Resolution Number 14-10-21-03 RESOLUTION NO. 14-10-21-03
L A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN
JUAN CAPISTRANO CERTIFYING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT FOR THE SPIEKER CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT
COMMUNITY SPECIFIC PLAN (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO.
2013121089)
WHEREAS, the Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Project
(the "Project") and aquatic center has been proposed for development in San
Juan Capistrano as follows:
Applicant: Spieker Senior Development Partners
Property Owner: Vermeulen Ranch Center
Project Location: 32382 Del Obispo Street
Property APNs: 121-182-17 and 121-182-53
Project Site Area: 35 acres
Proposed Use: 407 independent living units with amenities for
persons not requiring daily assistance and a
101-unit health care center for residents
needing daily assistance including memory
support or direct medical assistance
u Public Benefit: Aquatic center at an off-site location with
separate processing and environmental
analysis; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Project includes:
1. An application for a General Plan Amendment to change the
General Plan land use designation of the 35 acre Project site from
Agri-Business to Specific Plan/Precise Plan (GPA13-002); and
2. An application for a Rezone to change the zoning designation of
the 35-acre Project site from Agri-Business District to Specific
Plan/Precise Plan District (RZ13-005); and
3. An application for a Specific Plan to establish the land use policies
and zoning regulations for the 35 acre Project site (SP14-001); and
4. An application for a Development Agreement between the City of
San Juan Capistrano and the Projgct applicant to specify the
standards and conditions that would govern development of the
property (DA14-003); and
5. An application for a Tentative Tract Map to create and subdivide
the 35-acre Project site (TTM 17749); and
6. An application for an Architectural Control to establish the site plan
and architectural design of the proposed Continuing Care
Retirement Community (AC13-004); and
7. An application for a Grading Plan Modification to modify the existing
finished grade of the Project site by more than two feet (GPM13-
006); and
WHEREAS, the proposed Project has been processed pursuant to
Sections 9-2.301 (General Review Procedures) and 9-2-302 (Notification
Procedures) of Title 9 (Land Use) of the San Juan Capistrano Municipal Code;
and
WHEREAS, a Draft Environmental Impact Report and Final Environmental
Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2013121089) (collectively, the "EIR")
has been prepared to assess the environmental impacts of the proposed Project
in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the
State and local environmental guidelines, rules, regulations and procedures,
including without limitation, the City's Local CEQA Guidelines and Thresholds of
Significance; and
WHEREAS, on September 30, 2014, the Planning Commission conducted
a duly-noticed public hearing to consider the environmental determination of the
EIR pursuant to CEQA, to hear the public testimony on the proposed Project, and
to appraise all relevant information pertaining to the proposed Project, and after
considering all relevant public comments and careful study, the Planning
Commission adopted motions recommending to the City Council denial of
certification of the EIR and denial of the proposed Project; and
WHEREAS, on October 21, 2014, the City Council conducted a duly-
noticed public hearing pursuant to Title 9, Land Use Code, Section 9-2.302(f) and
City Council Policy 5 to consider the environmental determination of the EIR
pursuant to CEQA, to hear the public testimony on the proposed Project, and to
appraise all relevant information pertaining to the proposed Project.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, as follows:
Section 1. The above recitations are true and correct and adopted as the
findings of the City Council.
Section 2. Having received, reviewed, and considered the EIR for the
proposed Project (State Clearinghouse No. 2013121089), as well as all other
information in the record of proceedings on this matter, the City Council makes
the following findings:
-2- 10/21/2014
1. The EIR for the proposed Project has been prepared pursuant to
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as amended (Public
Resources Code Section 21000, et seq.), the CEQA Guidelines for
Implementation of CEA (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section
15000, et seq), and the State and local environmental guidelines, rules,
regulations and procedures, including without limitation, the procedures
established by the City of San Juan Capistrano for the implementation of
CEQA.
2. The City prepared and issued a Notice of Preparation of an
Environmental Impact Report for the proposed Project on December 23,
2013. A public scoping meeting was held on January 22, 2014, to solicit
input on the scope of the environmental analysis.
3. A Draft Environmental Impact Report was prepared pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines Section 15128 that identified the potential
environmental impacts of the proposed Project, discussed alternatives,
and proposed mitigation measures for identified potentially significant
impacts to minimize, offset, or otherwise reduce or avoid those
environmental impacts.
4. The City circulated a Notice of Availability of Draft Environmental
Impact Report for the proposed Project and made it available for a 47-day
public review period, beginning on June 6, 2014, and ending on July 22,
2014. Additional public comments were accepted following a public
hearing held by the Planning Commission on July 22, 2014, to introduce
the proposed Project.
5. A Final Environmental Impact Report was prepared including the
Responses to Comments in the Draft Environmental Impact Report and
the Findings of Fact.
6. The City has identified and disclosed all potentially significant
impacts and identified appropriate mitigation measures to reduce impacts
to a level of insignificance. All potentially significant impacts have been
effectively reduced to a less than significant level. The mitigation
measures have been included in a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program prepared pursuant to and in full compliance with the CEQA
Guidelines.
Section 3. The City Council, based on all of the information, testimony,
and evidence presented at its meeting on October 21, 2014, and the findings and
determinations set forth in Section 2, hereby approves the EIR prepared for the
proposed Project and certifies the Findings of Fact and the Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program, as provided by Exhibits A and 6, attached hereto and
incorporated herein.
-3- 10/21/2014
Section 4. The EIR, all documents referenced in the EIR, and the record
of proceedings on which the Planning Commission's recommendation is based
are located at City Hall for the City of San Juan Capistrano, located at 32400
Paseo Adelanto, San Juan Capistrano, California and the custodian of record of
proceedings is the Development Services Department Administrative Specialist.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 21" day of October 2014.
AM ACLEVAT6,7MAYOR
ATTES
i
,
MARI R IS, Cl CL RK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO )
I, MARIA MORRIS, appointed City Clerk of the City of San Juan Capistrano, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution No. 14-10-21-03 was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of
San Juan Capistrano at an Adjourned Regular meeting thereof, held the 21st day of October2014,
by th following vote:
AY S COUNCIL MEMBERS: Taylor, Kramer and Mayor Allevato
NO S COUNCIL MEMBER: Byrnes and Reeve
AB7E T COUACIL MEMBER: None
II
MAR R , City erk
-4- 10/21/2014
FINDINGS OF FACT IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS FOR THE
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR THE
SPIEKER CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT COMMUNITY SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT
SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO,CALIFORNIA
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2013121089
I. INTRODUCTION
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires decision-makers to balance the benefits of
the Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRC) Specific Plan project (proposed project)
against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the
benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse effects, those effects may be considered
"acceptable" (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093[a]). CEQA requires the agency to support, in
writing, the specific reasons for considering a project acceptable when significant impacts are infeasible
to mitigate. Such reasons must be based on substantial evidence in the Final Environmental Impact
Report(FEIR)or elsewhere in the administrative record(State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 [b]).
A. Project Summary
The proposed project is located at 32382 Del Obispo Street in the southwestern portion of the City of San
Juan Capistrano (City), which itself is located in the southwestern portion of Orange County (County).
The project site is bordered on the south by Via Positiva, on the east by Alipaz Street, on the west by a
retail center, including a Farm to Market and Armstrong Nursery, and Del Obispo Street, and on the north
by the Rancho Alipaz Mobile Home Park (for residents age 55 or older), Mariners Ocean Hills Church
and Private Heart Christian Academy (kindergarten through 8"' grade), Community Presbyterian
Preschool (preschool through kindergarten), and Del Obispo Terrace(a senior residential facility).
The proposed project would include the development of a self-contained CCRC designed for residents
over the age of 60. The CCRC would include two main components: independent living units, for
residents capable of residing in the community without daily assistance; and a Health Care Center, for
residents requiring daily assistance or daily medical attention.
The proposed independent living units would include approximately 418 residential units of various sizes
and types, as well as common buildings and amenities designed to provide recreational opportunities. The
independent living units would include 280 three-story Courtyard Apartments, 64 two-story Garden
Terrace apartments, and 74 single-story Villa Residences.
The proposed Health Care Center would be located immediately east of the independent living units on a
separate lot. The Health Care Center would be accessible to the general public,but access from the Health
Care Center to the independent living units would be restricted to residents. Health Care Center services
would be available to the CCRC residents on a priority basis, and to non-residents as space permits. The
Health Care Center would contain approximately 101 units of four different service levels in two
separately licensed facilities: the assisted living facility and the skilled nursing facility. Components of
the Health Care Center are described in further detail in Table A below.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 1
Table A: Health Care Center Residential Unit Tabulation
Proposed Number
Residential Unit of Units or Rooms
Assisted Living Facility(ADL Assistance) 39
Assisted Living Facility(Memory Support Center) 21
Assisted Living Total Units 60
Nursing Facility(Private Room) 20
Nursing Facility(Semi-Private Room) 21
Nursing Facility Rooms 41
Total 101
Source:KTGY Group,Inc.(November 2013).
ADL=Activities of Daily Living
Vehicular access to the project site would be provided by one primary gated access entrance on Del
Obispo Street and two secondary access entrances on Via Positiva and Alipaz Street, which would not be
gated. However, there would be a gate to the secondary entrance to the independent living units via Via
Positiva.
The City and the project Applicant have established the following intended specific objectives, which
would aid decision-makers in their review of the project and its associated environmental impacts:
1. The proposed project would establish appropriate General Plan land use and zoning designations to
facilitate achievement of project objectives and maximize the potential of the project site.
2. The proposed project would provide an opportunity to create a mixed-use environment integrating
residential and health care uses.
3. The proposed project would not interfere with the continuation of general commercial uses on the
existing retail site adjacent to the project site.
4. The proposed project would create a high-quality CCRC for persons age 60 years and over, designed
to be compatible with the surrounding community and consistent with State standards.
5. The proposed project would provide progressive care services for CCRC residents from independent
living units with associated amenities and dining options to assisted living, skilled nursing, and
memory support.
6. The proposed project would contribute to greater livability for senior citizens by incorporating the
following design and planning principles: safety and security, recreation and cultural activities,
walkability/accessibility, on-site management and care, and transportation, including shuttle service
to local restaurants, shopping, and health services.
7. The proposed project would offer a retirement community option not currently provided in the City.
The proposed project offers a comprehensive program to allow potential residents and family
members to plan for retirement with confidence. The project would provide an on-site Health Care
Center licensed to provide assisted living, skilled nursing services, and memory support to residents
of the Retirement Community and to non-residents as space permits.
8. The proposed project would create new employment opportunities in the City,particularly within the
medical and medical support fields.
