hazards and
hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, and public
services.
Attainment of Project Objectives. The No Project/Existing Los Rios Specific Plan
Alternative would not meet many of the project objects. For example, the No
Project/Existing Los Rios Specific Plan, would not: add a Commercial Core Planning
Area to encourage the development of commercial opportunities that honor the rich
history of the Los Rios neighborhood and surrounding uses (Objective 1); redevelop the
site with a complementary mix of commercial and office uses for residents and visitors
(Objectives 2, 3); enhance the visual attributes of the project site and the greater Los
Rios area through implementation of design guidelines, landscape design, and signage
requirements (Objective 9).
This alternate would achieve some of the proposed project’s objectives but to a
lesser extent as compared to the proposed project. For example, the No
Project/Existing Los Rios Specific Plan Alternative would increase the City’s revenue-
generating tax base through new sales tax (Objective 4), create new jobs (Objective 6),
and increase the number of employees within a transit priority area (Objective 7).
However, these objectives would be achieved to a lesser extent given the reduced
development intensity and lack of diverse retail uses (single tenant use.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 134 of 144
Comparative Merits. Overall, this alternative is not considered environmentally
superior when compared to the proposed project because it would not eliminate the
temporary significant and unavoidable construction-related noise impact and it would
increase the significant queuing at Paseo Adelanto and Del Obispo. Furthermore,
although it would reduce impacts for other environmental areas, those impacts were
determined to be less than significant or could be significantly reduced through
mitigation measures.
Finding: The City Council rejects the No Project/Existing Los Rios Specific Plan
Alternative on the following grounds, each of which individually provides sufficient
justification for rejection of this alternative: (1) its failure to meet most of the project
objectives; (2) failure to reduce or avoid significant and unavoidable impacts associated
with temporary construction noise; and (3) specific economic, legal, social,
technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities
for highly trained workers, make infeasible this project alternative identified in the EIR.
Therefore, the City Council hereby rejects the No Project/Existing Los Rios Specific
Plan Alternative.
3. Alternative 3: Reduced Intensity Alternative
Description:. The Reduced Intensity Alternative was selected to lessen potentially
significant impacts related to air quality, noise, and traffic. However, as described above
and within the substantive chapters of this EIR, these potentially significant impacts can
already be reduced through the implementation of mitigation measures. Regardless, in
order to eliminate a potentially significant PM peak hour traffic impact at Paseo Adelanto
and Del Obispo Street during General Plan Buildout conditions, a reduction in queue
length by 2 cars would be required; the project’s eastbound left-turns would need to be
reduced by 18 cars. This equates to an overall project trip generation reduction of 40
cars (from 106 to 66) for the inbound trips during the PM peak hour.
This reduction in trips results in a proportional decrease in building square
footage. Using a high-turnover restaurant rate of 9.77 PM peak hour trips (62 percent
inbound and 38 percent outbound) per thousand square feet (ITE Code 932: High-
Turnover Restaurant), this alternative would reduce high-turnover restaurant building
square footage by approximately 6,605, allowing buildout of 58,295 square feet.
Implementation of the amendment to the Specific Plan provisions would still apply to
this alternative. (Section 7.7, Reduced Intensity Alternative, of the DEIR)
Analysis
Avoid or Substantially Lessen Project Impacts. The Reduced Intensity
Alternative would lessen environmental impacts in the areas of air quality, GHG
emissions, noise, transportation and traffic, and utilities and service systems. This
alternative would eliminate the need for traffic Mitigation Measure TR-2. However, in
accordance with CEQA, significant environmental effects may be avoided or
substantially lessened through implementation of feasible alternatives or feasible
mitigation measures. Mitigation Measure TR-2 is a feasible mitigation measure that
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 135 of 144
would reduce project traffic impacts to less than significant.
This alternative would have similar impacts in the area of aesthetics, biological
resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials,
hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, public services, and tribal cultural
resources. However, significant and unavoidable construction-related noise impacts
would remain. Overall, this alternative is considered environmentally superior when
compared to the proposed project.
Attainment of Project Objectives. Under the Reduced Intensity Alternative, most
of the proposed project’s objectives would be achieved but to a lesser extent as
compared to the proposed project. For example, the Reduced Intensity Alternative
would encourage development of commercial opportunities in the Los Rios
neighborhood (Objective 1), redevelop the site with a complementary mix of commercial
and office uses for residents and visitors compatible with surrounding land uses
(Objectives 2, 3). However, these objectives would be achieved to a lesser extent given
the 10 percent reduction in development intensity. Additionally, this alternative would
not increase the City’s revenue-generating tax base through new sales tax (Objective
4), provide business activity in the specific plan area through creation of facilities
responsive to community needs (Objective 5), or create new jobs (Objective 6) to the
same extent as the proposed project.
Comparative Merits. Under the Reduced Intensity Alternative, the proposed
project’s objectives would be achieved but to a lesser extent as compared to the
proposed project. This alternative would have similar impacts in the area of aesthetics,
biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous
materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, public services, and tribal
cultural resources. However, significant and unavoidable construction-related noise
impacts would remain under this alternative. All feasible mitigation measures have been
incorporated into the proposed project to substantially lessen temporary construction-
related noise impacts.
Finding: The City Council rejects the Reduced Intensity Alternative on the
following grounds, each of which individually provides sufficient justification for rejection
of this alternative: (1) failure to meet the project objectives to the same extent as the
proposed project; (2) failure to reduce or avoid the project’s significant and unavoidable
impacts relating to temporary construction noise; and (3) specific economic, legal,
social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment
opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible this project alternative identified
in the EIR. Therefore, the City Council hereby rejects the Reduced Intensity Alternative.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 136 of 144
SECTION 9
ADOPTION OF STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093(a), the City Council must
balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of
the Project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to
approve the project. If the specific benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable
adverse environmental effects, those environmental effects may be considered
acceptable.
Having reduced the adverse significant environmental effects of the Modified
Project to the extent feasible by adopting the mitigation measures; having considered
the entire administrative record on the project; the City Council has weighed the benefits
of the Project against its unavoidable adverse impacts after mitigation in regards to the
temporary, short-term construction-related noise impacts. While recognizing that the
unavoidable adverse impacts are significant under CEQA thresholds, the City Council
nonetheless finds that the unavoidable adverse impacts that will result from the Project
are acceptable and outweighed by specific social, economic and other benefits of the
Modified Project.
In making this determination, the factors and public benefits specified below were
considered. Any one of these reasons is sufficient to justify approval of the Modified
Project. Thus, even if a court were to conclude that not every reason is supported by
substantial evidence, the City Council would be able to stand by its determination that
each individual reason is sufficient. The substantial evidence supporting the various
benefits can be found in the preceding findings, which are incorporated by reference
into this section, and in the documents found in the Records of Proceeding.
The City Council therefore finds that for each of the significant impacts which are
subject to a finding under CEQA Section 21081(a)(3), that each of the following social,
economic, and environmental benefits of the Modified Project, independent of the other
benefits, outweigh the potential significant unavoidable adverse impacts and render
acceptable the one significant unavoidable adverse environmental impact of the
Modified Project:
1. The Modified Project would enhance multimodal connectivity in support
of State Law (AB 375, SB 743.
