00-0404_NORMAN OLSSON CONSTRUCTION_Construction AgreementMEMORANDUM
TO: Memo to File
FROM: Maria Guevara, Secretary
DATE: April 18, 2000
SUBJECT: North Open Space Well
Please refer to the following file for Contract:
CVWD 600.70 Construction Agreement 2000
NORMAN A. OLSSON CONSTRUCTION, INC.
North Open Space Well
0
32400 PASEO ADELANTO
SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CA 92675
(949) 493-1171
(949) 493.1053 (FAX)
April 11, 2000
AKM Consulting Engineers
101 Pacifica, Suite 105
Irvine, California 92618
awl*
1776 �mulo 1961
1776
�4Fo�wd
Re: North Open Space Well Improvement
Gentlemen:
MEMBERS O THE CITY COUNCIL
COLLENE CAMPBELL
JOHN GREINER
WYATT HART
GIL JONES
DAVID M. SWERDLIN
CITY MANAGER
GEORGE SCARBOROUGH
At their meeting of April 4, 2000, the City Council of the City of San Juan Capistrano
adopted Resolution No. 00-4-4-4, which certified a Negative Declaration and approved the
North Open Space Well Improvement Plan.
A copy of Resolution No. 00-4-4-4 is enclosed for your information. Please feel free to
contact Richard Greenbauer at 443-6320 if you have any questions.
Very
truly yours,
Cheryl Johr4s'on
v
City Clerk
Enclosure
cc: Planning Director (with enclosure)
Richard Greenbauer (with enclosure)
San Juan Capistrano: Preserving the Past to Enhance the Future
ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS
PLANNING DIRECTOR
SELECTION OF CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR PREPARATION OF
COMPREHENSIVE REVISION TO TITLE 9 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE
(COTTON/BELAND/ASSOCIATES) (600.30)
Written Communications:
Report dated April 4, 2000, from the Planning Director, advising that the recently -
adopted General Plan included a number of implementation measures that identified
amendments to Title 9 to achieve the vision of the City and the individual Elements of
the General Plan. The Report forwarded an agreement with Cotton/Beland/Associates
to prepare a comprehensive revision to Title 9.
The Planning Director made an oral report.
Approval of Agreement:
It was moved by Council Member Greiner, seconded by Council Member Hart and
unanimously carried to approve the Personal Services Agreement with
Cotton/Beland/Associates to prepare a comprehensive revision to Title 9 of the
Municipal Code in order to implement provisions of the recently -adopted General Plan.
The agreement will be effective for the period ending March 15, 2001 at a cost not to
exceed $78,995. The City Manager was authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of
the City.
2. APPROVAL OF CONCEPT PLAN FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
00-772 NORTH OPEN SPACE WELL (1050.50)
Written Communications:
Report dated April 4, 2000, from the Planning Director, advising that the Capistrano
Valley Water District wishes to construct a single -story 608 -square -foot well pump
house on a the Swanner property located west of Camino Capistrano and north of
Trabuco Creek, The Report noted that the project was compatible with nearby existing
and proposed land uses and was consistent with the objectives of the Community
Design Element.
A site plan and color choices were on display and Richard Greenbauer, Assistant
Planner, made an oral presentation.
Certifying Negative Declaration/Approval of Capital Improvement Project:
It was moved by Council Member Swerdlin, seconded by Council Member Greiner that
the following Resolution be adopted:
City Council Minutes -8- 4/4/00
0 •
VALLEY WATER DISTRICT) - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA,
CERTIFYING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING THE
CAPISTRANO VALLEY WATER DISTRICT'S NORTH OPEN SPACE
WELL IMPROVEMENT PLANS FOR A 31.28 -ACRE PARCEL
LOCATED IMMEDIATELY NORTH OF TRABUCO CREEK AND WEST
OF CAMINO CAPISTRANO AND MORE PRECISELY REFERRED TO
AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 121-050-019 (NORTH OPEN
SPACE WELL IMPROVEMENT)
The motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bathgate, Greiner, Hart, Swerdlin and
Mayor Campbell
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
APPROVAL OF TREE MAINTENANCE AND PRESERVATION AGREEMENT
WITH SYCAMORE BUSINESS CENTER (SPAULDING) (600.30)
Written Communications:
Report dated April 4, 2000, from the Planning Director, advising that the Sycamore
Business Center property owner had submitted a tree Removal Permit for 21 Red Gum
eucalyptus trees that had been infected by the Red Gum Lerp Psyllid, subject to
replacement planting.
The Planning Director made an oral report, noting that while there was no known cure,
direct injections of insecticides could help maintain the health of an infected tree while
methods to fight the infestation are being developed. He noted that the Planning
Commission had recommended that the trees be retained due to their importance to the
community's viewshed and that the City consider assuming the cost of trying to maintain
the trees during an interim two-year period. If a permanent solution had not been
identified at the end of the two-year period, then the property owner would be allowed
to remove the trees.
Council discussed liability issues and the City Attorney advised that the only liability the
City could incur under the agreement was where a possible connection could be shown
between the actions of the contractor doing the work of maintaining the trees and the
damage itself; each damage situation would be reviewed on its own merit. Council
Member Swerdlin stated a preference fora one-year term on the agreement, rather than
the recommended two-year term, stating concerns for the City incurring ongoing
obligations.
City Council Minutes -9- 4/4/00
.* 0
AGENDA ITEM April 4, 2000
TO: George Scarborough, City Manager
FROM: Thomas Tomlinson, Planning Director
SUBJECT: Consideration of Concept Plan for Capital Improvement Project (C.I.P.) 00-
772, North Open Space Well.