9. The proposed project would increase the City's tax base, generating revenue for the City through
increased property values as well as increased retail sales.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 2
10. The proposed project would promote sustainability, including measures to increase efficiency and the
use of renewable resources while decreasing use of non-renewable energy.
11. The proposed project would meet or exceed the minimum number of green points required to become
"Green Certified"per the City of San Juan Capistrano Green Building Program.
12. The proposed project would promote the efficient use of water and energy through incorporation of
water and energy conservation measures.
B. Environmental Review Process
In conformance with CEQA, and the City's CEQA Thresholds of Significance, the City conducted an
extensive environmental review of the proposed project.
• The City determined that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) would be required for the proposed
project and issued a Notice of Preparation(NOP)on December 23, 2013.
• The City conducted a public scoping meeting on January 22, 2014, to provide the public and
interested parties with information on the project and to solicit input on the scope of the
environmental analysis in the Draft EIR (DEIR). The scope of the DEIR was determined based on
comments received in response to the NOP, and comments received at the public scoping meeting.
• The City prepared a DEIR, which was made available for a 47-day public review period, beginning
June 6,2014, and ending July 22,2014.
• The City prepared a FEIR, including the Responses to Comments to the DEIR, and the Findings of
Fact. The FEIR/Response to Comments contains written comments on the DEIR, responses to those
comments,revisions to the DEIR, and appended documents.
• The City held an information session at the Planning Commission on July 22, 2014, to brief the
Planning Commissioners and the public on the project and to allow opportunities for additional public
input on the project.
C. Record of Proceedings
For purposes of CEQA and these Findings,the Record of Proceedings for the proposed project consists of
the following documents and other evidence, at a minimum:
The NOP and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the proposed project;
• The DEIR;
• The FEIR for the proposed project;
All written comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the public review
comment period on the DEIR;
• All responses to written comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the public
review comment period on the DEIR;
All written public testimony presented during a noticed public hearing for the proposed project;
• The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program(MMRP);
• The reports and technical memoranda included or referenced in the Response to Comments;
All documents, studies,E1Rs, or other materials incorporated by reference in the DEIR and the FEIR;
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 3
• The Resolutions adopted by the City in connection with the proposed project, and all documents
incorporated by reference therein, including comments received after the close of the comment period
and responses thereto;
• Matters of common knowledge to the City, including but not limited to federal, State, and local laws
and regulations;
• Any documents expressly cited in these Findings; and
• Any other relevant materials required to be in the record of proceedings by Public Resources Code
Section 21167.6(e).
D. Custodian and Location of Records
The documents and other materials that constitute the administrative record for the City's actions related
to the project are located at the City of San Juan Capistrano, 32400 Paseo Adelanto, San Juan Capistrano,
California 92675. The City Development Services Department is the custodian of the administrative
record for the project. Copies of these documents, which constitute the record of proceedings, are and at
all relevant times have been and will be available upon request at the offices of the Development Services
Department. This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code Section
21081.6(a)(2)and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(e).
II. FINDINGS OF FACT
A. Environmental Effects Which Were Determined Not To Be Potentially Affected By the
Proposed Project
As a result of the NOP that was circulated by the City on December 23, 2013, the City determined,based
upon the threshold criteria for significance, that the project would not result in significant potential
environmental impacts in one area; therefore, the City determined that this potential environmental effect
would not be addressed in the DEIR. Based upon the environmental analysis presented in the FEIR, and
the comments received by the public on the DEIR, no substantial evidence has been submitted to or
identified by the City that indicates that the project would have an impact on the following environmental
area:
Mineral Resources.
Impact: Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be available to
the region and the residents of the State; or the loss of a locally-important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan.No mineral
resources within the City or on the project site are identified in the City's General Plan Conservation/
Open Space Element. Therefore, development of the proposed project would not result in impacts
related to the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region or
the residents of the State, or related to the loss of a locally important mineral resource recovery site.
Because no specific comments were received during the NOP public comment period that indicated a
potential for the project to result in potential impacts related to mineral resources, this issue was not
evaluated further in the DEIR.
Based upon the environmental analysis presented in the DEIR, and the comments received by the public
on the DEIR,no substantial evidence has been submitted to or identified by the City that indicates that the
project would have an impact on the following environmental areas:
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 4
Agriculture and Forestry Resources.
Impact: Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use. The project site is
surrounded by existing residential, commercial, education, public facility, park, and agri-business
uses in a developed area of the City. Public utilities and facilities are currently in-place to serve the
existing land uses, and the proposed project would not restrict or prohibit the continuation of any
adjacent land uses, including the agri-business uses. Development of the proposed project would not
involve other changes in the existing environment that, due to their location or nature would result in
additional impacts to Farmland, or interfere with other agricultural uses, and no mitigation is required.
No impacts are anticipated.
Cultural and Paleontological Resources.
Impact: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as
defined in Section 15064.5 of CEQA.The records search and field survey(DEIR,Appendix E of the
DEIR) did not identify any historic resources on or in the immediate vicinity of the project site.
Therefore, the proposed project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
known historic archeological resource as defined in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, and no
mitigation is required.No impacts are anticipated.
Geology and Soil Impacts.
Impact: 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. The
proposed project would connect to the existing City sewer system, and no septic tanks or alternative
wastewater disposal systems are proposed as part of the project. Therefore, the proposed project
would have no impacts related to alternative wastewater disposal systems, and no mitigation is
required.No impacts are anticipated.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
Impact: 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 create a significant
hazard to the public or the environment. The project site is not included on any hazardous
materials site list pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and would not result in a significant
hazard to the public or the environment.No mitigation is required, and no impacts are anticipated.
Impact: Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving
wildfires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residents are
intermixed with wildlands. The project site is located in an urbanized area. According to the Safety
Element of the City's General Plan,the project site is located outside areas that would be identified as
Wildland Fire Areas that may contain substantial fire risk or a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone.
Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to significant risk or loss,
injury, or death involving wildfires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or
where residents are intermixed with wildlands, and no mitigation is required. No impacts are
anticipated.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 5
Hydrology and Water Quality.
Impact: 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. The
project site is not located in a 100-year floodplain. The proposed project would not place housing or
structures within a 100-year flood hazard area. Therefore, there would be no impact related to
placement of housing or structures within a 100-year flood hazard area, and no mitigation is required.
No impacts are anticipated.
Impact: Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect
flood flows. The project site is not located in a 100-year floodplain. The proposed project would not
place housing or structures within a 100-year flood hazard area. Therefore, there would be no impact
related to placement of housing or structures within a 100-year flood hazard area, and no mitigation is
required.No impacts are anticipated.
Impact: 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. The project site is located
approximately 8 miles downstream of the Trampas Canyon Reservoir. According to the Safety
Element of the City's General Plan (December 14, 1999), the project site is not located within the
inundation area of the Trampas Canyon Dam. In addition, the project would not increase the risk of
failure of the dam. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in impacts related to exposure of
people or structures to risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding as a result of inundation from
failure of a dam or levee, and no mitigation is required.No impacts are anticipated.
Impact: Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. There are no major lakes or open water
impoundments in the vicinity of the project site. Therefore, there is no risk of inundation by seiche
waves. According to the Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning Dana Point
Quadrangle/San Juan Capistrano Quadrangle (March 15, 2009), the proposed project is not located in
a tsunami inundation area. Therefore, there is no risk of inundation by tsunami. The project site is
located within a relatively flat area, and no existing landslides are present on the property. Therefore,
there is no risk of inundation by mudflow, and no mitigation is required.No impacts are anticipated.
Impact: Tributary to other environmentally sensitive areas. If so, can it exacerbate already
existing sensitive conditions. Runoff from the project site is not tributary to a State Water Quality
Protection Area of Special Biological Significance as defined by the State Water Resources Control
Board (SWRCB). In addition, runoff from the project site is not tributary to an Environmentally
Sensitive Area according to the City's General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element
(December 14, 1999).No impacts are anticipated.
Noise.
Impact: 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, expose people residing
or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. The project site is approximately 22 miles
southeast of John Wayne Airport-Orange County and is not in the vicinity of a private airstrip.
Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels from a public airport,public use airport, or private airstrip, and no mitigation is
required.No impacts are anticipated.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 6
Impact: For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels. The project site is approximately 22 miles southeast of
John Wayne Airport-Orange County and is not in the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, the
proposed project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise
levels from a public airport, public use airport, or private airstrip, and no mitigation is required. No
impacts are anticipated.
Population and Housing.
Impact: Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere. The project site currently does not contain residential housing
units; therefore, the proposed project would not displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere, and no mitigation is required. No
impacts are anticipated.
Impact: Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere. The project site currently does not contain residential units; therefore, the
proposed project would not displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere, and no mitigation is required.No impacts are anticipated.
Public Services and Utilities.
Impact: 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 public
schools. The provision of education and school facilities in the City is the responsibility of the
Capistrano Unified School District(CUSD). Implementation of the proposed project would not result
in the generation of school-aged children within the CUSD service area. Therefore, the proposed
project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new
or physically altered governmental facilities in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response
times, or other performance objectives for public schools. The proposed project would have no
impacts related to public schools, and no mitigation is required.No impacts are anticipated.
Impact: Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality
Control Board. The proposed project would not include any industrial uses that would be subject to
an individual permit with specific treatment requirements from the San Diego Regional Water Quality
Control Board(RWQCB). Sewage would be discharged to the J.B. Latham Regional Treatment Plant
(J.B. Latham Plant) for treatment. Therefore, no impact would occur, and no mitigation is required.
No impacts are anticipated.
Transportation/Traffic.
Impact: 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. The City of San Juan Capistrano has
determined that due to the City's proximity (22 miles northwest) to the nearest airport (John Wayne
Airport), development projects in the City are not likely to impact any existing air traffic patterns.
Therefore, this is reflected in the City's CEQA Thresholds of Significance, which do not include the
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 7
impact significance threshold established in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines related to air traffic
patterns and safety risks associated with airports. Per the City's CEQA Thresholds of Significance,
and due to the distance from the project site to the nearest airport facility, project impacts related to
air traffic patterns under Threshold 4.15.3 were not analyzed as part of this EIR. No impacts are
anticipated.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH WERE DETERMINED TO BE LESS THAN
SIGNIFICANT
The FEIR identified certain less than significant effects that could result from implementation of the
proposed project. No mitigation is required to reduce or avoid such impacts because they would not
exceed applicable thresholds of significance.
Aesthetics.