As described on starting on Page 5.12-73 of the DEIR, the circulation of the
pedestrian-oriented site design is intentionally designed to accommodate pedestrians
as the focal point, while accommodating access to the site via public transportation and
bicycle. Site access and circulation are described in for each mode of alternative
transportation.
Transit
The Modified Project would increase employees within a transit priority area,
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 137 of 144
since it is located within a quarter mile of the San Juan Capistrano station. There are
several bus stops in proximity to the project as well as a regional rail station, the San
Juan Capistrano station. There are 3 bus stops served by Orange County
Transportation Authority (OCTA) within walking distance to the project site:
• Two bus stops are on Del Obispo Street to the south of the project site, served
by OCTA Bus 91.
• One bus stop is at Del Obispo Street at Alipaz Street, also served by OCTA Bus
91
Additionally, the San Juan Capistrano station is approximately 500 feet from the
project site, accessible via Los Rios Street or River Street and Paseo Adelanto. The
San Juan Capistrano station is served by the regional rail service, Metrolink, with two
lines operating from the station, the Orange County Line and the Inland Empire-OC
Line. The station is also served by Amtrak and the Pacific Surfliner passenger rail line.
Pedestrian
The Modified Project would invite pedestrian activity through providing an
accessible, family-oriented use to the area. As described in Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2.1,
of the DEIR, the project is envisioned as a pedestrian-oriented development, as
pedestrian access and circulation is a key component of the project. An enhanced
pedestrian entrance to the project site would be provided from Los Rios Street,
connecting to the current River Street. Historical depiction boards would also be located
in this area, providing a logical pedestrian transition from the O’Neill Museum, which
abuts the eastern site boundary. As part of the project, vehicular traffic along River
Street would be prohibited by the use of split-rail fencing to be placed just east of the
intersection with Paseo Adelanto, as well as retractable bollards in the northeastern end
of the project site where River Street intersects Los Rios Street. River Street would be
transitioned from the existing asphalt paved street to a decomposed granite path. An
enhanced pedestrian path to the proposed common area and buildings would be
provided between the Farmstead and Red Barn—the path would connect to the
decomposed granite path of the former River Street.
Patrons would also be able to safely and conveniently walk from the parking
areas to the common area and buildings via the decorative aggregate paving of the
parking areas. Additionally, a new public sidewalk would be constructed along Paseo
Adelanto. Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)-compliant parking and access
pathways would be provided throughout the site. The proposed project would enhance
pedestrian connectivity throughout the site and surrounding area, resulting in a
beneficial impact to pedestrian facilities.
Bicycle
The City of San Juan Capistrano promotes bicycling as a means of mobility and
a way in which to improve the quality of life within its community. As previously
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 138 of 144
described, Class I Bicycle paths in the vicinity of the project currently exist at the Robert
McCollum Memorial Bicycle Trail, Trabuco Creek Trail and San Juan Creek Trail. Class
II Bicycle routes currently exists along Del Obispo Street, Alipaz Street and Camino
Capistrano. The Los Rios Specific Plan describes that the primary bicycle access to the
area is via the Trabuco Creek trail.
The Modified Project would not encroach onto existing bicycle facilities.
Additionally, the development would provide sufficient right-of-way along Paseo
Adelanto and River Street to accommodate bicyclists and access to Trabuco Creek
Trail. The project would have a beneficial impact to bicycle facilities.
2. The Modified Project is consistent with the 2016-2040 RTP/SCS.
Table 5.9-2 of the DEIR provides an assessment of the proposed project’s
relationship to pertinent 2016–2040 SCAG RTP/SCS goals. The RTP/SCS goals are
directed toward transit, transportation and mobility, and protection of the environment
and health of residents. The table below demonstrates that the project is consistent
with the goals identified in SCAG’s 2016-2040 RTP/SCS.
Table Consistency with SCAG’s 2016–2040 RTP/SCS Goals
RTP/SCS Goal Project Compliance with Goal
RTP/SCS G1: Align the plan
investments and policies with
improving regional economic
development and competitiveness.
Not Applicable: This is not a project-
specific goal and is therefore not applicable.
RTP/SCS G2: Maximize mobility and
accessibility for all people and
goods in the region.
RTP/SCS G3: Ensure travel safety
and reliability for all people and
goods in the region.
RTP/SCS G4: Preserve and ensure a
sustainable regional transportation
system.
RTP/SCS G5: Maximize the
productivity of our transportation
system.
Consistent: Project implementation would
ensure that mobility, accessibility, travel
safety, and reliability for people and goods
would be maximized. The vehicular and
pedestrian improvements called for in the
Specific Plan Amendment would be
implemented and maintained to meet the
needs of employees and patrons.
Improvements are expected to increase
pedestrian connectivity and visual
experience; increase cyclist safety; and
enhance site access.
All modes of public and commercial transit
throughout the project site would be
required to follow safety standards set by
state, regional, and local regulatory
documents. The proposed project includes a
number of elements necessary for
pedestrian safety, including lighting and
signage guidelines.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 139 of 144
Table Consistency with SCAG’s 2016–2040 RTP/SCS Goals
RTP/SCS Goal Project Compliance with Goal
The proposed project recognizes the
importance of the San Juan Capistrano
Metrolink Station northeast of the project
site. The project will enhance pedestrian
connectivity at the project site, improving
access to and from the station.
A traffic impact analysis report was prepared
for the proposed project and is included in
its entirety in Appendix J1 of this DEIR. The
findings, conclusions, and
recommendations of the analysis are
provided in Section 5.12, Transportation and
Traffic .
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 140 of 144
Table Consistency with SCAG’s 2016–2040 RTP/SCS Goals
RTP/SCS Goal Project Compliance with Goal
RTP/SCS G6: Protect the environment
and health of our residents by
improving air quality and encouraging
active transportation (non-motorized
transportation, such as bicycling and
walking).
Consistent: The CEQA process ensures
that non-exempt projects at all levels of
government in California consider all
potential environmental impacts. Air quality
impacts are addressed in Section 5.2 of this
DEIR. The reduction of energy use,
improvement of air quality, and promotion of
more environmentally sustainable
development would be encouraged through
the existing and proposed alternative
transportation modes, sustainable building
and landscaping design techniques, and
other best management practices for
structures and non-structures.
An enhanced pedestrian entrance to the
project site would be provided from Los
Rios Street, connecting to the current River
Street. Historical depiction boards would
also be located in this area, providing a
logical pedestrian transition from the O’Neill
Museum, which abuts the eastern site
boundary. As part of the project, vehicular
traffic along River Street would be prohibited
by the use of split-rail fencing just east of
the intersection with Paseo Adelanto as well
as retractable bollards in the northeast
where River Street intersects Los Rios
Street. River Street would be transitioned
from the existing asphalt-paved street to a
decomposed-granite path. An enhanced
pedestrian path to the proposed common
area and buildings would be provided
between the Farmstead and Red Barn—the
path would connect to the path of the former
River Street.