RECOMMENDATION
By motion: adopt the attached draft resolution certifying a Mitigated Negative Declaration
and approving Capital Improvement Project (CIP) 00-772 (Capistrano Valley Water District
North Open Space Well Improvement)
SITUATION
A. APPLICANT: PROPERTY OWNER: ENGINEERIARCHITECT:
CM.W.D. City of San Juan Capistrano AKM Consulting Engineers
32450 Paseo Adelanto 32400 Paseo Adelanto 101 Pacifica, Suite 105
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 Irvine, CA 92618
B. Summary and Recommendation
The Capistrano Valley Water District proposes to construct a single story 608 square foot
Well Pump House on a 31.28 acre parcel located west of Camino Capistrano, and
immediately north of Trabuco Creek, and more specifically referred to as Assessor's
Parcel No. 121-050-019. Access to the site would be via a gravel access road off of an
existing Maintenance Access Road which, in turn, connects to Camino Capistrano. The
project also involves the establishment of 60' of 8" new ductile iron pipe to connect to the
existing 24" mainline, 410' of 6" PVC pipe approximately four feet underground which
would tie into the existing sewer line, and the addition of approximately 35' (feet) of six
foot high chain link fence to tie into existing fencing.
Processing of the subject project has been deemed urgent, in that significant
economical impacts are associated with getting the new well online as part of the
water districts water supply. Staff along with the Capistrano Valley Water District
have been working simultaneously to process the necessary approvals on an
expedited schedule. Issues noted at the Planning Commission meeting of March
14, 2000 were addressed and noted prior to the award of contract. At the last City
Council meeting the City Council awarded the contract for construction. The
contractor has been provided copies of the revised plans that were presented to
the Planning Commission. Staff further notes that any changes which may arise
out of the City Council meeting of April 4, 2000 will incorporate a contract change
order prior to commencement of said work.
FOR CITY COUNCIL AGEN 'J3
0
0
City Council Agenda Item -2- April 4, 2000
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the draft resolution approving the proposed
project. (see Attachment 1, Draft City Council Resolution).
C. Backaround
1. General Plan Designation: The project site has a General Plan Designation of CP
"Community Park".
2. Zoning Designation: The project site is located in the AG "General Agricultural" zone
district.
3. Environmental Processing: The Environmental Administrator has reviewed the
project pursuant to Section 15061 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
and Staff have prepared an initial study pursuant to Section 15063 of the CEQA
Guidelines and the City's Environmental Administrator has issued a negative declaration
pursuant to Section 15070 of the CEQA Guidelines. The City has posted a Notice of
Negative Declaration pursuant to Section 15072 of the CEQA Guidelines, and all
mitigation measures have been incorporated herein; and the City has otherwise complied
with all applicable provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).(See:
Attachment 2, Initial Study/ Negative Declaration)
2. CommissionlBoard Review and Recommendations: The City's Planning
Commission reviewed the proposed project on March 14, 2000, and forwarded the
application to the City Council recommending approval subject to conditions. Those
conditions are included in the Draft City Council resolution. This motion passed 5-0, one
absent, one vacancy.
D. Project Description
The Capistrano Valley Water District proposes to construct a single story 608 square foot
Well Pump House on a 31.28 acre parcel located west of Camino Capistrano, and
immediately north of Trabuco Creek. (See: Attachment 3, Project Site Map) Access to the
site would be via a gravel access road off of an existing Maintenance Access Road
which, in turn, connects to Camino Capistrano. The project also involves the
establishment of 60' of 8" new ductile iron pipe to connect to the existing 24" mainline,
410' of 6" PVC pipe approximately four feet underground which would tie into the existing
sewer line, and the addition of approximately 35' (feet) of six foot high chain link fence
to tie into existing fencing.
The proposed pump house has been designed with board and batten materials, and a
functional removable cupola similar in style to a rural farm out building. The proposed
structure would also incorporate a aha concrete simulated wood shake roof tile with
exposed wooden rafter tails, raised panel doors, and wood siding consistent with the
immediate agriculturally zoned areas adjoining buildings. Design of the project site
proposes a four foot wide sidewalk, laid out two feet from the proposed structure, and
leading from the asphalt area at the front of the building to the rear aspects of the
City Council Agenda Item -3- April 4, 2000
building. The project further proposes to construct a six foot high chain link fence, and
chain link gate consistent with and to tie in to, the existing fencing located around the
perimeter of the property. Landscaping proposed for the project will consist of low
maintenance type foliage, and to be located throughout the project site.
E. Issues
The subject project involves a public utility and more specifically water transmission.
State regulations dictate that establishment of water transmission facilities, and its
associated appurtenances are exempt from local municipal code regulations. Staff, in
reviewing Capital Improvement Plans, has focused on consistency with the policies and
objectives of the San Juan Capistrano General Plan, and more specifically the
Community Design Element, and the Public Services & Utilities element. Staff also
concentrated on consistency with the City's Open Space Master Plan, and the adopted
Architectural Design Guidelines.
F. Staff Analysis: Staff has analyzed the proposed project for consistency with the City's
General Plan, and adopted Architectural Design Guidelines as follows:
Staff has noted that the subject application consist of a public utility, and more specifically
water transmission to the city; therefore, exempting the project from local municipal
codes. In order to provide an aesthetically pleasing structure in the General Plan
designated "Community Park" area, an architectural design that simulates a rural farm -
type building was chosen. The proposed structure is intended to house a pump on an
existing well, and will not serve in any other capacity.
The 31.28 acre parcel is referred to as the Swanner property, and currently exists as
agricultural land with minimal non-performing fruit trees. The property is noted as a
community park on the Open Space Master Plan, and has been envisioned as an
equestrian type park. In order to maintain consistency with future development as a
equestrian type community park, the subject conceptual plans were devised.
The site plan is compatible with existing and proposed land uses in providing an
aesthetically pleasing well pump house that is situated in a depression west of Camino
Capistrano, and tucked up against an existing slope. Finished grade for the proposed
structure is approximately eight feet below the finished grade for the secondary arterial
located immediately adjacent to the project site. The land use is one of an existing well
site, and the proposed pump house has been designed in a manner that incorporates an
appropriate variety of qualities such as, compatibility with adjoining buildings, intimacy
of space, layering of views, richness of materials, and accent landscaping.