Impact: Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. Within the project vicinity, the City's
General Plan Circulation Element (1999) designates Del Obispo Street and Alipaz Street as scenic
corridors requiring view protection. The project site is visible from both of these roadways and is,
therefore, considered to be within a portion of a public scenic vista from these roadways. While
implementation of the proposed project would modify views of the project site, the proposed project
would not adversely impact (i.e., obstruct or block) views of the surrounding hills from nearby roads
and sidewalks, including the City-designated scenic corridors (i.e., Del Obispo Street and Alipaz
Street), as depicted in the visual simulations provided in Section 4.1, Aesthetics. Therefore, the
proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista, and impacts are
considered less than significant.No mitigation is required.
Impact: Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings,and historic buildings within a State-designated scenic highway. There are no City
or County-designated scenic resources (e.g., trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings) on the
project site. Furthermore, there are no State-designated scenic highways surrounding the project site.
Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially damage scenic resources within a State-
designated scenic highway, and impacts are considered less than significant. No mitigation is
required.
Impact: Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its
surroundings. Construction of the proposed project would involve on-site construction activities that
would be visible to adjacent land uses. Construction activities for the proposed project would be
short-term; therefore, construction activities would not substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality from adjacent land uses compared to existing conditions. Operation of the
proposed project would alter the existing visual character and quality of the proposed project site.
However, the proposed project would be designed to a height and scale consistent with existing
development surrounding the project site. Additionally,the proposed project would be designed in the
Southern California Mediterranean style, also consistent with surrounding development. Therefore,
development of the proposed project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the proposed project site and its surroundings, and impacts are considered less than
significant.No mitigation is required.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 8
Impact: Result in a cumulative aesthetic impact. Three projects, totaling 42 single-family dwelling
units (Olivia Tentative Tract Map [TTM] 16146 and TTM 17655, and Vermeulen Ranch), would be
located adjacent to the west side of the project site, across Del Obispo Street. The project site is
currently developed as an active commercial nursery in the City of San Juan Capistrano; therefore,
the cumulative area of aesthetic impacts is the project site's viewshed. While the existing character of
the project site would change substantially from existing conditions, the site design would result in a
developed condition that would be consistent with the character and massing of surrounding
developed uses and uses within the City. In addition, landscaping included as part of the proposed
project would enhance views along nearby roadways, including City-designated scenic corridors. In
addition, because the project site is located in an area already developed with a retail center, schools,
churches, senior residences, mobile homes, and single- and multifamily uses, the contribution of the
proposed project to potential cumulative aesthetics impacts in the City is considered less than
cumulatively significant,and no mitigation is required.
Agriculture and Forest Resources.
Impact: Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as depicted on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency. The approximately 35-acre project site
is currently developed with a commercial nursery and distribution center. According to the current
commercial nursery owners, no in-ground agricultural activities have occurred since operation of the
commercial nursery began in 1998; the site has been utilized exclusively for potted plant storage,
maturing,and regional distribution for the past 16 years.
The approximately 35-acre project site is currently designated Unique Farmland by the California
Department of Conservation (DOC). The construction and operation of the proposed project would
result in a permanent loss of approximately 34.80 acres of DOC designated Unique Farmland. It
should be noted that prior to construction of the CCRC, the existing commercial nursery and
distribution center would be relocated to Ventura County. In addition, the nursery operator is
expanding one of its existing facilities in San Diego County. Overall, the relocation and expansion
will total 50 acres and will represent a net increase of 15 acres of nursery operations within the State.
Nursery facilities over 10 acres are designated as Unique Farmland by the DOC. Therefore, the
economic value of the nursery would not be a loss to the State since the commercial nursery would
continue to operate at another location in the State and expand existing operations at a second
location. The continued, relocated nursery production within the State will reduce the potential
impacts related to the conversion of the Unique Farmland to a nonagricultural use.
To assess potential agricultural resource impacts that may result from development of the proposed
project, the Land Evaluation and Site Assessment(LESA) Model was run for the project site (refer to
the DEIR, Appendix B). A single LESA score is generated for a given project after all of the
individual Land Evaluation (LE) and Site Assessment (SA) factors have been scored and weighted.
The project site attained a score of 63.45. While a score of 63.45 would be considered significant
according to the LESA Model's Significance Determination Thresholds, the project site's SA
subscore of 18.75 is less than 20 points. Therefore, pursuant to the LESA Model, the proposed
conversion of the site from agriculture to non-agricultural use would not be considered significant.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 9
Although the project's impacts to agricultural resources are less than significant per analysis using the
LESA Model, the City does require the Applicant to pay an agricultural impact fee,which is intended
to implement the goals for open space and agriculture established in the General Plan. Payment of this
fee as required in Standard Condition 4.2.1 would further reduce potential impacts related to
conversion of the Unique Farmland to a nonagricultural use, and no mitigation is required.
Standard Condition 4.2.1: Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the Applicant shall
provide proof to the Community Development Director that
payment of fees to the City of San Juan Capistrano's (City)
Agricultural Preservation Fund have been made in accordance
with City Ordinance Number 316.
Impact: Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract. The
project site is not covered under a Williamson Act contract; therefore, the proposed project would not
conflict with any Williamson Act contract.
Development of the proposed project would require a General Plan Amendment(GPA)to change the
land use designation of the project site from Agri-Business to Specific Plan/Precise Plan (SP/PP).
Development of the proposed project would also require a Rezone Amendment to rezone the project
site from an Agri-Business District to a SP/PP District. Once adopted, the Spieker CCRC Specific
Plan would be the guiding land use document for the project site. Therefore, with project approval
and adoption of the Spieker CCRC Specific Plan, the proposed project would not conflict with
agricultural zoning designations, and no mitigation is required.
Impact: Impact: Result in a cumulative Agriculture and Forestry Resources impact. The loss of
approximately 34.80 acres of Unique Farmland represents approximately 0.8 percent of the total
Unique Farmland inventoried in the County (4,209 acres) in 2008. The loss would be permanent and
would contribute to an overall loss of agricultural resources in the County; however, the economic
value of the crops would not be a loss to the State since the nursery operations are being relocated and
expanded in other locations within the State. Further, the LESA Model analysis conducted for the
proposed project concluded that the loss of agriculture uses would be less than significant. For these
reasons, the proposed project's contribution to the loss of agricultural resources is considered less
than cumulatively significant, and no mitigation is required.
Air Quality.
Impact: Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. The
proposed project's emissions would be below the emissions thresholds established in the South Coast
Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD) CEQA Handbook. Therefore, the project would not
conflict with the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), and no significant impact would result with
respect to implementation of the AQMP. Furthermore, the proposed project would be consistent with
all applicable goals and policies established in the City's General Plan Conservation and Open Space
Element (1999) related to air quality. In addition, with implementation of Standard Conditions 4.3.1
and 4.3.2, requiring adherence to standard SCAQMD Rule 403 and dust suppression requirements
related to fugitive dust, project impacts related to fugitive dust during project construction would be
reduced to a less than significant level.No mitigation is required.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 10
Standard Condition 4.3.1: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)
Rule 403 Measures. The proposed project would be required to
implement the following SCAQMD measures:
• Nontoxic chemical soil stabilizers shall be applied to all
inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive
for 10 days or more) according to manufacturer's
specifications.
• Active sites shall be watered at least twice daily (locations
where grading is to occur will be thoroughly watered prior to
earthmoving).
• All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are
to be covered or should maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard
in accordance with the requirements of California Vehicle
Code (CVC) Section 23114 (freeboard means vertical space
between the top of the load and the top of the trailer).
• Construction access roads shall be paved at least 100 feet
onto the site from the main road.
• Traffic speeds on all unpaved roads shall be reduced to 15
miles per hour(mph) or less.
Standard Condition 4.3.2: The proposed project would be required to implement the
following SCAQMD measures:
a. Dust suppression measures:
• Disturbed areas shall be revegetated as quickly as
possible.
• All excavating and grading operations shall be
suspended when wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts)
exceed 25 mph.
• All streets shall be swept once per day if visible soil
materials are carried to adjacent streets (water sweepers
with reclaimed water are recommended).
• A wheel shaker/wheel spreading device consisting of
raised dividers (rails,pipe, or grates) at least 24 feet long
and 10 feet shall be utilized where vehicles enter and
exit unpaved roads onto paved roads.
• All on-site roads shall be paved as soon as feasible,
watered periodically, or chemically stabilized.
• The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earthmoving, or
excavation operations shall be minimized at all times.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 11
b. The construction contractor shall select the construction
equipment used on site based on low-emission factors and
high energy efficiency. The construction contractor shall
ensure that construction grading plans include a statement
that all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained
in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications.
c. The construction contractor shall utilize electric or diesel-
powered equipment in lieu of gasoline-powered engines
where feasible.
d. The construction contractor shall ensure that construction
grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut
off equipment when not in use. During smog season (May
through October), the overall length of the construction
period will be extended, thereby decreasing the size of the
area prepared each day to minimize vehicles and equipment
operating at the same time.
e. The construction contractor shall time the construction
activities so as to not interfere with peak-hour traffic and
minimize obstruction of through traffic lanes adjacent to the
site; if necessary, a flagperson shall be retained to maintain
safety adjacent to existing roadways.
f. The construction contractor shall support and encourage
ridesharing and transit incentives for the construction crew.
g. Compliance with SCAQMD Rule 1113 on the use of
architectural coatings should be ensured. Emissions
associated with architectural coatings would be reduced by
complying with these rules and regulations, which include
using pre-coated/natural-colored building materials and
using water-based or low-volatile organic compound (VOC)
coating.
Impact: Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality
violation.
Construction Emissions. Construction emissions associated with the proposed project would not
exceed the SCAQMD daily emissions thresholds (refer to the DEIR, Appendix Q. However, in
order to ensure that impacts related to fugitive dust remain less than significant,the project would
comply with Standard Conditions 4.3.1 and 4.3.2, during construction.No mitigation is required.
Operation Emissions. The proposed project's emissions (from both stationary sources and
vehicular sources) would not exceed the SCAQMD daily emissions thresholds. Therefore, the
long-term air quality impacts of the proposed project would be less than significant. No
mitigation is required.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 12
Long-Term Microscale (CO Hot-Spot) Analysis. Given the extremely low level of carbon
monoxide (CO) concentrations in the project area, project-related vehicles are not expected to
result in the CO concentrations exceeding the State or federal CO standards. Because no CO hot
spot would occur, there would be no project-related impacts related to CO concentrations, and no
mitigation is required.
Standard Condition 4.3.1: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule
403 Measures. The proposed project would be required to
implement the following SCAQMD measures:
• Nontoxic chemical soil stabilizers shall be applied to all
inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive
for 10 days or more) according to manufacturer's
specifications.