Patrons would also be able to safely and
conveniently walk from the parking areas to
the common area and buildings via the
decorative aggregate paving of the parking
areas. Additionally, a new public sidewalk
would be constructed along Paseo
Adelanto. Parking and access pathways
throughout the site would comply with the
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 141 of 144
Table Consistency with SCAG’s 2016–2040 RTP/SCS Goals
RTP/SCS Goal Project Compliance with Goal
Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA).
Project implementation would also maximize
the protection of the environment and
potential improvement of air quality by
encouraging the use of the region’s public
transportation system by creating retail and
office opportunities for employment within a
transit priority area within a quarter mile of
the San Juan Capistrano Metrolink Station.
A traffic impact analysis report was prepared
for the proposed project and is included in
its entirety in Appendix J1 of this DEIR. The
findings, conclusions, and
recommendations of the analysis are
provided in Section 5.12, Transportation and
Traffi c.
RTP/SCS G7: Actively encourage and
create incentives for energy efficiency,
where possible.
Consistent: Energy-saving and sustainable
design features and operational programs
would be incorporated into the proposed
project, including those required by the
California Green Building Standards Code
(CALGreen; CCR, Title 24, Part 11). The
project would also incorporate design
features and attributes promoting energy
efficiency and sustainability:
• Redevelopment and revitalization of the
project site promotes efficient use of
scarce real property. Further,
redevelopment and reuse of the site
supports sustainable and efficient use of
resources by taking advantage of
currently available utilities and public
services.
To reduce water demands and associated
energy use, the project uses would be
required to implement a water conservation
strategy and demonstrate a minimum 20
percent reduction in indoor water usage
when compared to baseline water demand
(total expected water demand without
implementation of the water conservation
strategy). Project uses would also be
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 142 of 144
Table Consistency with SCAG’s 2016–2040 RTP/SCS Goals
RTP/SCS Goal Project Compliance with Goal
required to implement:
• A landscaping palette emphasizing
drought-tolerant plants consistent with
provisions of the State Model Water
Efficient Landscape Ordinance and/or City
requirements.
• Water-efficient irrigation techniques
consistent with City requirements.
• US Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) Certified WaterSense or equivalent
faucets, toilets, and other plumbing
fixtures.
RTP/SCS G8: Encourage land use and
growth patterns that facilitate transit
and active transportation.
Consistent: See responses to RTP/SCS
Goals G2 through G5.
RTP/SCS G9: Maximize the security of
the regional transportation system
through improved system monitoring,
rapid recovery planning, and
coordination with other security
agencies.
Not Applicable: This is not a project-
specific goal and is therefore not applicable.
Source: SCAG 2016.
3. The Modified Project would restore and enhance a historical resource.
As described in Section 5.4, Cultural Resources, of the DEIR, River Street, on
the north boundary of the project site, is a contributor to the Los Rios Historic District
and is a historical resource independent of the historic district’s status.
Originally initiating at Los Rios Street and spanning west approximately four-
miles to Dana Point, the pathway was a common transportation route for area settlers.
Aerial imagery reveals that between 1946 and 1952 the route was compromised in the
vicinity of present-day Paseo Adelanto, possibly caused by flooding from Trabuco
Creek. The Trabuco Creek flood channel intersected the route in 1962. Between 1963
and 1967 a residential tract was constructed west of the flood channel and west of
present-day Paseo Adelanto, therein eliminating the historic transportation route’s
coastal connection. Because the unpaved four-mile route has been reduced to a paved
600-foot private drive, the integrity of River Street is severely compromised due to the
removed connections west of Paseo Adelanto and as a result of the installation of
asphalt paving over the natural surface materials that historically characterized the
pathway; in other words the historical attributes of River Street in its present paved
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 143 of 144
configuration and location are virtually non-existent.
The Modified Project intends to restore River Street to an unpaved road,
consistent with its historic surface material, since decomposed granite (or other natural
material) is closer to the natural surface materials that historically characterized the
pathway. In other words, implementation of the project and removal of pavement from
River Street improves the contributory nature of River Street to the district as a whole.
4. The Modified Project would create a significant economic benefit to the
City of San Juan Capistrano.
An economic impact analysis for the proposed project (Attachment A to these
Findings of Fact) was conducted to provide a high-level analysis of the development in
terms of job creation, economic output created, and impact on personal income in San
Juan Capistrano during the period of construction through the first 10 years of
operations. The development will inject cash into the local economy both from the
construction of the facility and as a result of the business operations in the five
structures. Revenues from operations of the Marketplace development are projected to
increase from $9 million in its first year of operations to $28 million by its third year.
Over the first 10 years of operations, revenues from operations are expected to total
$170 million and average $19 million annually.
The construction and operations of the project development are estimated to
sustain 200 jobs on average in the City of San Juan Capistrano. The development is
projected to create a cumulative total of $242 million in economic output over 11 years,
amounting to an average increase of $24 million annually. Furthermore, the
development is projected to create a cumulative total of $64 million in household
earnings over 11 years, amounting to an average increase of $6 million annually.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
Page 144 of 144
Attachment A
RIVER STREET MARKETPLACE ECONOMIC IMPACT
Page 1 of 10
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Nicole Morse, Esq., Associate Principal
Placeworks
Phone: 714-966-9220
Email: nmorse@placeworks.com
FROM: Andrew Chang, Managing Director
Andrew Chang & Company, LLC
Phone: 916-538-6091
Email: andrew.chang@AChangLLC.com
RE: River Street Marketplace Economic Impact
DATE: May 15, 2019
You have asked us to provide an economic impact analysis of Frontier Real Estate Investments’
proposed development of the River Street Marketplace in San Juan Capistrano, California. This
memorandum provides a high-level analysis of the development in terms of job creation,
economic output created, and impact on personal income in San Juan Capistrano during the
period of construction through the first 10 years of operations utilizing generally accepted
principles of economics..
Background:
The River Street Marketplace development (Marketplace) will be a 64,900 square foot space
consists of five structures. The Marketplace structure will house unique boutique retail
businesses, including a juice bar, artisanal baked goods, farm fresh produce, gourmet cheeses,
and specialty meats. The Mercantile structure will house retail businesses, restaurant, fitness
studios, and office space. The Greenhouse structure will house restaurants and retail
businesses. The Red Barn structure will house restaurants and/or brewery/winery, and the
Farmstead structure will house only restaurants. The development site is a 5.6-acre parcel that
is currently occupied by Ito Nursery, a commercial nursery. The proposed structures and
planned use are exhibited in Table 1 below.
ATTACHMENT A
Page 2 of 10
Table 1
Marketplace Development Use
Square Footage
Structure Restaurant Retail Fitness Office Total
Marketplace 7,960 15,140 - - 23,100
Mercantile 2,000 4,300 4,500 8,000 18,800
Greenhouse 6,300 4,600 - - 10,900
Red Barn 7,500 - - - 7,500
Farmstead 4,600 - - - 4,600
Total: 28,360 24,040 4,500 8,000 64,900
Summary of Economic Benefits:
The Marketplace development is projected to produce the following economic benefits:
• The construction and operations of the Marketplace development are estimated to
sustain 200 jobs on average in the City of San Juan Capistrano.