The architectural design as previously mentioned is consistent with the Objectives of the
Community Design Element in providing a structure that is designed with a farm like
architectural theme, and that will incorporate like materials found throughout the
surrounding areas. In order to soften the new construction, landscaping with low
maintenance type plants is proposed throughout the immediate project site.
City Council Agenda Item -4- April 4 2000
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the proposed project subject to
conditions.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
The public meeting notice has been mailed to all property owners (as listed on the Orange
County Real Property Tax Assessment rolls) immediately adjacent to the project site. Also,
the public meeting notice has been posted pursuant to the public notice requirements of
Administrative Policy 409 (see Attachment 4, Public Meeting Notice). Copies of this agenda
item were mailed to the applicants and their representative.
ALTERNATE ACTIONS
Recommend approval of the proposed project.
2. Recommend denial of the proposed project.
3. Continue the public meeting to April 18, 2000 and direct staff to provide additional
information on specific issues.
RECOMMENDATION
By motion: adopt the attached draft resolution certifying a Mitigated Negative Declaration
and approving Capital Improvement Project (CIP) 00-772 (Capistrano Valley Water District
North Open Space Well Improvement)
Respectfully submitted,
Thomas Tomlins_
Planning Director
RG:hs
(C:\OFFICE\WPW IN\WPDOCS\CURRENT\CIPCCA. WPD)
?Prep,red by,
Richard Greenbauer,
Assistant Planner
Attachments:
Attachment 1,
Draft City Council Resolution
Attachment 2,
Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
Attachment 3,
Project Site Map
Attachment 4,
Public Meeting Notice
Enclosure: Large Scale Plans
• • 03-30
RESOLUTION NO. 00-4-4-4
CERTIFYING NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING NORTH
OPEN SPACE WELL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT 00-772/CAPISTRANO VALLEY WATER DISTRICT)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JUAN
CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
AND APPROVING THE CAPISTRANO VALLEY WATER DISTRICT'S
NORTH OPEN SPACE WELL IMPROVEMENT PLANS FORA31.28-ACRE
PARCEL LOCATED IMMEDIATELY NORTH OF TRAUBCO CREEK AND
WEST OF CAMINO CAPISTRANO AND MORE PRECISELY REFERRED
TO AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 121-050-019 (NORTH OPEN
SPACE WELL IMPROVEMENT)
WHEREAS, the Capistrano Valley Water District has requested approval of
Capital Improvement Project 00-772 conceptual plans which would allow construction of
a 608 -square -foot well pump house, a gravel access road, 35 linear feet of six -foot -high
chain link fence, and 470 linear feet of new water pipeline on property located immediately
north of Trabuco Creek and west of Camino Capistrano, which is General Plan -designated
(CP), "Community Park," and classified as (AG), "General Agricultural," on the Official
Zoning Map; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed project has been processed pursuant to Section
9-2.311, Public Improvement Plans and Outside Agency Development, of the Land Use
Code; and,
WHEREAS, the Environmental Administrator has prepared an initial study
pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines and,
pursuant to Section 15070 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, has
issued a negative declaration and caused a Notice of Negative Declaration to be posted
pursuant to Section 15072 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, and all
mitigation measures have been included herein as conditions of approval, and has
otherwise complied with all applicable provisions of the California Environmental Quality
Act; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a duly -noticed public
meeting on March 14, 2000, pursuant to Section 9-2.313 of the Municipal Code to consider
publictestimony on the proposed project and has recommended conditional approval; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a duly -noticed public meeting on
April 4, 2000, pursuant to Section 9-2.313 of the Municipal Code to consider public
testimony on the proposed project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
San Juan Capistrano does hereby make the following findings:
-1-
0
1. The proposed project is consistent with the policies and objectives of
the San Juan Capistrano General Plan, specifically, the Community Deign element
because the project has been designed in a manner that incorporates an appropriate
variety of qualities such as compatibility with adjoining buildings, intimacy in space, layering
of view, richness of materials and accent landscaping; and,
2. The proposed project is consistent with the policies and objectives of
the San Juan Capistrano General Plan, specifically, the Public Services & Utilities Element
because the project will provide additional levels of water service for the purpose of
meeting the needs of the community; and,
3. The proposed project has been designed in a manner consistent with
the San Juan Capistrano Open Space Master Plan, because the project will provide a well
pump house that incorporates an architectural design compatible to future community park
development and the Historical Farm Area designation listed in the Open Space Master
Plan; and,
4. The proposed project is consistent with the City's adopted Architectural
Guidelines, because review of the proposed site plan and architectural plans retains a clear
and defined connection to the fundamental elements of a rural farm -like architectural style;
and,
5. The proposed project complies with all applicable provisions of the
City's administratively approved Public Facility Standards for public works projects.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of San Juan
Capistrano does hereby confirm issuance of a mitigated negative declaration and approves
the project subject to the following mitigation measures and conditions of approval:
Mitigation Measures
1. Priorto issuance of the notice to proceed, the Capistrano Valley Water
District's project manager will require that the contractor provide an executed contract for
services with a Society of Professional Archeologists -certified archeologist, including a
scope -of -work which provides for comprehensive monitoring; a contingency for
assessment, recovery, and/or evaluation; and the preparation of a technical memoranda
or report. In the event cultural resources are encountered during grading or trenching, the
monitor may cease grading or trenching operations, consistent with City Council policy, to
allow for the assessment, recovery, and/or evaluation of any cultural resources.
Conditions of Approval
1. The Capistrano Valley Water District shall be responsible for cost
estimate and construction of a retaining wall in the event that future widening of the
secondary arterial roadway immediately adjacent to the project site is warranted. The
retaining wall and design shall be subject to review by the Director of Engineering.