• Active sites shall be watered at least twice daily (locations
where grading is to occur will be thoroughly watered prior to
earthmoving).
• All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are
to be covered or should maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard
in accordance with the requirements of California Vehicle
Code (CVC) Section 23114 (freeboard means vertical space
between the top of the load and the top of the trailer).
• Construction access roads shall be paved at least 100 feet
onto the site from the main road.
• Traffic speeds on all unpaved roads shall be reduced to 15
miles per hour(mph) or less.
Standard Condition 4.3.2: The proposed project would be required to implement the
following SCAQMD measures:
a. Dust suppression measures:
• Disturbed areas shall be revegetated as quickly as
possible.
• All excavating and grading operations shall be
suspended when wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts)
exceed 25 mph.
• All streets shall be swept once per day if visible soil
materials are carried to adjacent streets (water sweepers
with reclaimed water are recommended).
• A wheel shaker/wheel spreading device consisting of
raised dividers (rails,pipe, or grates) at least 24 feet long
and 10 feet shall be utilized where vehicles enter and
exit unpaved roads onto paved roads.
• All on-site roads shall be paved as soon as feasible,
watered periodically, or chemically stabilized.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 13
• The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earthmoving, or
excavation operations shall be minimized at all times.
b. The construction contractor shall select the construction
equipment used on site based on low-emission factors and
high energy efficiency. The construction contractor shall
ensure that construction grading plans include a statement
that all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained
in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications.
c. The construction contractor shall utilize electric or diesel-
powered equipment in lieu of gasoline-powered engines
where feasible.
d. The construction contractor shall ensure that construction
grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut
off equipment when not in use. During smog season (May
through October), the overall length of the construction
period will be extended, thereby decreasing the size of the
area prepared each day to minimize vehicles and equipment
operating at the same time.
e. The construction contractor shall time the construction
activities so as to not interfere with peak-hour traffic and
minimize obstruction of through traffic lanes adjacent to the
site; if necessary, a flagperson shall be retained to maintain
safety adjacent to existing roadways.
£ The construction contractor shall support and encourage
ridesharing and transit incentives for the construction crew.
g. Compliance with SCAQMD Rule 1113 on the use of
architectural coatings should be ensured. Emissions
associated with architectural coatings would be reduced by
complying with these rules and regulations, which include
using pre-coated/natural-colored building materials and
using water-based or low-volatile organic compound (VOC)
coating.
Impact: Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors). Nitrogen oxide (NOx) and volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions generated
during all construction phases would be below the established SCAQMD threshold of 100 pounds per
day (lbs/day) and 14 lbs/day, respectively. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in
significant short-term air quality impacts during construction due to exceedances of the NOx and
VOC thresholds.
Operation of the proposed project would not exceed the SCAQMD thresholds for NOx.
Consequently, the proposed project has been determined to be consistent with the AQMP. Therefore,
project-related long-term air quality impacts related to ozone precursors (NOx) would be less than
significant, and no mitigation is required.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 14
Impact: Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. The closest sensitive
receptors to the project site are existing residential uses located north of and adjacent to the project
site but approximately 150 feet from the project's construction areas. Emissions of pollutants on the
peak day of project construction would result in concentrations of pollutants at these nearest
residences that are below the SCAQMD thresholds of significance. Therefore, construction impacts
related to the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations would be less
than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Fugitive dust emissions would occur during construction of the proposed project as a result of
demolition, grading, and exposure of soils to the air and wind. Fugitive dust emissions would be 10.2
lbs/day for particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter (PMIo) and 6.8 lbs/day for particulate
matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5). These emissions would be below the SCAQMD's
thresholds of 11.7 lbs/day for PM2.5 and 71bs/day for PM2.5. Therefore,the project construction would
result in less than significant air quality impacts related to CO and NOx emissions, and no mitigation
is required. To further reduce fugitive dust emissions, the proposed project would be required to
comply with SCAQMD Standard Conditions and Rule 403, as specified in Standard Conditions 4.3.1
and 4.3.2.
Long-term operational criteria pollutant emission impacts are those associated with stationary and
mobile sources. The maximum emissions from project construction would not cause or contribute to
an exceedance of applicable federal or State ambient air quality standards (AAQS). Therefore, the
long-term operation of the project would result in less than significant air quality impacts related to
CO,NOx, or other criteria pollutants and would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations, and no mitigation is required.
Impact: Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. Some
objectionable odors may emanate from the operation of construction equipment during construction
of the proposed project. These odors, however,would be limited to the short-term construction period
of the project and are not expected to be substantial; therefore, objectionable odors associated with
the proposed project would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
The proposed project includes development of the CCRC, which would include independent living
units and an associated Health Care Center. These uses are not anticipated to emit any objectionable
odors. Therefore, objectionable odors posing a health risk to potential on-site and existing off-site
uses would not occur as a result of the proposed project, and no mitigation is required.
Impact: Result in a cumulative air quality impact. The cumulative study area for air quality
analysis is the South Coast Air Basin (Basin), and air quality conformance is overseen by the
SCAQMD. Each project in the Basin is required to comply with SCAQMD rules and regulations and
is subject to independent review by the City. The proposed project would not result in significant
operational air quality impacts, contribute to an ozone exceedance at a nearby monitoring station,
cause the area to be in noncompliance with the AQMP, or result in a significant health risk for any of
the analyzed pollutants. Although emissions during construction of the proposed project would not
exceed the SCAQMD emission thresholds for any criteria pollutants, project construction has the
potential to contribute to short-term air quality impacts. However, with implementation of Standard
Conditions 4.3.1 and 4.3.2, short-term air quality impacts would be reduced to a less than significant
level. Therefore, the contribution of the proposed project to potential cumulative air quality impacts
in the City is considered less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 15
Standard Condition 4.3.1: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule
403 Measures. The proposed project would be required to
implement the following SCAQMD measures:
• Nontoxic chemical soil stabilizers shall be applied to all
inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive
for 10 days or more) according to manufacturer's
specifications.
• Active sites shall be watered at least twice daily (locations
where grading is to occur will be thoroughly watered prior to
earthmoving).
• All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are
to be covered or should maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard
in accordance with the requirements of California Vehicle
Code (CVC) Section 23114 (freeboard means vertical space
between the top of the load and the top of the trailer).
• Construction access roads shall be paved at least 100 feet
onto the site from the main road.
• Traffic speeds on all unpaved roads shall be reduced to 15
miles per hour(mph) or less.
Standard Condition 4.3.2: The proposed project would be required to implement the
following SCAQMD measures:
a. Dust suppression measures:
• Disturbed areas shall be revegetated as quickly as
possible.
• All excavating and grading operations shall be
suspended when wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts)
exceed 25 mph.
• All streets shall be swept once per day if visible soil
materials are carried to adjacent streets (water sweepers
with reclaimed water are recommended).
• A wheel shaker/wheel spreading device consisting of
raised dividers (rails,pipe, or grates) at least 24 feet long
and 10 feet shall be utilized where vehicles enter and
exit unpaved roads onto paved roads.
• All on-site roads shall be paved as soon as feasible,
watered periodically, or chemically stabilized.
• The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earthmoving, or
excavation operations shall be minimized at all times.
b. The construction contractor shall select the construction
equipment used on site based on low-emission factors and
high energy efficiency. The construction contractor shall
ensure that construction grading plans include a statement
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 16
that all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained
in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications.
c. The construction contractor shall utilize electric or diesel-
powered equipment in lieu of gasoline-powered engines
where feasible.
d. The construction contractor shall ensure that construction
grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut
off equipment when not in use. During smog season (May
through October), the overall length of the construction
period will be extended, thereby decreasing the size of the
area prepared each day to minimize vehicles and equipment
operating at the same time.
e. The construction contractor shall time the construction
activities so as to not interfere with peak-hour traffic and
minimize obstruction of through traffic lanes adjacent to the
site; if necessary, a flagperson shall be retained to maintain
safety adjacent to existing roadways.
f. The construction contractor shall support and encourage
ridesharing and transit incentives for the construction crew.
g. Compliance with SCAQMD Rule 1113 on the use of architectural
coatings should be ensured. Emissions associated with
architectural coatings would be reduced by complying with these
rules and regulations, which include using pre-coated/natural-
colored building materials and using water-based or low-volatile
organic compound(VOC)coating.
Biological Resources.
Impact: Result in a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community. The project site does not contain any riparian habitat or sensitive natural communities
identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife (CDFW) or the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). The man-made
drainage channels located on the project site do not support riparian or wetland habitat, nor do they
appear to support fish or other aquatic-dependent animal species. Therefore, it is unlikely that CDFW
would consider the artificial drainage channels or water storage basins subject to CDFW jurisdiction,
pursuant to Section 1600 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code. However, CDFW reserves the
right to make the final determination regarding their jurisdiction. Therefore, the proposed project
would not have a significant impact on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community, and
no mitigation is required.
Impact: Result in a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands. The project site is
entirely developed and lacks any natural streams or riparian habitat. Given the purpose of the existing
on-site man-made drainage channel systems and water storage basins, these would not be considered
jurisdictional waters of the United States per 33 Code of Federal Regulations(CFR) 328.3. Therefore,
the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)would not regulate these drainage channels and
water storage basins per Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). However, USACE reserves the
right to assert jurisdiction over the drainage channels and water storage basins. Therefore, the
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 17
proposed project would not result in a significant impact on federally protected wetlands, and no
mitigation is required.
Impact: Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources.
Construction of the proposed project would result in the removal of existing trees, including
nonnative Peruvian pepper trees, as well as other ornamental trees on the project site. Given that the
proposed project would apply for a tree removal permit as part of the legislative actions to be
considered by the City, development of the proposed project would not conflict with the City's tree
preservation policy, as specified in the City's Municipal Code (Section 9-2.349(c)1, Tree Removal
Permit). Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, and no mitigation is required.
Impact: Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation
plan. The project site is located in an area identified as "developed" and is outside of the designated
habitat reserve within the Central and Coastal region of the Orange County Natural Community
Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP). Therefore, development of the proposed
project would not result in the removal of any sensitive habitat species identified in the Orange
County NCCP/HCP, would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted NNCP/HCP, and no
mitigation is required.
Impact: Result in a cumulative biological resources impact. There are no natural plant
communities within the project site and the proposed project would not contribute to the loss of
natural habitat in the City. Although the project site is located in the Central and Coastal region of the
Orange County NCCP/HCP, it is located in an area identified as "developed" and is outside of the
designated habitat reserve. In addition, development of the proposed project would not result in the
removal of any sensitive habitat species identified in the Orange County NCCP/HCP. Therefore, the
contribution of the proposed project to potential cumulative biological resource impacts in the City is
considered less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Geology and Soils.