• The development is projected to create a cumulative total of $242 million in economic
output over 11 years, amounting to an average increase of $24 million annually.
• The development is projected to create a cumulative total of $64 million in household
earnings over 11 years, amounting to an average increase of $6 million annually.
Analysis:
The Marketplace development will inject cash into the local economy both from the construction
of the facility and as a result of the business operations in the five structures.
To estimate economic impact, this analysis relies on economic multipliers provided by the US
Bureau of Economic Analysis. In order to determine impact, this analysis estimates the change
in final demand that will result from the development factored by the industry specific multipliers.
There are two elements that are estimated to determine change in final demand – construction
activity costs and ongoing revenue from businesses that will occupy the development.
The City’s downtown and the River Street Marketplace provide intimate artisanal retail and
dining offerings that do not compete with but rather complement each other. Given the strength
of the local economy and the unique nature of the development facilities, the development is not
expected to create urban decay impacts. Urban decay more commonly occurs when large big-
box format discount retailers (e.g., Walmart) come into a market place and compete with locally-
owned merchants.
Estimated Construction Costs:
Though there is variation in the construction costs for different construction type, we estimated
the construction costs based on per foot construction costs for similar projects factored against
Page 3 of 10
the size of the new developments. Table 2 below exhibits the comparable per square foot
construction cost estimates used in this analysis.
Table 2
Construction Cost Comparable Estimates
(Per Square Foot)
Type of Construction Low Median High
Restaurant $237 $256 $277
Retail $185 $227 $281
Gym $417 $417 $417
Office $247 $247 $247
Source: RSMeans
It should be noted that this analysis utilizes the Low estimates of the comparable cost estimates
in an intentional effort to produce conservative estimates of economic impacts. In other words,
this analysis tends to understate the actual economic benefits of the Marketplace development
on the community. Actual economic impacts are likely greater.
Table 3 exhibits the estimated construction costs of each structure in the Marketplace
development.
Table 3
Marketplace Development
Estimated Construction Costs
($Thousands)
Structure Restaurant Retail Fitness Office Total
Marketplace $1,887 $2,801 $0 $0 $4,687
Mercantile $474 $796 $1,877 $1,976 $5,122
Greenhouse $1,493 $851 $0 $0 $2,344
Red Barn $1,778 $0 $0 $0 $1,778
Farmstead $1,090 $0 $0 $0 $1,090
Total: $6,721 $4,447 $1,877 $1,976 $15,021
Estimated Ongoing Revenues from Operations:
Once again, though revenues will be driven by the specific offerings and business models of the
occupying businesses, our revenue estimates per square foot are derived from the lower end of
the comparable costs. Table 4 exhibits revenue per square foot of comparable businesses.
Page 4 of 10
Table 4
Comparable Revenues
(Per Square Foot)
Industry Comparable Revenue per sq. ft.
Restaurant Franchise Restaurant $545
Retail Consumer Retail $345
Fitness Fitness Studio $82
Office Professional Office $309
To account for ramp up and fluctuations in the business cycle, this analysis assumed that each
business unit would grow to 80% utilization in the first three years and remain at an average of
80% capacity in 10 years of operations for which we estimate revenues. Given the current
strong economy in the Southern California region, we believe this assumption is conservative
and will tend to underestimate the actual economic impact. Actual economic benefits will likely
be greater.
Figure 1 below exhibits the estimated revenues from operations in the first ten years of
operations.
Figure 1
Marketplace Development
Estimated Revenues from Operations
Source: Table A-1
Page 5 of 10
Revenues from operations of the Marketplace development are projected to increase from $9
million in its first year of operations to $28 million by its third year. Over the first 10 years of
operations, revenues from operations are expected to total $170 million and average $19 million
annually.
Economic Impact – Job Creation
The Marketplace development’s impact on jobs in the region are derived by factoring the
estimated change in final demand caused by the construction and the operations of the
occupying businesses with the US Bureau of Economic Analysis’ jobs multipliers. Figure 2
below exhibits the resulting estimated impact of the Marketplace Development on jobs within
San Juan Capistrano.
Figure 2
Marketplace Development
Impact on Jobs in San Juan Capistrano
Source: Table A-2
The development is expected to support approximately 90 direct and indirect jobs during the
construction phase. During the first year of operations, the development is projected to support
approximately 70 jobs and grow to approximately 240 jobs by the third year of operations. Over
the construction period and the first 10 years of operations, the development would support
approximately 200 direct and indirect jobs on average.
Page 6 of 10
Economic Impact – Economic Output
Figure 3 exhibits the impact of the Marketplace Development on economic output within the
region. Economic output reflects the value created through economic activity from the
construction and the operations of the facility. As shown in Figure 3 below, the development is
expected to generate approximately $19 million in economic activity during the construction
phase. During the first year of operations, the development is projected to generate
approximately $9 million in economic activity, growing to approximately $28 million by the third
year of operations. Over the construction period and the first 10 years of operations, the
development would generate approximately $242 million in economic activity, averaging at
approximately $24 million annually.
Figure 3
Marketplace Development
Impact on Economic Output in San Juan Capistrano
Source: Table A-3
Page 7 of 10
Economic Impact – Household Earnings
Figure 4 exhibits the impact of the Marketplace Development on personal earnings within the
region. Household Earnings reflects the earnings increase of county residents from the
economic activity generated by construction and ongoing operations of the development. As
shown in Figure 4, the development is expected to generate approximately $5 million in
household earnings during the construction phase. During the first year of operations, the
development is projected to generate approximately $2 million in earnings, growing to
approximately $7 million by the third year of operations. Over the construction period and the
first 10 years of operations, the development would generate approximately $64 million in
earnings, averaging at approximately $6 million annually.
Figure 4
Marketplace Development
Impact on Household Earnings in San Juan Capistrano
Source: Table A-4
Conclusion:
In conclusion, the Marketplace project is expected to create significant economic benefit for the
City of San Juan Capistrano. Benefits to the City and its community include the following:
• Approximately 200 jobs;
• $242 million in economic output over 11 years, amounting to an average of $24 million
annually.
• $64 million in household earnings over 11 years, amounting to an average increase of
$6 million annually.
Page 8 of 10
If you have any questions about this analysis, please contact me at
andrew.chang@AChangLLC.com or 916-538-6091 ext. 1.