-2-
r�
L
2. Wall pack type lights shall be of a rustic/rural style lighting fixture, and
subject to review and final approval by the Planning Director.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 4th day of April, 2000.
OLLE AMP ELL, AYOR
Gid*111111
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss
CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO )
I, CHERYL JOHNSON, City Clerk of the City of San Juan Capistrano,
California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of
Resolution No. 00-4-4-4 adopted by the City Council of the City of San
Juan Capistrano, California, at a regular meeting thereof held on the 4th day of
April , 2000, by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bathgate, Greiner, Hart, Swerdlin
and Mayor Campbell
NOES. None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
(SEAL)
:.z 46ll, /(10 t
CHERYL JOHNSON, CITY CLEIRK '
-3-
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
city of san Juan capistrano, california
DATE POSTED: Z- Zz— d'
REMOVE POSTING:
20 days or
[ ] 30 days for SCH review
1. APPLICANT: Capistrano Valley Water District
2. ADDRESS: 32450 Paseo Adelanto, San Juan Capistrano
3. PHONE NUMBER: (949) 487-4312 (Eric Bauman, Associate Engineer CVWD)
4. LEA .AGENCY: City of San Juan Capistrano, 32400 Paseo Adelanto, 92675
5. ECT MGR.: Richard Greenbauer, Assistant Planner; (949) 443-6320
6. PROJECT TITLE: Capital Improvement Project 00-772
7. DESCRIPTION: The proposal consists of a request to construct a single story, 608
square foot, well pump house on a 31.28 acre parcel located west of Camino
Capistrano and immediately north of Trabuco Creek. The proposal includes a
gravel access road which would connect to an existing maintenance access road
which, in turn, connects to Camino Capistrano. The project also involves the
placement of new six inch ductile iron pipe approximately four feet underground
which would tie into existing pipelines.
ENVIRONMENTAL ADMINISTRATOR (EA) DETERMINATION: This project has been
evaluated by the Environmental Administrator of the City of San Juan Capistrano in
accordance with the Section 21080(c) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
On February 22, 2000, the Environmental Administrator determined that this project will
not have a significant effect on the environment and issued a Mitigated Negative
Declaration. The basis for the Administrator's determination is the attached Initial Study
(copies may be obtained from the Planning Department, City Hall, 32400 Paseo Adelanto,
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675). All public comments on the negative declaration must
be provided in writing to the Planning Department on or before the "Posting Removal Date"
cited above.
by Resolution 94-7-5-1 adopting the City's Environmental Review Guidelines. Pursuant to Section 9-2.314,
Appeals of the Land Use Code, any person may file an appeal of the Environmental Administrator's decision
to issue a Negative Declaration. Appeals must be filed in writing with the City Clerk within fifteen (15) days
of the "date posted". The filing of an appeal stays the issuance of a negative declaration until a determination
on appeal by the City Council. If the City determines that the appeal is based on environmental factors not
previously considered which may have a significant effect on the environment, the City Council may require
preparation of an environmental impact report (EIR).
cc'. County Clerk project file CEQA file
lobo- posting site posting library posting
Attachment 2
0 •
'R INITIAL STUDY
city of san Tuan canistrano california
1, PROJECT: Capital Improvement Project 00-772
2. LEAD AGENCY: City of San Juan Capistrano
3. CONTACT PERSON & PHONE: C.J. Amstrup, Senior Planner
4. PROJECT LOCATION: West of Camino Capistrano, immediately north of Trabuco
Creek.
5. APPLICANT: Capistrano Valley Water District, 32450 Paseo Adelanto, San Juan
Capistrano CA 92675
6. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Natural Open Space (NOS)
7. ZONING: General Agriculture (AG)
8. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposal consists of a request to construct a single
story, 608 square foot, well pump house on a 31.28 acre parcel located west of
Camino Capistrano and immediately north of Trabuco Creek. The proposal
includes a gravel access road which would connect to an existing maintenance
access road which, in turn, connects to Camino Capistrano. The project also
involves the placement of new six inch ductile iron pipe approximately four feet
underground which would tie into existing pipelines.
9. SURROUNDING LAND USE(S) & PROJECT SETTING: The project site is located
within the City's north open space property. Existing uses on-site include non -
producing avocado and citrus orchards. Adjacent uses include non -producing
agricultural land, Camino Capistrano, the Orange County Transit Authority rail line
and Trabuco Creek.
10. OTHER REQUIRED AGENCY APPROVALS: None.
11. PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION: An EIR was prepared for the
City's Open Space Master Plan, and was certified by the City Council on June 2,
1992
12. CONSULTATION:
A. Federal, State, and Other Local Agencies:
California Department of Transportation (CALTRANS)
Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD)
0
1]
Initial Study/Environmental Checklist -2- City of San Juan Capistrano California
B. City of San Juan Capistrano
George Scarborough, City Manager
Tom Tomlinson, Planning Director
William Huber, Engineering & Building Director
Al King, Community Services Director
Amy Amirani, Public Works Director
Dan McFarland, Building Official
Sam Shoucair, Senior Engineer
Brian Perry, Senior Civil Engineer
C.J. Amstrup, Senior Planner
C. Documents & resources:
City of San Juan Capistrano, General Plan.
City of San Juan Capistrano, Title 9, Land Use Code.
City of San Juan Capistrano, Environmental Review Guidelines.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Insurance Rate Maps.
Open Space Master Plan
U.S.G.S. Topographic Quadrangle, San Juan Capistrano.
City of San Juan Capistrano, Architectural Design Guidelines.
13. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: A
summary of the environmental factors potentially affected by this project, consisting
of a "Potentially Significant Impact' or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless
Mitigated", include cultural resources (potential unearthing of significant
archeological or paleontological artifacts).