Impact: 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, or based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault (refer to DM&G Pub.42). The project site is not located within a
currently designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The closest mapped active faults to
the project site are the Newport-Inglewood and San Joaquin Hills faults,which are approximately
4.7 miles south and 7.8 miles west of the site, respectively. Therefore, the project site is not
anticipated to be at risk of a rupture of a known earthquake fault, and no mitigation is required.
Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. Although the project site is within a
State of California Hazard Zone for Liquefaction, the liquefaction analysis performed for the
project site indicated that only very discrete, thin layers of soils would be subject to liquefaction
(refer to the DEIR, Appendix F). Further, dry soil settlements and liquefaction are anticipated to
result in seismic settlements of less than 0.5 inch. Therefore, liquefaction and liquefaction-related
hazards are not of concern on the project site. Furthermore,because of the lack of groundwater on
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 18
the project site, the project site is not anticipated to be at risk of lateral spreading, and no
mitigation is required.
Landslides. The project site is relatively flat. There are no landslides on the project site and no
known landslides extend onto the project site. In addition, the project site is not located in a zone
susceptible to seismic-induced landslides. Therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to be
at risk of landslides, and no mitigation is required.
Impact: 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.
Landslides. The project site is relatively flat. There are no landslides on the project site, and no
known landslides extend onto the project site. In addition, the project site is not located in a zone
susceptible to seismic-induced landslides. Therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to be
at risk of landslides, and no mitigation is required.
Lateral Spreading and Liquefaction. Although the project site is within a State of California
Hazard Zone for Liquefaction, the liquefaction analysis performed for the project site indicated
that only very discrete, thin layers of soils would be subject to liquefaction (refer to the DEIR,
Appendix F). Further, dry soil settlements and liquefaction are anticipated to result in seismic
settlements of less than 0.5 inch. Therefore, liquefaction and liquefaction-related hazards are not
of concern on the project site. Furthermore, because of the lack of groundwater on the project
site, the project site is not anticipated to be at risk of lateral spreading, and no mitigation is
required.
Subsidence. No pumping of petroleum reserves or groundwater would occur as a result of the
proposed project. As such, subsidence is not expected to occur on the project site or to affect
development of the proposed project, and no mitigation is required.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions.
Impact: Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment.During construction of the proposed project,greenhouse gas
emissions (GHGs) would be emitted through the operation of construction equipment and from
worker and vendor vehicles, each of which typically use fossil-based fuels to operate. The potential
total construction GHG emissions for the multiyear process would be 3,680 metric tons (MT) of
carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e). The peak COZe emissions associated with construction equipment
exhaust for the proposed project would be highest during the building construction phase.
Construction emissions are typically amortized over 30 years when considering their contribution to
global climate change(GCC); therefore, impacts are assessed as part of the long-term operation of the
project.
Long-term operation of the proposed project would generate GHG emissions from area and mobile
sources and indirect emissions from stationary sources associated with energy consumption. Mobile-
source emissions of GHGs would include project-generated vehicle trips associated with on-site
facilities and visitors/deliveries to the project site. Area-source emissions would be associated with
activities such as landscaping and maintenance of proposed land uses, natural gas for heating, and
other sources. Increases in stationary-source emissions would also occur at off-site utility providers as
a result of demand for electricity,natural gas, and water by the proposed uses.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 19
With implementation of the proposed Conservation and Sustainability Features, the proposed project
would produce 3,900 MT of CO2e/yr, which is 0.0039 million metric tons (MMT) of CO2e/yr. The
total GHG emissions would be below the service population thresholds as allowed under Tier 4
analysis (4.8 MT of CO2e/yr per service population). The service population for the proposed project
would be the combination of 749 residents and 250 workers; thus, the threshold is 999 * 4.8 =4,795
MT of CO2e/yr. As a comparison, the existing emissions from the entire Southern California
Association of Governments (SCAG) region are estimated to be approximately 176.79 MMT of
CO2e/yr and approximately 496.95 MMT of CO2e/yr for the entire State. Given that the project's
GHG emissions rate is below the service population threshold of 4,795 MT of CO2e/yr, it is unlikely
that this emissions level would have a significant impact on the environment, and no mitigation is
required.
Impact: Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. The total GHG emissions of 0.0039 MMT of CO2e/yr
from the proposed project are not likely to result in GHG emission levels that would substantially
conflict with implementation of the GHG reduction goals under Assembly Bill(AB) 32 or other State
regulations. Furthermore, the proposed project would implement Conservation and Sustainability
Features that would be consistent with the City's General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element
goal of improving air quality (Goal 6). Impacts are considered less than significant, and no mitigation
is required.
Impact: Result in a cumulative greenhouse gas emissions impact. A project's GHG emissions and
the resulting significance of potential impacts are more properly assessed on a cumulative basis.
Thus, the project-specific analysis conducted in Thresholds 4.7.1 and 4.7.2 is essentially already a
cumulative analysis because it takes into consideration statewide GHG reduction targets and
demonstrates that the proposed project would be consistent with those targets.
Depending on construction schedules and actual implementation of projects in the area, generation of
fugitive dust and pollutant emissions during construction could result in substantial short-term
increases in air pollutants. However, each project would be required to comply with the SCAQMD's
standard construction measures. Therefore, because the proposed project's short-term construction
emissions would not exceed the significance thresholds, the proposed project would not result in a
significant short-term cumulative impact on GCC.
Additionally, the proposed project's long-term operational emissions would not exceed the
SCAQMD's thresholds. The proposed project would result in a GHG emission profile that is lower
than the service population thresholds as allowed under Tier 4 analysis (4.8 MT of CO2e/yr per
service population). Additionally, since climate change is a global issue, it is unlikely that the
proposed project would generate enough GHG emissions to influence GCC on its own. Because the
proposed project would be consistent with the SCAQMD's thresholds and because the project's
impacts alone would not cause or significantly contribute to GCC,project-related CO2e emissions and
their contribution to GCC impacts in the State of California would not make a significant contribution
to cumulatively considerable GHG emission impacts. Therefore, the contribution of the proposed
project to potential cumulative GHG emission impacts in the City is considered less than
cumulatively significant, and no mitigation is required.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 20
Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
Impact: Result in a cumulative hazard and hazardous materials impact. The cumulative
contribution of hazardous materials use and hazardous waste disposal with implementation of the
project is minimal, and combined hazardous materials effects from past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable projects within the County and the City would not be significant.As previously stated,the
proposed project would involve the use of potentially hazardous materials (e.g., solvents, cleaning
agents, paints, pesticides, and diesel and petroleum fuels), but these products would be used in small
amounts and any spills that do occur would be cleaned up when they occur. Proper and routine use of
these products would not result in a significant hazard to residents or workers in the vicinity of the
proposed project. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in an incremental
contribution to cumulative impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials that are cumulatively
considerable; therefore, cumulative hazards and hazardous materials impacts are considered less than
cumulatively significant, and no mitigation is required.
Hydrology and Water Quality.
Impact: Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge.
Due to the depth to groundwater (30 to 40 feet below ground surface), it is not anticipated that the
groundwater table would be encountered during excavation (refer to the DEIR, Appendix H).
However, perched groundwater may be encountered in localized areas during excavation and may
require dewatering. In addition, grading and construction activities would compact soil, and
construction of structures would increase impervious area, which can decrease infiltration during
construction. However, construction of the proposed project would be temporary and would not
substantially deplete groundwater or interfere with groundwater recharge. Construction activities
related to groundwater supplies would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Operation of the proposed project would not require groundwater extraction. As discussed previously,
the proposed project would increase impervious surface area, which would reduce infiltration.
However, the project includes infiltration best management practices (BMPs); therefore, any
reduction in infiltration would not be substantial. Operational impacts related to groundwater supplies
would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Impact: Result in a cumulative hydrology and water quality impact. Each of the cumulative
projects, individually and cumulatively, could potentially increase the volume of storm water runoff
and contribute to pollutant loading in storm water runoff reaching both the City's storm drain system
and San Juan Creek, resulting in cumulative impacts to hydrology and surface water quality.
However, as with the proposed project, each of the cumulative projects would also be subject to
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and Municipal Separate Storm Sewer
System (MS4) Permit requirements for both construction and operation. Each project would be
required to develop a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan(SWPPP), a Water Quality Management
Plan (WQMP), and a hydrology study and would be evaluated individually to determine appropriate
BMPs and hydromodification controls to minimize water quality and hydrologic impacts. In addition,
the City Department of Engineering reviews all development projects, including the proposed project,
on a case-by-case basis to ensure that sufficient local and regional drainage capacity is available.
Implementation of the proposed project would not result in an incremental contribution to cumulative
hydrology or water quality impacts; therefore, cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts are
considered less than cumulatively significant, and no mitigation is required.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 21
Land Use.
Impact: Physically divide an established community. The proposed project would replace the
existing on-site active commercial nursery and distribution center with residential uses that would be
consistent with land uses adjacent to and in the vicinity of the project site. Because the proposed
project would not develop the project site with land uses inconsistent with the surrounding area, no
established communities would be physically divided, and no mitigation is required.
Impact: Conflict with any applicable land use plan,policy, or regulation adopted for purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an environmental impact.
General Plan Consistency: As part of the proposed project, the existing Agri-Business land use
designation would be changed to SP/PP through the approval of a GPA. Approval of the GPA
would ensure that the Spieker CCRC Specific Plan (included as DEIR Appendix I) would be the
guiding land use policy document for the project site and would mitigate any potential
inconsistencies between the proposed project and the City's General Plan. Impacts are, therefore,
considered less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
City Zoning Code: The proposed project would be consistent with all applicable policies in the
City's General Plan,with the exception of the City's goal aimed at preserving unique agricultural
land. However, the LESA Model prepared for the proposed project determined that the proposed
conversion of the site from agriculture to non-agricultural use would not be considered
significant. Approval of the proposed project would ensure that the Spieker CCRC Specific Plan
would be the guiding land use policy document for the project site and would mitigate any
potential inconsistencies between the proposed project and the City's Zoning Code. Impacts are,
therefore, considered less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
SCAG RCP: SCAG Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP) policies encourage job and housing
opportunities to be balanced at the County or subregional level. SCAG policies also encourage
growth to be concentrated near transit services, transit nodes, existing freeways, high-occupancy
vehicle (HOV) lanes, and toll roads. The proposed project would be located immediately adjacent
to Del Obispo Street, a designated secondary arterial in the City's General Plan Circulation
Element, which connects to Ortega Highway (State Route 74 [SR-74]) and Interstate 5 (1-5)just
north of the project site. Therefore,the proposed project would be consistent with SCAG policies
to encourage growth near existing freeways. Furthermore, the proposed project would include an
on-site Health Care Center and CCRC services that would provide on-site employment
opportunities in the medical/nursing field, as well as employment for on-site cooks, maintenance
personnel, and healthcare providers. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with
SCAG policies aimed at encouraging job opportunities, and no mitigation is required.