Page 9 of 10
Appendix
Table A-1
Estimated Fiscal Stimulus
($Thousands)
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Construction $15,021 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Revenue from Ops
Restaurant $0 $4,122 $8,243 $12,365 $12,365 $12,365 $12,365 $12,365 $12,365 $12,365 $12,365
Retail $0 $2,212 $4,423 $6,635 $6,635 $6,635 $6,635 $6,635 $6,635 $6,635 $6,635
Fitness $0 $98 $197 $295 $295 $295 $295 $295 $295 $295 $295
Office $0 $659 $1,318 $1,978 $1,978 $1,978 $1,978 $1,978 $1,978 $1,978 $1,978
Total $15,021 $7,091 $14,182 $21,273 $21,273 $21,273 $21,273 $21,273 $21,273 $21,273 $21,273
Table A-2
Estimated Jobs Impact
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Construction 89 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Revenue from Ops
Restaurant 0 50 100 149 149 149 149 149 149 149 149
Retail 0 23 47 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70
Fitness 0 1 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Office 0 5 10 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
Total 89 79 158 237 237 237 237 237 237 237 237
Page 10 of 10
Table A-3
Estimated Output Impact
($Thousands)
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Construction $18,963 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Revenue from Ops
Restaurant $0 $5,447 $10,894 $16,341 $16,341 $16,341 $16,341 $16,341 $16,341 $16,341 $16,341
Retail $0 $2,811 $5,622 $8,433 $8,433 $8,433 $8,433 $8,433 $8,433 $8,433 $8,433
Fitness $0 $119 $237 $356 $356 $356 $356 $356 $356 $356 $356
Office $0 $927 $1,855 $2,782 $2,782 $2,782 $2,782 $2,782 $2,782 $2,782 $2,782
Total $18,963 $9,304 $18,608 $27,913 $27,913 $27,913 $27,913 $27,913 $27,913 $27,913 $27,913
Table A-4
Estimated Earnings Impact
($Thousands)
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Construction $4,802 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Revenue from Ops
Restaurant $0 $1,426 $2,852 $4,278 $4,278 $4,278 $4,278 $4,278 $4,278 $4,278 $4,278
Retail $0 $719 $1,439 $2,158 $2,158 $2,158 $2,158 $2,158 $2,158 $2,158 $2,158
Fitness $0 $28 $56 $84 $84 $84 $84 $84 $84 $84 $84
Office $0 $295 $590 $884 $884 $884 $884 $884 $884 $884 $884
Total $4,802 $2,468 $4,936 $7,404 $7,404 $7,404 $7,404 $7,404 $7,404 $7,404 $7,404
16
EXHIBIT B
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (“MMRP”)
April 2019 | Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
RIVER STREET MARKETPLACE PROJECT
for City of San Juan Capistrano
Prepared for:
City of San Juan Capistrano
Contact: David Contreras, Senior Planner
32400 Paseo Adelanto
San Juan Capistrano, California 92675
949.443.6331
Prepared by:
PlaceWorks
Contact: Nicole Morse, Esq., Associate Principal
3 MacArthur Place, Suite 1100
Santa Ana, California 92707
714.966.9220
info@placeworks.com
www.placeworks.com
RIVER STREET MARKETPLACE PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO
Table of Contents
April 2019 Page i
Section Page
1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 PURPOSE OF MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM .................................................................. 1
1.2 PROJECT LOCATION .................................................................................................................................... 2
1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................................................. 2
1.4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ..................................................................................................................... 3
2. MITIGATION MONITORING REQUIREMENTS .............................................................................. 5
2.1 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM ORGANIZATION .......................................................... 5
List of Tables
Table Page
Table 1-1 Land Use Summary .............................................................................................................................. 3
Table 2-1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements ................................................................................................ 7
RIVER STREET MARKETPLACE PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO
Table of Contents
Page ii PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.
April 2019 Page 1
1. Introduction
1.1 PURPOSE OF MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been developed to provide a vehicle by
which to monitor mitigation measures outlined in the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) prepared
for the River Street Marketplace Project (proposed project). The MMRP has been prepared in conformance
with Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code and City of San Juan Capistrano Monitoring
Requirements. Section 21081.6 states:
(a) When making findings required by paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 21081 or
when adopting a mitigated negative declaration pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision
(c) of Section 21080, the following requirements shall apply:
(1) The public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes
made to the project or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to mitigate
or avoid significant effects on the environment. The reporting or monitoring
program shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. For
those changes which have been required or incorporated into the project at the
request of a responsible agency or a public agency having jurisdiction by law over
natural resources affected by the project, that agency shall, if so requested by the
lead or responsible agency, prepare and submit a proposed reporting or monitoring
program.
(2) The lead agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other
material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which its decision is
based.
(b) A public agency shall provide that measures to mitigate or avoid significant effects on
the environment are fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other
measures. Conditions of project approval may be set forth in referenced documents
which address required mitigation measures or, in the case of the adoption of a plan,
policy, regulation, or other public project, by incorporating the mitigation measures into
the plan, policy, regulation, or project design.
(c) Prior to the close of the public review period for a draft environmental impact report or
mitigated negative declaration, a responsible agency, or a public agency having
jurisdiction over natural resources affected by the project, shall either submit to the lead
agency complete and detailed performance objectives for mitigation measures which
would address the significant effects on the environment identified by the responsible
RIVER STREET MARKETPLACE PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO
1. Introduction
Pa ge 2 PlaceWorks
agency or agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by the project, or
refer the lead agency to appropriate, readily available guidelines or reference documents.
Any mitigation measures submitted to a lead agency by a responsible agency or an
agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by the project shall be limited
to measures which mitigate impacts to resources which are subject to the statutory
authority of, and definitions applicable to, that agency. Compliance or noncompliance by
a responsible agency or agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by a
project with that requirement shall not limit the authority of the responsible agency or
agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by a project, or the authority
of the lead agency, to approve, condition, or deny projects as provided by this division
or any other provision of law.
This MMRP will serve to document compliance with adopted/certified mitigation measures that are
formulated to minimize impacts associated with development activities that would be accommodated by the
proposed project.
1.2 PROJECT LOCATION
The 5.86-acre project site is at the southeast corner of Paseo Adelanto and River Street, just north of Del
Obispo Street in the City of San Juan Capistrano, Orange County. The site is generally bounded by River
Street on the north, Los Rios Street on the east, Del Obispo Street on the south, and Paseo Adelanto on the
west. The project site lies within the southern portion of the 40-acre area of the Los Rios Specific Plan. The
project site consists of the following Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs): 121-160-28, 121-160-22, and 121-
160-49.
1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Development of the proposed project includes demolition of the existing single-story sales office, sheds, and
various hardscape improvements associated with Ito Nursery, a commercial nursery operating onsite. Project
development also requires removal of several trees, shrubs, and other landscape improvements throughout
the project site, as well the existing chain-link fence that runs along the entire project boundary.
Upon clearing, the 5.86-acre project site would be developed with the River Street Marketplace Project, a
neighborhood-scale commercial and office development that highlights the agrarian history of the area. The
project site would be developed with just under 65,000 square feet of commercial and office space in five
buildings: Marketplace, Mercantile, Greenhouse, Red Barn, and Farmstead. Table 1-1 provides a summary of
the square footage of the proposed commercial and office uses that would occupy these buildings. The
overall design concept for the project depicts a complementary, pedestrian-oriented development, with
outdoor seating and dining areas that incorporate a California native landscape palette throughout.