0 0
Initial Study/Environmental Checklist -3- City of San Juan Capistrano California
14. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST (Explanations are required in Section 14)
Potentially
Potentially
Less than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
Impact
Impact
Unless
Mitigated
I.
AESTHETICS. Would the project:
[ ] [ 1
[ 1 1X1
a.
Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
[ ] [ 1
[] 1X1
b.
Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not
limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic building along
a State -designated scenic highway?
[ ] I ]
[ ] 1X1
c.
Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality
of the site and its surroundings?
[ ] [ 1
(] IN
d.
Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
[ ] [ 1
[ ] [X]
Il.
AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a.
Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, Farmland of
Statewide Importance as depicted on maps prepared
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program
of the Ca. Resources Agency?
[] (]
[] [X]
b.
Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act Contract?
[ ] [ ]
[ 1 1X1
c.
Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due
to their location or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
[] []
I [X]
Ill.
AIR QUALITY. Would the project:
a.
Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
[] []
(] [X]
b.
Violate an air quality standard or contribute to ai existing or
projected air quality violation?
[ ] [ 1
[ I IXI
c.
Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment
under the applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard (including releasing emissions which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
[ ] [ ]
[ ] [X]
d.
Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
I 11
[] 1X]
e.
Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of
people?
11 [ 1
11 IXI
IV.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
Initial Study/Environmental Checklist -4- City of San Juan Capistrano California
-
Potentially
Potentially
Less than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
Impact
Impact
Unless
Mitigated
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through
habitat modifications, on any species identified as a
candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or the USFWS?
[ ] [ ] [] [X]
b. 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 Game (DFG) or U.S. Fish and
[] [] [] [X]
Wildlife Service?
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected
wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or
other means?
j] [] [] [X]
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
[ ] [] [] [X]
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as tree preservation
policy/ordinance?
[ ] [] [] [X]
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or
other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation
plan?
[1 [] [] [X1
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historical resource as defined in § 15064.5 of CEQA?
[ ] [ ] [] [X]
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5 of CEQA?
[] [] [] [X]
c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource
or site or unique geologic feature?
[] [X] [] []
d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside
of formal cemeteries?
[ ] [X] [] []
Vl. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
Initial Study/Environmental Checklist -5- _ City of San Juan Capistrano, California
-
Potentially
Potentially
Less than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
Impact
Impact
Unless
_
Mitigated
a.
Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse
effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i.) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated
on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist, or based
on other substantial evidence of a known fault (Refer
to DM&G Pub. 42)?
[ ]
[ ] [ ] [X]
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
[]
[] [] [X]
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including
[ ]
[ ] [ ] [X]
liquefaction?
[ ]
[ ] [ ] [X]
iv) Landslides?
b.
Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
[ ]
[ ] [ ] [X]
c.
Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that
would become unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on-site or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
[ ]
[ ] [ ] [X]
d.
Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 1-B of
the 1994 UBC, creating substantial risks to life or property?
[ ]
[ ] [ ] [X]
e.
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?
[ I
[ ] [ ] [X]
VII.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the
project:
a.
Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
[J
[] [] [X]
b.
Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the environment?
[ ]
[ ] [ ] [X]
c.
Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
[ ]
[ I [ ] IN
d.
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?
[ ]
[ ] [ ] [X]
Initial Study/Environmental Checklist -6- City of San Juan Capistrano California
-
Potentially
Significant
Potentially
Significant
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
Impact
Impact
Impact
_
Unless
Mitigated
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would the project result in
safety hazard for people residing or working in the project
[] [] [] IN
area?
f. 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?
[ ] [ ] [] [X]
g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
[ ] [ ] [) IN
h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury
or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands
are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildiands?
[] [j [] (X]
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
[ ] [ ] [ ] (X]
b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would
be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level (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)?
[] [] I [X]
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area including through the alteration of the course of a stream
or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion
or siltation on- or off- site?
d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount
of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding
on or off site?
[ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems
or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
[ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
[) [ ] [ ] [X]
0
Ll
Initial Study/Environmental Checklist -7- City of San Juan Capistrano California
_
Potentially
Potentially
Less than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
Impact
Impact
Unless
Mitigated
g.
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?
[ ] [ j [ ] IN
h.
Place within a loo -year flood hazard area structures which
would impede or redirect flood flows?
[ ] [ ] [ ] IN
i.
Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury
or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of
the failure of a levee or dam?
[ ] [ ] [ ] IN
I .
Inundation by setche, tsunami, or mudflow?
[ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
IX.
LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a.
Physically divide an established community?
[ ] [ ] [ ] IN
b.
Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation
of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but
not limited to the General Plan, specific plan, local coastal
program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
(] [ ] [ ] IN
c.
Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or
natural community conservation plan?
[] I I IN
X.
MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a.
Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource
that would be of value to the region and the residents of the
state?
[ ] [ ] [ ] IN
b.
Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral
resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan,
specific plan or other land use plan?
[ j [ ] [ ] IN
XI.
NOISE. Would the project result in:
a.
Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in
excess of standards established in the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
[ j [ ] [ ] [X]
b.
Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground -
borne vibration or ground -borne noise levels?
[] [] [] IN
c.
A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
[ ] [ ] [ ] IN
d.
A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the
project?
[ ] [ ] [ ] IN
0 •
Initial Study/Environmental Checklist -8- City of San Juan Capistrano California
_
Potentially
Potentially
Less than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
Impact
Impact
Unless
Mitigated
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would the project expose
people residing or working in the project area to excessive
noise levels?
[] [] I (X]
f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project area
to excessive noise levels?
(] [ ] [ ] [Xj
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly
(for example, by proposing new homes and businesses or
indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
[ j [ ] [ ] [X]
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
[ ] [] [ j [X]
c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
[ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. 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 any of the public services:
Fire Protection?
[ ] [ ] [ ] [Xj
Police Protection?
[ ] [ j [ j [X]
Schools?