Impact: Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan (HCP) or natural community
conservation plan (NCCP). The project site is located the Central and Coastal region of the Orange
County NCCP/HCP, but is located in an area identified as "developed" and is outside of the
designated habitat reserve. As discussed in Section 4.4, Biological Resources, development of the
proposed project would not result in the removal of any sensitive habitat species identified in the
Orange County NCCP/HCP. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with any applicable
NCCP/HCP, and no mitigation is required.
Impact: Result in a cumulative land use impact. The project site is designated Agri-Business (A)
on both the City's General Plan and Zoning Map. Therefore, the proposed project would require both
a GPA and a Rezone Amendment to change the General Plan land use to SP/PP and change the
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 22
zoning for the project site to SP/PP District. With approval of the proposed project, the requested
GPA, the Rezone Amendment, and adoption of the CCRC Specific Plan, the proposed project would
be consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, and cumulative land use impacts
would be considered less than significant.
The proposed project would include land uses that are consistent with the surrounding neighborhoods
and, therefore, would not contribute to a pattern of development that adversely impacts adjacent land
uses or conflicts with existing or planned development. Proposed on-site improvements would be
consistent with the long-range planning goals of the governing plans and policies for the surrounding
area.
There are no incompatibilities between the proposed project and planned future projects in the City,
which primarily include residential and commercial developments. Therefore, the proposed project
would not contribute to a significant cumulative land use compatibility impact in the study area, and
no mitigation is required.
Noise.
Impact: Expose persons to or generate excess groundborne vibration or groundborne noise.
Receptors at 100 feet and 200 feet from the construction activity may be exposed to groundborne
vibration up to 86 vibration velocity decibels (VdB) and 80 VdB,respectively. Although this range of
groundborne vibration levels would result in potential annoyance at the nearest residences
approximately 150 feet from the project site, it would not cause any damage to buildings, and no
mitigation is required.
Impact: Result in a cumulative noise impact. An increase of 3 A-weighted decibels (dBA)
Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) at any roadway location is considered a significant
impact. Project-related traffic would have mostly small (0.6 dBA or less) noise level increases along
roadway segments in the project vicinity for the existing and cumulative buildout year scenarios.
Therefore, because none of the roadway segments in the vicinity of the project site are expected to
experience a noise level increase greater than 3 dBA CNEL, the contribution of the proposed project
to potential cumulative noise impacts in the City is considered less than cumulatively significant, and
no mitigation is required.
Population,Housing, and Employment.
Impact: Induce substantial population growth. The population increase associated with the
proposed project(749 persons)would be within SCAG's projected population growth forecast,would
not exceed the City's Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) target residential housing units
between 2014 and 2021, and would introduce employment opportunities in the City or the County.
Therefore, any impact to population, housing, and employment growth in the City would be less than
significant, and no mitigation is required.
Impact: Result in a cumulative population and housing impact. The proposed project, in
combination with approved and pending cumulative projects, could result in a total population
increase of 3,821 persons,which is only 1 percent over the projected 2008-2020 SCAG estimates and
not considered to be cumulatively significant. Therefore, the contribution of the proposed project to
potential cumulative population growth within with City is considered less than cumulatively
significant, and no mitigation is required.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 23
Public Services and Utilities.
Impact: 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. The City contracts with the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) for fire protection
services. The proposed project would not result in an adverse impact to the OCFA's response times.
According to the OCFA, fire protection services for the existing area are adequate for the proposed
project. Compliance with Standard Condition 4.13.1 (Secured Fire Protection Agreement) would
ensure that the proposed project would be serviceable within OCFA's current staffing and resources,
and would not create a substantial increase in demand for staff, equipment, or other emergency
activities. As part of this approval, the project Applicant must demonstrate that the OCFA
requirement for fire hydrant flow can be met with at least 20 pounds per square inch(psi)residual on
the project site. Therefore, Standard Condition 4.13.2 requires the Applicant to perform a fire hydrant
flow test on the existing water system in the vicinity of the proposed project in order to verify
available flow and pressure in the existing system. Compliance with Standard Condition 4.13.2 will
ensure that adequate fire flow pressures are provided to the proposed project. Project impacts related
to fire protection would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Standard Condition 4.13.1: Secured Fire Protection Agreement. Prior to the issuance of
grading permits, the Applicant shall enter into a Secured Fire
Protection Agreement with the Orange County Fire Authority
(OCFA). This Agreement shall specify the developer's pro-rata
fair-share funding of capital improvements necessary to establish
adequate fire protection facilities and equipment, and/or
personnel.
Standard Condition 4.13.2: Fire Hydrant Flow Test. Prior to issuance of any grading or
construction permits, the Applicant shall perform a fire hydrant
flow test on the existing water system in the vicinity of the
proposed project in order to demonstrate that the OCFA
requirement for fire hydrant flow can be met with at least 20
pounds per square inch(psi)residual on the project site. The fire
flow results shall be incorporated into the hydraulic modeling of
the existing water system plus the proposed project's on-site
public water system. The hydraulic modeling shall be performed
in accordance with the guidelines and standards of the City's
Water Utilities Department. The Applicant shall pay the
proposed project's appropriate share of any improvements
required to provide the necessary increase of flow and pressure
to the water system so that the fire flow requirements will be
met.
Impact: 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. The City contracts with the Orange County Sheriff's Department (OCSD) for police
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 24
protection services. The proposed project would not result in an adverse impact to the OCSD's
response times. According to the OCSD, operation of the proposed project would not result in a
significant increase in demand for police services. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in
substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other
performance objectives for police protection. Thus,project impacts related to police protection would
be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Impact: 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 parks.
The increase in population associated with the proposed project would be approximately 749 persons.
Based on the City's parkland requirement of 5 acres per 1,000 residents, the proposed project would
increase the requirement for parkland in the City by 3.7 acres. However, the proposed CCRC
development is considered an Institutional use and, therefore, is not required to pay park fees
normally associated with a residential development. Although the proposed project does not have any
impacts related to recreational facilities, the project Applicant has agreed to contribute to a
community benefit program designed to implement future park or recreation improvements within the
City. Therefore, the proposed project would not require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities, and impacts on recreational facilities, would be considered less than significant. No
mitigation is required.
Impact: 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
other public facilities,including:
Public Library. The Orange County Public Library (OCPL) system provides library services to
the County, including the City of San Juan Capistrano. The San Juan Capistrano Regional Library
exceeds the OCPL standard for size and number of books with a 12,896-square-foot facility and
approximately 80,000 books. The proposed project's increase in demand for library services is
incremental and would not substantially impact library services. Therefore, the proposed project
would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or
physically altered governmental facilities in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response
times, or other performance objectives for public libraries. Project impacts related to public
libraries would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Public Transportation. Public transportation is provided within the project vicinity by the
Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). Existing routes (Routes 91 and 191) in the
vicinity of the project site are operating within capacity; additional ridership is not anticipated to
significantly increase as a result of the proposed project, and residents would also have access to
a private shuttle service. The proposed project would not result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of or need for new or physically altered governmental
facilities in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance
objectives for public transportation, and no mitigation is required.
Telephone. Telephone service is primarily provided to the project site and surrounding areas by
AT&T. Based on the existing demand and current capacity,the proposed project would not create
an adverse impact on existing telephone service, and AT&T would be able to provide adequate
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 25
service to the proposed project. Therefore,the proposed project would not have an adverse impact
on telephone services, and no mitigation is required.
Cable. Cable television service is primarily provided to the project site and surrounding areas by
Cox Communications. Based on the existing demand and current capacity, the proposed project
would not create an adverse impact on existing cable service, and Cox Communications would be
able to provide adequate service to the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project would
not have an adverse impact on cable services, and no mitigation is required.
Electricity. The project site is within the service territory of the San Diego Gas and Electric
Company (SDG&E). The proposed project would comply with federal, State, and local statutes
and regulations related to energy efficiency, including Title 24 of the California Administrative
Code, California Building Energy Efficiency Standards, and California Green Building Standards
Code (CalGreen), through the plan check and building permit process. The proposed project
would consume a total of 5,336,785.5 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year. Therefore, the proposed
project would require an increase of approximately 1,136,785.5 kWh of electricity per year
compared to existing conditions. Based on California Energy Commission (CEC) projections for
the SDG&E service area in 2024, the maximum project-related annual consumption would
represent approximately 0.00002 percent of the forecasted net energy load. Therefore, impacts
associated with the proposed project's electricity demand would be less than significant, and no
mitigation is necessary.
Natural Gas. The Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) is the service provider for the
project site. The proposed project would generate a total natural gas demand of 2,856,916 therms
per year, which would be approximately 2,724,916 therms per year more than the natural gas
demand of the existing uses on the project site. Based on CEC projections for the SoCalGas
service area in 2022 (the latest year for which a natural gas demand forecast for the SoCalGas
service area is available), the estimated increase in natural gas demand associated with the
proposed project would represent approximately 0.00007 percent of the forecasted natural gas
demand. Therefore, impacts related to the provision of natural gas services for the proposed
project would be less than significant, and the proposed project would not require new or
physically altered transmission facilities. Similarly, no significant impacts to local regional
supplies of natural gas would occur as a result of the proposed project, and no mitigation is
required.
Impact: Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment or
collection facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects.
Proposed On-Site Sewer System. Wastewater collection for the proposed project would be
provided by the South Orange County Wastewater Authority (SOCWA), and the J.B. Latham
Plant would provide treatment of wastewater generated by the proposed project. The project
proposes the development of an on-site sewer system to collect sewer flows within the project site
in order to convey them toward the southeast entrance of the project site. This configuration
would follow the general slope of the topography and would minimize the off-site connection to a
single location at Via Positiva. The proposed on-site sewer collection system's flows, depth of
flow, and sizing would be part of the final design of the on-site improvements.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 26
Proposed Off-Site Sewer System. The off-site sewer system would need to be improved to
accommodate the additional sewage flow anticipated to be generated by the proposed project. The
proposed off-site sewer system improvement would be located in Via Positiva between the
southeast entrance to the proposed project and Alipaz Street. Project Design Feature 4.13.1 would
include the construction of a new 300-foot long 10-inch gravity sanitary sewer line parallel to the
existing line in Via Positiva from the southeast entrance of the development to the existing
18-inch gravity sewer line in Alipaz Street. The proposed 300-foot long 10-inch gravity sanitary
sewer line would only handle wastewater flows from the proposed project. Therefore,the existing
8-inch sewer line in Via Positiva would continue to provide service to the City, as it currently
does.