RIVER STREET MARKETPLACE PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO
1. Introduction
April 2019 Page 3
Table 1-1 Land Use Summary
Land Use Square Footage
Marketplace 23,100
Mercantile 18,800
Greenhouse 10,900
Red Barn 7,500
Farmstead 4,600
Total 64,900
The Marketplace building is 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
cheeses, and specialty meats. Onsite dining options may include specialty deli and sandwich shops, specialty
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, 4,600-square-foot Farmstead would house restaurant uses in the northern portion of the site.
1.4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The DEIR identified adverse impacts that would be potentially significant without mitigation, and
recommended mitigation that would eliminate these impacts or reduce them to a less than significant level.
1.4.1 Potentially Significant Adverse Impacts That Can Be Mitigated, Avoided,
or Substantially Lessened
Seven environmental have been identified as having potentially significant impacts if the proposed project is
implemented. These topics are:
Air Quality
Biological Resources
Cultural Resources
Noise
Transportation and Traffic
Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities and Service Systems
However, the DEIR also found that these impacts would be reduced, avoided, or substantially lessened
through the implementation of mitigation measures (see Table 2-1).
RIVER STREET MARKETPLACE PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO
1. Introduction
Pa ge 4 PlaceWorks
1.4.2 Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts
This DEIR identifies that there is one temporary significant and unavoidable adverse impact, as defined by
CEQA, that would result from implementation of the proposed project. Unavoidable adverse impacts may be
considered significant on a project-specific basis, cumulatively significant, and/or potentially significant.
Where there are unavoidable adverse impacts, the City must prepare a “statement of overriding
considerations” before it can approve the project, attesting that the decision-making body has balanced the
benefits of the proposed project against its unavoidable significant environmental effects and has determined
that the benefits outweigh the adverse effects, and therefore the adverse effects are considered acceptable.
The impact that was found in the DEIR to be significant and unavoidable is:
Construction-related noise
April 2019 Page 5
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
2.1 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM ORGANIZATION
CEQA requires that a reporting or monitoring program be adopted for the conditions of project approval
that are necessary to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment (Public Resources Code
21081.6). The mitigation monitoring and reporting program is designed to ensure compliance with adopted
mitigation measures during project implementation. For each mitigation measure identified in the DEIR,
specifications are made herein that identify the action required and the monitoring and reporting that must
occur. In addition, a responsible agency is identified for verifying compliance with individual conditions of
approval contained in the MMRP.
To effectively track and document the status of mitigation measures, a mitigation matrix has been prepared
(see Table 2-1). Numbering in the table is consistent with that found in the DEIR. Environmental topics for
which no significant impacts were identified have been omitted.
RIVER STREET MARKETPLACE PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Pa ge 6 PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.
RIVER STREET MARKETPLACE PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
April 2019 Page 7
Table 2-1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Mitigation Measure
Method of Verification/
Timing
Responsible Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring Party
Document Location
(Monitoring Record)
Completion Date
Responsible
Monitoring Party
Project Mitigation
Monitor
5.2 AIR QUALITY
AQ-1 The construction contractor shall implement the following measure
to reduce construction exhaust emissions during soil hauling
activities associated with rough grading:
• Hauling of soil generated from rough grading activities shall be
limited to a maximum of 125 trucks per day (250 one-way haul
trips per day if 16-cubic-yard trucks are used) assuming a one-
way haul distance of 20 miles. If the one-way truck haul
distance for export of soil from site preparation activities is
greater than 20 miles, as identified by the contractor(s), hauling
shall be restricted to no more than 5,000 miles per day.
These requirements shall be noted on all construction management
plans and verified by the City of San Juan Capistrano prior to
issuance of any construction permits and during the soil disturbing
phases.
Submit
construction
management
plan prior to
issuance of
grading permit
Project
applicant and
construction
contractor
Development
Services Director or
designee
AQ-2 During building construction, the construction contractor shall, at
minimum, use paints with a maximum volatile organic compound
(VOC) content of 50 grams per liter or less for all interior
architectural coatings. This requirement shall be noted on all
construction management plans verified by the City of San Juan
Capistrano prior to issuance of any construction permits and during
interior coating activities.
Submit
construction
management
plan prior to
issuance of
grading permit
Project
applicant and
construction
contractor
Development
Services Director or
designee
AQ-3 The construction contractor shall implement the following measure
to reduce onsite construction-related fugitive dust emissions during
asphalt demolition debris hauling activities:
• Hauling of asphalt demolition debris shall be limited to a
maximum of 14 trucks per day (28 one-way haul trips per day)
assuming 16-cubic-yard trucks are used. Overall, the amount of
asphalt demolition debris material hauled off-site shall be
restricted to no more than 283 tons per day.
These requirements shall be noted on all construction management
Submit
construction
management
plan prior to
issuance of
grading permit
Project
applicant and
construction
contractor
Development
Services Director or
designee
RIVER STREET MARKETPLACE PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 8 PlaceWorks
Table 2-1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Mitigation Measure
Method of Verification/
Timing
Responsible Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring Party
Document Location
(Monitoring Record)
Completion Date
Responsible
Monitoring Party
Project Mitigation
Monitor
plans and verified by the City of San Juan Capistrano prior to
issuance of any construction permits and during the asphalt
demolition hauling activities.
5.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
BIO-1 Prior to issuance of permits for any construction activity, the project
applicant shall demonstrate compliance with the federal MBTA and
submit required nesting bird surveys to the City of San Juan
Capistrano. If construction is proposed between January 15th to
September 1st, a qualified biologist must conduct a nesting bird
survey(s) no more than three days prior to initiation of construction
activities to document the presence or absence of nesting birds in or
adjacent to the project site. The preconstruction survey(s) will focus
on identifying any raptors and/or passerines nests that may be
directly or indirectly affected by construction activities. Construction
outside the nesting season (between September 1st and January
14th) does not require pre-removal nesting bird surveys. Any nest
permanently vacated for the season are not protected by the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act. If active nests are documented, the
following measures are required:
• Species-specific measures, based upon the species found
during the survey, shall be prepared by a qualified biologist and
implemented to prevent abandonment of the active nest. At a
minimum, grading in the vicinity of a nest shall be postponed
until the young birds have fledged. A minimum exclusion buffer
of 100 feet shall be maintained during construction, depending
on the species and location. The perimeter of the nest setback
zone shall be fenced or adequately demarcated with stakes and
flagging at 20-foot intervals, and construction personnel and
activities are restricted from the area.
• A survey report by a qualified biologist verifying that no active
nests are present, or that the young have fledged, shall be
submitted to the City of San Juan Capistrano prior to initiation
of grading in the nest-setback zone. The qualified biologist shall
Submit bird
survey prior to
construction
permits
Project
applicant
Development
Services Director
RIVER STREET MARKETPLACE PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
April 2019 Page 9
Table 2-1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Mitigation Measure
Method of Verification/
Timing
Responsible Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring Party
Document Location
(Monitoring Record)
Completion Date
Responsible
Monitoring Party
Project Mitigation
Monitor
serve as a biological monitor during those periods when
construction activities occur near active nest areas to ensure
that no inadvertent impacts on these nests, or any birds
dwelling in such nests, shall occur.