[] [] [] (X]
Parks?
[] [] [] [X]
Other public facilities?
(] (] [] fX]
XIV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
a. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to
the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e.,
result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle
trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
[] [] [] [Xj
b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service
standard established by the county congestion/management
agency for designated roads or highways?
[ ] [ ] [ ] (X]
0
Initial Study/Environmental Checklist -9- City of San Juan Capistrano, California
_
Potentially
Potentially
Less than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
Impact
Impact
Unless
Mitigated
c.
Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an
increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in
substantial safety risks?
[]
[] [] IN
d.
Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
[]
[] [] [X]
e.
Result in inadequate emergency access?
[]
[] [ j [X]
f.
Result in inadequate parking capacity?
[ j
[] [ j IN
g.
Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting
alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
[ ]
[ ] [ ] [X]
XV.
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a.
Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control Board?
[ ]
[ j [ ] [X]
b.
Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
[ j
[] [] [Xj
c.
Require or result in the construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
[]
[ ] [ j [X]
d.
Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project
from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or
expanded entitlements needed?
[]
[ ] [ ] [X]
e.
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?
[ ]
[ ] [ ] [X]
f.
Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
[ j
[ ] [ ] [X]
g.
Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations
related to solid waste?
[]
[ ] [] [X]
XVI.
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
Initial Study/Environmental Checklist -10-
City of San Juan Capistrano California
_
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Unless
Mitigated
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of
the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to decrease
below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of
a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important
examples of major periods of California history or prehistory?
[ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to
the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals?
[ ] [ ] [ ] IN
c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited,
but cumulatively considerable ("Cumulatively considerable'
means the project's incremental effects are considerable
when compared to the past, present, and future effects of
other projects)?
[ ] [] [] [X]
d. Does the project have environmental effects which will have
substantial adverse effects on human beings, directly or
[] I I [X]
indirectly?
0
Ll
Initial Study/Environmental Checklist -11- City of San Juan Capistrano, California
14. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
AESTHETICS: City -adopted significance thresholds provide that aesthetic impacts may be deemed
significant if the project would:
result in visually offensive structures/uses (outdoor storage, towers/antenna, etc.) or development
within view of General Plan -designated scenic highways, or obstructs views of General Plan -
designated ridgelines; or,
be substantially inconsistent with the City's Architectural Design Guidelines; or,
the installation of outdoor lighting including lighted athletic fields/courts, commercial/ industrial
parking lots, automobile sale display areas in excess of lighting standards established by Title 9.
The project would not exceed significance thresholds with respect to aesthetic impacts.
AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. The City's adopted significance thresholds provide that an
agricultural resource impact maybe deemed significant if the project would:
convert Prime Farmland (as defined by the California Dept. of Agriculture) to a non-agricultural
use; or,
conflict with existing agricultural zoning a Williamson Act contract or require cancellation of a
contract; or,
result in changes in the physical environment which would result in the conversion of farmland
to non-agricultural use.
The project would not exceed significance thresholds with respect to potential agricultural resource
impacts.
NI. AIR QUALITY: The City's adopted significance thresholds provide that air resource impacts may be
deemed significant if the project would:
exceed advisory project emission thresholds established by the SCAQMD using the Mobile
Assessment of Air Quality Impacts (MAAQI) model or other air quality assessment method(s)
recognized or established by the California Air Resources Board; or,
result in locally elevated levels of regulated air emissions (e.g. carbon monoxide) in close
proximity to schools, hospitals, senior housing, senior assisted living/congregate care facilities
or similar land uses; or
involve animal storage, manure stockpiling, industrial processes, food processing or similar uses
which consistently produce detectable, offensive odors.
The proposal is for an unmanned pump station which would generate minimal vehicle trips, related
to maintenance, and would not produce any air -borne pollutants of its own. Therefore, the project
would not result in significant air quality impacts.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: The City's adopted significance thresholds provide that biological
resource impacts may be deemed significant if the project would:
clear areas, previously undeveloped, of existing natural vegetation which serves as primary
habitat for animal species protected by the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) and
Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA), or,
alter or remove areas under jurisdiction of the US Army Corps of Engineers pursuant to Section
404 of the Federal Clean Water Act; or,
block/develop over established wildlife corridors (streams and valleys) which link major habitat
areas or introduce livestock or unrestricted domestic pets to previously undeveloped areas.
•
E
Initial Study/Environmental Checklist -12- City of San Juan Capistrano California
The project would not exceed significance thresholds with respect to biologic resource impacts.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. City -adopted significance thresholds provide that cultural resource
impacts may be deemed significant if the project would:
disturb paleontological resources; or,
disturb archeological resources; or,
demolish/alter a site/structure, or alter the context of a site/structure listed on the City's Inventory
of Historic and Cultural Landmarks or the State or National Register of Historic Places (CEQA,
Appendix "K"); or the project is on a recorded sensitive site or adjoins such a site; or
effect a site of City -documented historical significance to the Juaneno Band of Mission Indians;
or,
restrict existing religious or sacred uses.
The proposal includes grading and trenching in areas which may contain significant archeological
and/or paleontological resources. Mitigation is appropriate.
Mitigation Measure #1 - Prior to issuance of a grading permit , the applicant will retain the services
of a SOPA (Society of Professional Archeologists) -certified archeologist who will monitor all grading
and excavation for potential impacts on cultural resources including archeological, paleontological,
and historic resources. The applicant will provide an executed contract for services with a SOPA-
certified archeologist including a scope -of -work which provides for comprehensive monitoring; a
contingency for assessment, recovery, and/or evaluation; and the preparation of a technical
memoranda or report. In the event cultural resources are encountered during grading, the monitor
may cease grading operations, consistent with City Council policy, to allow for the assessment,
recovery, and/or evaluation of any cultural resources.