Wastewater. It is anticipated that wastewater generated by the proposed project would be treated
at the J.B. Latham Plant located in the City of Dana Point, which has a design capacity of
13 million gallons per day (mgd) and currently treats an average wastewater flow of 9.44 mgd.
The proposed project would represent 3.1 percent of the anticipated available daily capacity of
the J.B. Latham Plant in 2018. Therefore, the estimated wastewater flow of 111,545 gallons per
day(gpd) from the proposed project would be accommodated within the existing design capacity
of the J.B. Latham Plant. Therefore, potential project impacts related to wastewater treatment
would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. In addition, the City would require
the Applicant to pay a Sewer Connection Fee, as required in Standard Condition 4.13.4, which
would further reduce potential impacts related to wastewater treatment.
Standard Condition 4.13.4: Sewer Connection Fee. Prior to issuance of any grading
or construction permits, the City Public Works Director,
or designee, shall verify that the project Applicant has
paid the proposed project's fair share of Sewer
Connection Fees in accordance with City Resolution No.
04-11-16-05.
Project Design Feature 4.13.1: Gravity Sanitary Sewer Line. The proposed project
will construct a new 300-foot long 10-inch gravity
sanitary sewer line parallel to the existing line in Via
Positiva from the southeast entrance of the development
to the existing 18-inch gravity sewer line in Alipaz
Street.
Impact: Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements
and resources,or are new or expanded entitlements needed.
Construction. Short-term demand for water may occur during demolition, excavation, grading,
and construction activities on site. 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 system or available water supplies. Therefore, impacts associated with short-term
demolition and construction activities would not require or result in the need for new or expanded
water entitlements, and no mitigation is required.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 27
Operation.
On-Site Potable Water System. The project proposes the development of an on-site potable
water system, which would be a public system and would be constructed in compliance with
City standards. The proposed on-site potable water system would consist of three connections
to the existing 10-inch water lines. One connection would be located in Del Obispo Street,
one would be located in Via Positiva, and one would be located in a proposed water easement
from the project site to the existing 10-inch water main in Via Positiva.
Off-Site Potable Water System. As indicated in the Overview of Potable Water Service
(refer to the DEIR, Appendix H), the minimal required residual pressure during a fire flow
event would be met; therefore, the proposed project would not impact off-site potable water
systems, and no mitigation is required.
Water Supplies. As required for all new development in California, the proposed project
would 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, the proposed project would incorporate additional water conservation measures
including,but not limited to,the following:
• Energy Star dishwashers, Energy Star washers/dryers, and Energy Star refrigerators
would be installed in every dwelling apartment/villa.
• All showerheads installed would consume less than 2 gallon per minute(gpm)of water.
• The building would install high-efficiency toilets in all apartments that would use 1.28
gallons or less of water per flush.
• High-efficiency urinals with an average flush rate of 0.5 gallon or less would be installed
in common spaces.
• All water collected in the storm drain system would be filtered on site using natural and
mechanical methods. The storm drain system has been designed to ensure the City storm
drain system receives no additional impact as a result of the development of the project.
According to the Overview of Potable Water Service, the estimated total average daily
potable water demand for the proposed project was calculated using two different methods.
The first method was used to address whether the proposed project would require the
completion of a Water Supply Assessment (WSA), in accordance with Senate Bill (SB) 610.
SB 610 requires a WSA to be prepared when a proposed project is anticipated to exceed the
water demand of 500 residential dwelling units. Based on this methodology, the total average
water demand for the proposed project was calculated to be 116,775 gpd, which is less than
half of the water demand for a typical 500-dwelling-unit residential project.
The second method that was used to develop a more conservative water demand to be used
for the hydraulic analysis utilized the City's Water Master Plan Update (March 2004) water
demand factors, which calculated 2,229 gpd/acre. The total average daily potable water
demand for the proposed project based on these factors is estimated to be approximately
78,015 gpd, which would be approximately 57,505 gpd greater than the water demand of the
existing uses on the project site. Although using water demand factors provided in the City's
Water Master Plan Update resulted in a lower potable water demand for the proposed project,
in order to remain consistent with demand factors provided by the City, 78,015 gpd was the
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 28
average water demand value used in the hydraulic analysis for the proposed project.
Therefore, the proposed project would represent a small (0.89 percent) portion of the City's
projected water supply in 2020.
Therefore,with construction of the proposed on-site potable water system, impacts associated
with long-term operation of the proposed project would be less than significant, and no
mitigation is required. Further, the Applicant is required to pay a Domestic Water Fee, as
outlined in Standard Condition 4.13.3, which would further reduce potential impacts related
to water supplies.
Standard Condition 4.13.3: Domestic Water Fee. Prior to issuance of any grading
or construction permits, the City Public Works Director,
or designee, shall verify that the project Applicant has
paid the proposed project's fair share of Domestic Water
Fees in accordance with City Resolution No. 04-05-18-
04.
Impact: Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may
serve the project that has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition
to the provider's existing commitments.
Construction. No significant increase in wastewater flows is anticipated as a result of
construction activities on the project site. Sanitary services during construction would likely be
provided by portable toilet facilities, which transport waste off site for treatment and disposal.
Therefore, during construction, potential impacts to wastewater treatment and wastewater
conveyance infrastructure would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Operation.
Proposed On-Site Sewer System. Wastewater collection for the proposed project would be
provided by the SOCWA, and the J.B. Latham Plant would provide treatment of wastewater
generated by the proposed project. The project proposes the development of an on-site sewer
system to collect sewer flows within the project site in order to convey them toward the
southeast entrance of the project site. This configuration would follow the general slope of
the topography and would minimize the off-site connection to a single location at Via
Positiva. The proposed on-site sewer collection system's flows, depth of flow, and sizing
would be part of the final design of the on-site improvements.
Proposed Off-Site Sewer System. The off-site sewer system would need to be improved to
accommodate the additional sewage flow anticipated to be generated by the proposed project.
The proposed off-site sewer system improvement would be located in Via Positiva between
the southeast entrance to the proposed project and Alipaz Street. Project Design Feature
4.13.1 would include the construction of a new 300-foot long 10-inch gravity sanitary sewer
line parallel to the existing line in Via Positiva from the southeast entrance of the
development to the existing 18-inch gravity sewer line in Alipaz Street. The proposed 300-
foot long 10-inch gravity sanitary sewer line would only handle wastewater flows from the
proposed project. Therefore, the existing 8-inch sewer line in Via Positiva would continue to
provide service to the City, as it currently does.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 29
Wastewater. It is anticipated that wastewater generated by the proposed project would be
treated at the J.B. Latham Plant located in the City of Dana Point, which has a design
capacity of 13 mgd and currently treats an average wastewater flow of 9.44 mgd. The
proposed project would represent 3.1 percent of the anticipated available daily capacity of the
J.B. Latham Plant in 2018. Therefore, the estimated wastewater flow of 111,545 gallons per
day (gpd) from the proposed project would be accommodated within the existing design
capacity of the J.B. Latham Plant. Therefore, potential project impacts related to wastewater
treatment would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. In addition, the City
would require the Applicant to pay a Sewer Connection Fee, as required in Standard
Condition 4.13.4, which would further reduce potential impacts related to wastewater
treatment.
Standard Condition 4.13.4: Sewer Connection Fee. Prior to issuance of any grading
or construction permits, the City Public Works Director,
or designee, shall verify that the project Applicant has
paid the proposed project's fair share of Sewer
Connection Fees in accordance with City Resolution No.
04-11-16-05.
Project Design Feature 4.13.1: Gravity Sanitary Sewer Line. The proposed project
will construct a new 300-foot long 10-inch gravity
sanitary sewer line parallel to the existing line in Via
Positiva from the southeast entrance of the development
to the existing 18-inch gravity sewer line in Alipaz
Street.
Impact: Be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the
project's solid waste disposal needs. The closest active Orange County Waste and Recycling
(OCW&R) landfill to the project site is the Prima Deshecha Landfill. The proposed project would
generate approximately 1.6 percent of the maximum daily permitted capacity of the Prima Deshecha
Landfill, which is a less than significant proportion of solid waste compared to the total permitted
daily capacity of the landfill. The proposed project would also include efficient waste management
procedures to reduce the amount of solid waste generated on site. Therefore, impacts related to solid
waste generation are considered less than significant,and no mitigation is required.
Impact: Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste.
The City contracts with CR&R Waste and Recycling Services (CR&R), a private solid waste hauler,
to collect and dispose of the solid waste/refuse generated by the City. It should be noted that the City
complies with all federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. The City's
Municipal Code (Section 6-3.08.01) requires all new construction to meet the State requirement
(California Integrated Water Management Act of 1989) of at least 50 percent diversion for all
construction waste. In addition, the proposed project would meet or exceed the minimum number of
green points required to become "Green Certified" per the San Juan Capistrano Green Building
Program. Therefore, impacts related to federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to
solid waste are considered less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Impact: Result in cumulative public services impacts. The proposed project would contribute to
cumulative local and regional demand for public services and utilities, including police and fire
services, schools, parks, libraries, transportation, telephone and cable service, electricity, natural gas,
wastewater, domestic water, storm water, and solid waste. For each public service and utility, the
proposed project would generate increased demand in varying amounts. However, the impacts to
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 30
public utilities and services would be incremental and within planned growth, would be less than
cumulatively significant. Therefore,no mitigation is required.
Recreation.
Impact: 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. Although an estimated increase in population of 749 persons could result in more
frequent use of existing recreational facilities in the City, the project proposes approximately 54,722
square feet of recreational facilities on the site designed for use by CCRC residents and their guests.
On-site recreational facilities would include a clubhouse, a pool, a dog park, a health and fitness
center, a putting green, a tennis court, and open space areas. Therefore, the proposed project would
not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such
that substantial physical deterioration of the facilities would occur or be accelerated, and no
mitigation is required.
Impact: Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. The increase in
population associated with the proposed project would be approximately 749 persons. Based on the
City's parkland requirement of 5 acres per 1,000 residents, the proposed project would increase the
requirement for parkland in the City by 3.7 acres. However, the proposed CCRC development is
considered an Institutional use and, therefore, is not required to pay park fees normally associated
with a residential development. Although the proposed project does not have any impacts related to
recreational facilities, the project Applicant has agreed to contribute to a community benefit program
designed to implement future park or recreation improvements within the City. Therefore, the
proposed project would not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, and
impacts on recreational facilities would be considered less than significant.No mitigation is required.