• A final report of the findings, prepared by a qualified biologist,
shall be submitted to the City of San Juan Capistrano prior to
construction-related activities that have the potential to disturb
any active nests during the nesting season.
5.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
CUL-1 Prior to issuance of any permits allowing ground-disturbing activities
for the River Street Marketplace project, the City of San Juan
Capistrano shall ensure that an archeologist who meets the
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for professional archaeology
has been retained for the project and will monitor all grading and
other significant ground-disturbing activities. The Qualified
Archaeologist shall ensure that the following measures are followed
for the project:
• Prior to any ground disturbance, the Qualified Archaeologist, or
their designee, shall provide worker environmental awareness
protection training to construction personnel regarding
regulatory requirements for the protection of cultural (prehistoric
and historic) resources. As part of this training, construction
personnel shall be briefed on proper procedures to follow
should unanticipated cultural resources be made during
construction. Workers will be provided contact information and
protocols to follow in the event that inadvertent discoveries are
made. The training can be in the form of a video or PowerPoint
presentation. Printed literature (handouts) can accompany the
training and can also be given to new workers and contractors
to avoid the necessity of continuous training over the course of
the project.
• Prior to any ground disturbance, the applicant shall submit a
Submit
Project
Monitoring
Plan prior to
grading
permits
Project
applicant
Development
Services Director
RIVER STREET MARKETPLACE PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 10 PlaceWorks
Table 2-1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Mitigation Measure
Method of Verification/
Timing
Responsible Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring Party
Document Location
(Monitoring Record)
Completion Date
Responsible
Monitoring Party
Project Mitigation
Monitor
written Project Monitoring Plan (PMP) to the City’s
Development Services Director for review and approval. The
monitoring plan shall include monitor contact information,
specific procedures for field observation, diverting and grading
to protect finds, and procedures to be followed in the event of
significant finds.
• During grading or trenching activities, a Native American
monitor provided by the Juaneño Band of Mission Indians–
Acjachemen Nation shall observe all grading and trenching
activities below the original ground surface. The Native
American monitor shall consult with the archaeological monitor
regarding objects and remains encountered during grading or
trenching activities that may be considered sacred or important.
• In the event that unanticipated cultural material is encountered
during any phase of project construction, all construction work
within 50 feet (15 meters) of the find shall cease and the
Qualified Archaeologist shall assess the find for importance.
Construction activities may continue in other areas. If the
discovery is determined to not be important by the Qualified
Archaeologist and the Native American monitor, work will be
permitted to continue in the area.
• If a find is determined to be important, additional
investigation may be warranted, or the find can be
preserved in place and construction may be
allowed to proceed.
• Additional investigation work can include scientific
recording and excavation of the important portion of
the find.
• If excavation of a find occurs, the Qualified
Archaeologist shall draft a report within 60 days of
conclusion of excavation that identifies the find and
summarizes the analysis conducted. The
completed report shall be approved by the City’s
RIVER STREET MARKETPLACE PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
April 2019 Page 11
Table 2-1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Mitigation Measure
Method of Verification/
Timing
Responsible Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring Party
Document Location
(Monitoring Record)
Completion Date
Responsible
Monitoring Party
Project Mitigation
Monitor
Development Services Director and filed with the
County and with the South Central Coastal
Information Center at California State University,
Fullerton.
• Excavated finds shall be curated at a repository
determined by the Qualified Archaeologist in
consultation with the Native American monitor and
approved by the City.
CUL-2 Prior to the issuance of any permits allowing ground-disturbing
activities for the River Street Marketplace project, the City of San
Juan Capistrano shall ensure that a paleontological monitor has
been retained for the project. The paleontologist shall prepare a
paleontological monitoring program. All grading and other significant
ground-disturbing activities more than 3 feet below the ground
surface will be monitored by a paleontological monitor. If any
evidence of paleontological resources is discovered, the following
measures shall be taken:
• All below-grade work shall stop within a 50-foot radius of the
discovery. Work shall not continue until the discovery has been
evaluated by a qualified paleontologist.
• A qualified paleontologist in coordination with the City shall
assess the find(s) and determine if they are scientifically
important. If the find(s) are of value then:
• Scientifically important fossils shall be prepared by
the paleontologist and/or his/her designee(s) to the
point of identification, identified to the lowest
taxonomic level possible, and curated in a museum
repository with permanent, retrievable storage.
• Significant paleontological resources found shall be
preserved as determined necessary by the
paleontological monitor.
• Excavated finds shall be offered to the Los Angeles
Submit
Paleonto-
logical
Monitoring
Plan prior to
grading
permits
Project
applicant
Development
Services Director
RIVER STREET MARKETPLACE PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 12 PlaceWorks
Table 2-1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Mitigation Measure
Method of Verification/
Timing
Responsible Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring Party
Document Location
(Monitoring Record)
Completion Date
Responsible
Monitoring Party
Project Mitigation
Monitor
County Museum of Natural History or its designee
for curation on a first-refusal basis. After which,
finds shall be offered to an accredited and
permanent scientific institution for the benefit of
current and future generations.
• Within 60 days of completion of the end of earth-
moving activities, the paleontologist shall draft a
report summarizing the finds and shall include the
inspection period, an analysis of any resources
found, and the present repository of the items.
• The paleontologist’s report shall be approved by
the City. Any resulting reports shall also be filed
with the permanent scientific institution where the
resources are curated.
5.10 NOISE
N-1 Prior to the issuance of demolition, grading, and/or building permits,
a construction noise mitigation plan shall be prepared by the project
applicant and reviewed and approved by the City of San Juan
Capistrano Director of Development Services and shall be noted on
plans. The project applicant shall be responsible for requiring
contractors to implement the following measures to limit
construction-related noise:
• Construction activity is limited to the daytime hours between 7
AM and 6 PM (Monday through Friday) or between 8:30 AM
and 4:30 PM (Saturdays) or at no time on Sundays or national
holidays, as prescribed in the Municipal Code.
• At least 30 days prior to commencement of demolition,
notification of planned construction activities and scheduling
shall be given to all residents or commercial entities adjacent to
the project site. The notification shall include a brief description
of the project, the activities that would occur, and the
durations/hours of construction. The notification shall also
Submit
Construction
Noise
Mitigation
Plan prior to
issuance of
demolition,
grading, or
building
permits.
Project
applicant and
construction
contractor
Director of
Development
Services
RIVER STREET MARKETPLACE PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
April 2019 Page 13
Table 2-1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Mitigation Measure
Method of Verification/
Timing
Responsible Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring Party
Document Location
(Monitoring Record)
Completion Date
Responsible
Monitoring Party
Project Mitigation
Monitor
include the phone number of the construction superintendent. If
the superintendent receives a complaint, the superintendent
shall investigate, take appropriate corrective action, and report
the action to the reporting party and the City of San Juan
Capistrano Director of Development Services.
• A sign shall be posted on construction-zone fencing that is
clearly visible to site passers-by and that includes a contact
name and telephone number of the construction
superintendent. If the superintendent receives a complaint, the
superintendent shall investigate, take appropriate corrective
action, and report the action to the reporting party and the City
of San Juan Capistrano Director of Development Services.