VI. GEOLOGY & SOILS: The City's adopted significance thresholds provide that geologic impacts may
be deemed significant if the project would:
be situated in an area of moderate or high risk potential for seismic ground shaking per the
General Plan Seismic Safety Element; or,
be situated in an area of moderate or high risk potential for seismic ground shaking per the
General Plan Seismic Safety Element; or,
be situated in an area of moderate or high risk potential for liquefaction per the General Plan's
Geotechnical Land Use Capabilities Map; or,
be situated within the potential area of effect associated with seiche, tsunami, or volcanic events;
or,
be situated in an area of moderate or high risk potential for landslides per the General Plan's
Geotechnical Land Use Capabilities Map; or,
grade erosion -prone soils in areas subject to high winds or water flow (channel or sheet); or,
bore, grade, cut, or construct on an otherwise stable land mass resulting in a reduction of bearing
capacity below minimum accepted engineering limits; or,
be situated in an area of moderate or high risk potential for expansive/erosive soils per the
General Plan's Geotechnical Land Use Capabilities Map; or,
grade or develop within a General Plan -designated "major ridgeline", or a canyon, drainage
Swale, steep slopes, floodplain, or significant rock outcropping.
The project would not exceed significance thresholds with respect to geology and soil impacts.
VII. HAZARDS & HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: The City's adopted significance thresholds provide that hazard
impacts may be deemed significant if the project would:
0
E
Initial Study/Environmental Checklist -13- City of San Juan Capistrano California
consist of a service station, commercial nursery, agriculture, electroplating, or similar use which
uses, stores, dispenses, and/or transports hazardous materials (per California Government
Code) within 300 feet of sensitive receptors including residential areas, day-care centers,
hospitals, convalescent homes, etc.; or,
be inconsistentwith the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) emergency evacuation
plan; or,
include the use, processing, and/or transport of solid waste (landfill), household hazardous waste
(facilities), manufacture of explosives or flammables, hazardous waste processing, radioactive
materials (medical) or similar uses; or,.
develop residential uses in close proximity to a solid waste landfill, household hazardous waste
facilities, manufacturing of explosives or flammables, hazardous waste processing, radioactive
materials or similar uses; or,
not comply with the City's adopted fuel modification ordinance provisions.
The project would not exceed significance thresholds and therefore will not have significant hazard
impacts.
VIII. HYDROLOGY & WATER QUALITY: The City's adopted significance thresholds provide that water
resource impacts may be deemed significant if the project would:
increase the impervious surface coverage more than 20%, or increase the quantity of stotmwater
runoff by greater than 20%, or discharge new stormwater to existing storm drainage facilities; or,
be located in a designated 100 year special flood hazard area based on the FEMA Flood
Insurance Rate Maps or the project would obstruct or interfere with stream flows in such areas;
or,
consist of power plant operation, industrial/manufacturing processes, or automotive repair/service
subject to NPDES (National Pollution Discharge Elimination System) standards which would
involve the discharge of cooled/heated water, or pollutant laden runoff into surface waters; or,
change the water surface elevations of ponds/lakes by at least one foot or the quantity (Q) of
water by at least 10%; or,
move the alignment or modify the channel geometrics of existing an "blueline" stream.
change the quantity of groundwater, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or by
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations; or,
alter the direction or rate of flow of groundwater; or,
likely result in conditions which violate groundwater quality standards established by the San
Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB); or,
use at least 5% of existing estimated groundwater capacity as determined by the San Diego
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).
The project would not exceed significance thresholds with respect to water resource impacts.
X. LAND USE: The City's adopted significance thresholds provide that a land use impact may be
deemed significant if the project would:
not be a permitted or conditional use within the Zoning classification or proposes a General Plan,
or Zoning Map designation which are inconsistent with the General Plan or Land Use Code
consistency matrix; or,
conflict with adopted environmental plans/policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the
project; or,
include a General Plan Amendment or zone change to change the designation of a parcel from
one category to another (categories include residential [1.0], open space and recreation [2.0],
commercial [3.0], industrial [4.0], and institutional [5.01); or,
convert an amount of agricultural acreage so that less than 20 acres or 50% of the original
acreage remained; or,
Initial Study/Environmental Checklist -14- City of San Juan Capistrano California
propose a physical barrier including an arterial street, utility corridor, open drainage way, or
similar feature.
Based on the significance thresholds, the project would not result in a significant land use impact:
X. MINERAL RESOURCES: The City's significance threshold provides that energy & mineral resource
impacts may be deemed significant if the project would conflict with adopted energy conservation
plans; or use non-renewable resources in an inefficient manner; or result in the loss of availability of
a known mineral resource that would be a future value to the region and State's residents. The
project will not exceed thresholds and therefore will not result in significant energy & mineral resource
impacts.
XI. NOISE: The City's adopted significance thresholds provide that noise impacts may be deemed
significant if the project would:
include outdoor recreation, amplified sound, industrial processes, automotive repair or similar
activities and/or is situated next to noise sensitive land uses including hospitals, convalescent
homes, or schools; or,
result in noise levels which exceed the standards established by the General Plan's Noise
Element.
The project would not exceed significance thresholds with respect to noise impacts.
XII. POPULATION & HOUSING: The City's adopted significance thresholds provide that population and
housing impacts may be deemed significant if the project would:
exceed population projections established by the General Plan Land Use Element.; or,
exceed population projections for a project site based on General Plan designations; or
eliminate existing very -low or low income dwellings (based on Housing & Urban Development
(HUD) or Housing & Community Development (HCD) criteria); or, proposes five or more
lots/dwellings with no provision for very -low or low income dwellings.
Based on the significance threshold, the project would not result in significant population and housing
impacts.
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES: The City's adopted significance thresholds provide that public service impacts
may be deemed significant if the project would exceed the General Plan Growth Management
Element service standard for police, fire, parks, roads, and government services; or in the case of
schools, Capistrano Unified School District (CUSD) service standards. The project would not exceed
significance thresholds and therefore will not have significant public service impacts.
XIV. TRANSPORTATION: The City's adopted significance thresholds provide that transportation impacts
may be deemed significant if the project would:
generate traffic resulting in at least a 5% increase in ADT on adjoining public streets; or,
reduce intersection levels of service on primary/secondary arterials to a level below the minimum
established by the General Plan Growth Management Element; or,
provide no frontage improvements to attain a geometric section consistent with that established
by the General Plan Circulation Element and Master Plan of Streets & Highways, or,
increase traffic in areas with statistically -significant, higher than average accident rates; or,
not meet emergency access requirements of the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA).
convert existing parking to an alternate use or requires additional parking and does not meet Title
9 parking standards; or,
create barriers to non -motorists (e.g. pedestrians, bikes, etc.); or,
0 0
Initial Study/Environmental Checklist -15- City of San Juan Capistrano California
conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation; or,
create rail, waterborne, or air traffic impacts?
The proposal is for an unmanned pump station which would generate minimal vehicle trips, related
to maintenance, and would not alter any existing roadways. Therefore the project would not exceed
significance thresholds with respect to transportation or circulation impacts.
XV. UTILITIES: The City's adopted significance thresholds provide that utility impacts may be deemed
significant if the project would exceed standards of San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E) Company
for gas and electric, Pacific Bell Telephone for telephone, Capistrano Valley Water District (CVWD)
for water, Southeast Regional Reclamation Authority (SERRA) for sanitary sewer, City Master Plan
of Drainage for storm drainage, and the California Integrated Water Management Board/Agency for
solid waste. The project would not exceed significance thresholds and therefore will not have
significant utility impacts.
XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a. The project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to decrease below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict
the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, nor eliminate important examples of major periods
of California history or prehistory.
b. The project does not have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term,
environmental goals.
c. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable
("Cumulatively considerable" means the project's incremental effects are considerable when
compared to the past, present, and future effects of other projects).
d. The project will not have environmental effects which will have substantial adverse effects on human
beings, directly or indirectly.
16. PREPAffATION. The initial study for the subject project was prepared by:
C
Amstrup, Senior
17. 'DETERMINATION. (To be completed by lead agency) Based on this initial
evaluation:
[ ] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
[X] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the
mitigation measures described herein have been included in this project. A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
0 0
Initial Study/Environmental Checklist -16- City of San Juan Capistrano, California
[X] I _find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
18. DE MINIMIS FEE DETERMINATION (Chapter 1706, Statutes of 1990 -AB 3158)
[X] It is hereby found that this project involves no potential for any adverse
effect, either individually or cumulatively, on wildlife resources and that a
"Certificate of Fee Exemption" shall be prepared for this project.
[ ] It is hereby found that this project could potentially impact wildlife, individually
or cumulatively, and therefore fees shall be paid to the County Clerk in
accordance with Section 711.4(d) of the Fish and Game Code.
19. ENVIRONMENTAL ADMINISTRATOR DETERMINATION (Section 9-2.201 of SJC
Municipal Code): The initial study for this project has been reviewed and the
environmental determination, contained in Section V. preceding, is hereby
approved:
Thomas Tomlinson. Environmental Administrator
20. PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT CONCURRENCE; The property owner/
applicant signifies by their signature below their concurrence with all mitigation
measures contained within this environmental document:
Eric Bauman, Associate Engineer
(C:\OFFICE\WPWIN\ENVFORMS\ISCIP772.WPD)
4i•
Rosenbaum
E\� VWI No. 1
FIGURE 1
SITE LOCATION MAP
NORTH AREA DOMESTIC WELL
RCS JOB NO. $0732 MARCH 111"
AF
ptu p ��IINo Farm Narth Wall
• \� \ `\,,\
Tree Fam
Residences South Well'
u '
Egan Tract Well
:Nos. 1 and 3
in Mehl Sh
New North Are
J 1 Domestic Well
r.� Egan Tract
Greenrnouses d Well No. 2 r
_\ . _ 1 i� in Ooen Fieldill
i
M\
N
0 S00. 1000
I 1 r.
<ab 3T0j
,'-Un( /!]o
Attachment 3
0
PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE
city of san Tuan
Subject: C.I.P. 00-772 (North Open Space Well Improvement)
Dear Resident/Property Owner:
On Tuesday, March 14, 2000, the Planning Commission will conduct a public meeting at
7:00 p.m. in the City Council chambers located at 32400 Paseo Adelanto to consider the
subject project. The Capistrano Valley Water District is proposing to construct a single
story 608 square foot Well Pump House on a 31.28 acre parcel located west of Camino
Capistrano, and immediately north of Trabuco Creek. The project proposes access to the
site via a gravel access road off of an existing Maintenance Access Road/Easement, which
is accessed directly off of Camino Capistrano. The project also involves the placement
of new waterlines necessary to connect the existing well to existing waterlines. The project
site has a General Plan designation of CP, "Community Park", and a Zoning designation
of AG "General Agricultural".
This project has been reviewed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality
Act (1970). The City's Environmental Administrator has determined that the project
requires the issuance of a negative declaration. Copies of the Negative Declaration (ND)
are available for public review at City Hall and the Public Library at 31495 EI Camino Real.
You are invited to attend the public meeting to be heard in favor of or in opposition to this
project, either by speaking or submitting written communication to the Commission. If you
can't attend the meeting, you may submit written comments to the Planning Department.
All written comments received at least 24 hours before the meeting will be distributed to
the Commission and become part of the public record. If you have any questions, please
call the project manager, Assistant Planner Richard Greenbauer at (949) 443-6320.
Sincerely,
Thomas Tomlinson, Date: 2 • z 2 • od
Planning Director
RG:hs
C:\OFFICE\WPWIN\WPDOCS\CURRENT\CIPPMN.WPD
Attachment 4