• Erect a temporary noise barrier/curtain between residential
receptors that (a) share a boundary with the project site and
any project construction zones within 100 feet of the shared
boundary and (b) when such a nearby construction zone will
use any equipment items rated at 60 dBA or above per FTA
Manual Table 12-1. The sound barrier shall be free of gaps
and holes and must achieve a Sound Transmission Class
(STC) of 35 or greater. The barrier can be (a) a ¾-inch-thick
plywood wall or (b) a hanging blanket/curtain with a surface
density or at least 2 pounds per square foot. For either
configuration, the construction side of the barrier shall have an
exterior lining of sound absorption material with a Noise
Reduction Coefficient (NRC) rating of at least 0.7.
• All internal combustion engines on construction equipment and
trucks are fitted with properly maintained mufflers, air intake
silencers, and engine shrouds that are no less effective than as
originally equipped by the manufacturer.
• Stationary construction equipment and material delivery
(loading/unloading) areas shall be located as far as practicable
from the residences.
• Material stockpiling, staging of equipment and construction
RIVER STREET MARKETPLACE PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 14 PlaceWorks
Table 2-1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Mitigation Measure
Method of Verification/
Timing
Responsible Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring Party
Document Location
(Monitoring Record)
Completion Date
Responsible
Monitoring Party
Project Mitigation
Monitor
trailers/offices shall be located as far as feasible from the
residences.
• Unnecessary engine idling shall be curtailed to no more than 10
minutes, to the extent feasible.
• “Smart” back-up alarms, which automatically adjust the alarm
level based on the background noise level, shall be employed
on all trucks and construction vehicles or back-up alarms shall
be disabled and replaced with human spotters.
• The use of public address systems shall be limited to the extent
feasible.
• Grade-surface irregularities on the construction sites shall be
minimized to the extent feasible.
• Construction traffic shall be limited to the haul routes
established by the City.
5.12 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
TR-1 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall
prepare a Construction Traffic Management Plan in coordination
with the City of San Juan Capistrano City Traffic Engineer. The
Plan, at a minimum, shall include the following:
• Ingress and egress for the construction traffic would be via
Driveway 1 located along Paseo Adelanto with a flagman to
provide ingress/egress from the project site to Del Obispo
Street.
• Restrict construction traffic on all local collector streets.
• 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, etc.), to access the site, traffic controls and detours
and proposed construction phasing plan for the project.
Submit
Construction
Traffic
Management
Plan prior to
issuance of
grading
permits
Project
applicant
City Traffic
Engineer
RIVER STREET MARKETPLACE PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
April 2019 Page 15
Table 2-1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Mitigation Measure
Method of Verification/
Timing
Responsible Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring Party
Document Location
(Monitoring Record)
Completion Date
Responsible
Monitoring Party
Project Mitigation
Monitor
• Identify parking needs and parking areas for construction
related equipment and workman support.
• Specify the hours during which transport activities can occur
and methods to mitigate construction-related impacts to
adjacent streets.
• Require the Applicant 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 shall clean adjacent streets, as
directed by the City Engineer (or representative of the City
Engineer) of any material which may have been spilled, tracked
or blown onto adjacent streets or areas.
• Hauling or transport of oversize loads will be allowed between
the hours of 8:30 AM and 2:30 PM only, Monday through
Friday, unless approved otherwise by the City Engineer.
Hauling or transport may be permitted/required during nighttime
hours, weekends or Federal holidays, at the discretion of the
City Engineer. An approved Haul Route Permit will be required
from the City.
• Haul trucks entering or exiting public streets shall at all times
yield to public traffic.
• If hauling operations cause any damage to existing pavement,
street, curb and/or gutter along the haul route, the applicant will
be fully responsible for repairs. The repairs shall be completed
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
• All constructed-related parking and staging of vehicles will be
kept out of the adjacent public roadways and parking lots and
will occur on-site.
• This Plan shall meet standards established in the current
California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Device (MUTCD)
as well as City of San Juan Capistrano requirements.
RIVER STREET MARKETPLACE PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 16 PlaceWorks
Table 2-1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Mitigation Measure
Method of Verification/
Timing
Responsible Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring Party
Document Location
(Monitoring Record)
Completion Date
Responsible
Monitoring Party
Project Mitigation
Monitor
TR-2 Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, the project applicant
shall implement the following improvement to the Paseo Adelanto
and Del Obispo Street intersection:
• Restripe the southbound approach on Paseo Adelanto to
provide a southbound (outbound) 18-foot shared
left/through/right-turn lane and two (2) departure (inbound)
lanes (one 12-foot lane and one 10-foot lane); and
• Restripe the eastbound approach on Del Obispo Street to
provide dual eastbound left-turn lanes with a minimum storage
of 70-feet each lane and a 50-foot transition.
In order to accommodate the recommended dual eastbound left-
turn lanes on Del Obispo Street via the provision of two (departure)
northbound receiving lanes on Paseo Adelanto, the one of two
options shall be implemented:
• Option 1: Eliminate the proposed on-street angled parking
south of the proposed project driveway along Paseo Adelanto,
and sign and stripe the curb lane as a right-turn lane into the
project driveway.
• Option 2: Widen the street along the west side of Paseo
Adelanto, as necessary, and sign and stripe the curb lane as a
right-turn lane into the project driveway to maintain the
proposed on-street angled parking south of the proposed
project driveway along Paseo Adelanto and/or existing lane
configuration on the southbound approach of Paseo Adelanto
at Del Obispo Street. Any additional right-of-way within the
Orange County Flood Control parcel required to implement this
improvement option, beyond that already proposed to construct
a traffic circle at Paseo Adelanto and River Street, will require
the project applicant to obtain approval from the Orange County
Flood Control District.
Re-striping of the Del Obispo Street at Paseo Adelanto intersection
and improvements to Paseo Adelanto are subject to review and
Construct
improvements
prior to
issuance of
occupancy
permits
Project
applicant
Public Works
Department
(Engineering
Division)
RIVER STREET MARKETPLACE PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
April 2019 Page 17
Table 2-1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Mitigation Measure
Method of Verification/
Timing
Responsible Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring Party
Document Location
(Monitoring Record)
Completion Date
Responsible
Monitoring Party
Project Mitigation
Monitor
approval of the City of San Juan Capistrano Public
Works/Engineering Department.
5.13 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
USS-1 Prior to issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall
upsize pipe segment D15704 between manhole D10135 on Los
Rios Street and manhole D11155 on Del Obispo, from 8 inch to 12
inch diameter pipe. Prior to upsizing the line, the project applicant
and the City or applicable wastewater provider shall enter into a
development reimbursement agreement for said improvements such
that the applicant will be reimbursed for costs incurred in
exceedance of its fair share contribution.
Construct
improvements
prior to
issuance of
building
permits
Project
applicant
Public Works
Department
(Engineering
Division)
RIVER STREET MARKETPLACE PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 18 PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.