Impact: Result in cumulative recreation impacts. The Parks and Recreation Element(1999) of the
City's General Plan encourages the development and maintenance of ample park and recreational
facilities that provide a diversity of recreational activities. With the approved and reasonably
foreseeable fixture projects that add to the number of residential units in the City comes the need for
increased park and recreation facilities. The proposed project, in conjunction with the cumulative
projects in the City (listed in Chapter 4.0 of the DEIR), has the potential to increase the City's
population by approximately 3,943 persons. Using the City's parkland standard of 5 acres of
recreational space per 1,000 residents, the proposed project, in combination with the City's
cumulative residential projects, would require 19.7 additional acres of City parkland. The proposed
CCRC development would include on-site recreational facilities to meet the needs of future CCRC
residents and their guests, and is not anticipated to significantly increase the use of or need for
additional City park facilities. In addition, the proposed CCRC development is considered an
Institutional use and, therefore, is not required to pay park fees normally associated with a residential
development. However, the proposed Development Agreement includes a requirement for the
Applicant to pay fees that would be specifically reserved by the City for park or recreation
improvements.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 31
Transportation and Circulation.
Impact: 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).
Construction: Phase I Building Construction and Phase II Building Construction (both of which
include 250 workers and two trucks) would generate the most construction trips. As discussed
further in the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared for the proposed project (refer to Appendix L),
both Building Construction I and II phases would generate 6 a.m. peak-hour trips (3 inbound and
3 outbound) and 106 p.m. peak-hour trips (3 inbound and 103 outbound) in passenger car
equivalents (PCEs). Construction activity (106 trips) in the p.m. peak hour is anticipated to
generate 9 more trips than the projected typical operation(97 trips)of the proposed project. Based
on the results of the construction analysis, all study area intersections are anticipated to operate at
satisfactory Level of Service (LOS) E or better based on the intersection capacity utilization
(ICU) and the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodologies. No construction traffic impacts
would occur at any study area intersection or roadway segment.No mitigation is required.
Operation: Existing Plus Project. The proposed project would generate approximately 1,759
average daily traffic (ADT), including 89 trips (58 inbound and 31 outbound) in the a.m. peak
hour and 97 trips (38 inbound and 59 outbound) in the p.m. peak hour. All study area
intersections are anticipated to operate at satisfactory LOS based on the ICU methodology, with
the exception of the I-5 northbound ramps/Ortega Highway(LOS F in the a.m.peak hour)and the
I-5 southbound ramps/Ortega Highway (LOS F in the a.m. peak hour). However, the addition of
project-related trips would not result in an increase in the traffic delay at this intersection.
Although the project would increase the deficient ICUs at these intersections,the ICUs would not
increase by 0.01 or greater. Therefore, based on the ICU methodology, no significant project
impact would occur at any study area intersection in the existing plus project scenario, and no
mitigation is required.
All study area intersections are anticipated to operate at a satisfactory LOS based on the HCM
method,with the exception of the following:
I-5 northbound ramps/Ortega Highway(LOS F in the a.m. peak hour)
I-5 southbound ramps/Ortega Highway(LOS F in the a.m.peak hour)
Camino Capistrano/Forster Street(LOS E in the a.m.peak hour)
Although the proposed project would increase the deficient delays at these intersections, the
delays would not increase by 1 second or greater. Based on the HCM methodology,no significant
project impact would occur at any study area intersection in the existing project scenario, and no
mitigation is required.
Impact: Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by
the County congestion/management agency for designated roads or highways. Based on the
Orange County 2013 Congestion Management Program (CMP) Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA)
guidelines, the traffic analysis for a project needs to include CMP monitoring locations in the analysis
if the proposed development generates more than 2,400 ADT for projects adjacent to a CMP
Highway System (CMPHS) or more than 1,600 ADT for projects that directly access the CMPHS.
The proposed project would generate fewer than 2,400 ADT, and because the proposed project does
not directly access the CMPHS, a CMP-level analysis is not required. However, the CMP-designated
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 32
intersections at the I-5 on- and off-ramps at Ortega Highway were analyzed as part of the TIA. Based
on the results of the TIA, there would be no cumulative (or project) impacts to these intersections.
Therefore, the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts related to conflicts with
the Orange County CMP, and no mitigation is required.
Impact: Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment). The proposed project would not
include or involve sharp curves, dangerous intersections, or incompatible uses. Therefore, the
proposed project would not pose any hazards due to a design feature.
A sight distance analysis was conducted along Del Obispo Street at the proposed location of the main
project driveway (and at a future residential driveway to be aligned across the street) to ensure driver
visibility and safety. According to the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
(CAMUTCD), the stopping sight distance for a roadway with the speed limit of 40 mph is 305 feet.
The sight distance at the project driveway is approximately 760 feet in the northbound direction and
700 feet in the southbound direction. Therefore, the project driveway and the future opposing
driveway would both meet the minimum sight distance requirements specified in the CAMUTCD.
In addition to a site distance analysis, gaps in traffic on Del Obispo Street at the proposed project
driveway location were surveyed to determine whether a driver has adequate time to safely turn left
into or out of the proposed driveway on Del Obispo Street. Caltrans HDM Section 405.1 states that a
driver turning out of a site requires 7.5 seconds to complete the necessary maneuver (i.e., cross both
directions of travel)while an approaching vehicle travels at the assumed design speed(40 mph) of the
main highway. Based on the results of these surveys, there are approximately 58 gaps greater than or
equal to 7.5 seconds in the a.m. peak hour and 48 gaps greater than or equal to 7.5 seconds in the p.m.
peak hour. Therefore, there are adequate gaps to accommodate all left-turn movements (9 outbound
left turns during the a.m. peak hour and 18 outbound left turns during the p.m. peak hour) at the
project driveway. Impacts related to traffic hazards are considered less than significant, and no
mitigation is required.
Impact: Result in inadequate parking. The proposed project includes a total parking supply of 746
spaces (i.e., 723 standard parking spaces plus 23 accessible spaces). The proposed project would
provide more parking than required by the City's Zoning Code (452 total spaces), and parking
impacts are considered less than significant.No mitigation is required.
Impact: Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative
transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle routes). In addition to existing OCTA transit lines in the
project vicinity (Routes 91 and 191), the proposed project would provide an on-site shuttle service
that would transport project residents to and from the project site to nearby shopping centers,
religious institutions, and medical centers. Furthermore, the proposed project takes into account all
modes of transportation, including pedestrian circulation. The proposed project would not conflict
with any plans, ordinances, policies, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian
facilities. Impacts are less than significant,and no mitigation is required.
Impact: Result in cumulative transportation impacts.
Cumulative Plus Project. All study area intersections are forecast to operate at satisfactory LOS
during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, with the exception of Valle Road/San Juan Creek Road
(LOS F in the p.m. peak hour). Although the proposed project would increase the deficient ICUs
at this intersection, the ICUs would not increase by 0.01 or greater from existing baseline to
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 33
existing plus project conditions. Therefore,based on the ICU methodology, no significant project
or cumulative impacts would occur at any study area intersection.
All study area intersections are forecast to operate at satisfactory LOS during the a.m. and p.m.
peak hours based on the HCM methodology,with the exception of the following:
• Camino Capistrano/Forster Street(LOS F in both a.m. and p.m.peak hours)
• Valle Road/San Juan Creek Road(LOS F in the p.m.peak hour)
Although the proposed project would increase the deficient delays at these intersections, the
delays would not increase by 1.0 second or greater from existing baseline to existing plus project
conditions. Therefore, based on the HCM methodology, no significant project or cumulative
impacts would occur at any study area intersection.
An existing plus project plus cumulative Synchro operational analysis of the intersections along a
hot-spot segment of Del Obispo Street (between Plaza Drive and Alipaz Street) was conducted
for the proposed project. The results of the existing plus project plus cumulative Synchro analysis
indicate that the four closely spaced intersections along Del Obispo Street are forecast to operate
at satisfactory LOS with implementation of the proposed project.
All traffic impacts for the cumulative plus project scenario are less than significant, and no
mitigation measures are required.
Cumulative Buildout. All study area intersections are forecast to operate at satisfactory LOS
based on ICU methodology. In addition, all study area intersections are forecast to operate at
satisfactory LOS based on the HCM methodology, with the exception of Camino
Capistrano/Forster Street (LOS F in the a.m. peak hour and LOS E in the p.m. peak hour).
Although the proposed project would increase the existing deficient delay at this intersection, the
delay would not increase by 0.01 or greater from existing baseline to existing plus project
conditions. Therefore, a significant project or buildout impact would not occur at a study area
intersection based on the HCM methodology.
A cumulative buildout Synchro operational analysis of the intersections along a hot-spot segment
of Del Obispo Street (between Plaza Drive and Alipaz Street) was conducted for the proposed
project. The results of the cumulative buildout Synchro analysis indicate that the four closely
spaced intersections along Del Obispo Street are forecast to operate at satisfactory LOS with
implementation of the proposed project.
Although the project's cumulative buildout traffic impacts are less than significant, and no
mitigation is required, the City does require the Applicant to pay traffic impact fees into the
Capistrano Circulation Fee Program (CCFP), in compliance with City Resolution 02-05-21-02,
for future roadway improvements. Payment of this fee as required in Standard Condition 4.15.1
would further reduce potential cumulative traffic impacts.
Standard Condition 4.15.1 Capistrano Circulation Fee Program. Prior to issuance of any
grading or construction permits, the City Public Works Director,
or designee, shall verify that the project Applicant has paid the
proposed project's fair share of traffic impact fees into the
Capistrano Circulation Fee Program (CCFP) for future roadway
improvements, in compliance with City Resolution 02-05-21-02.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 34
C. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH WERE DETERMINED TO BE LESS THAN
SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION
The FEIR identified certain potentially significant effects that could result from the proposed project.
However, the San Juan Capistrano City Council finds for each of the significant or potentially significant
impacts identified in this section, based upon substantial evidence in the record, that changes or
alterations have been required or incorporated into the proposed project that avoid or substantially lessen
the significant effects as identified in the FEIR. As a result, adoption of the mitigation measures set forth
below would reduce the identified significant effects to a less than significant level.
Aesthetics.
Impact: Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area. Construction of the proposed project would involve lighting that could
generate light spillover in the vicinity of the project site. However, construction would occur only
during daylight hours; therefore, construction activities would not adversely impact day or nighttime
views in the area.
The proposed project would introduce new lighting to the project site from architectural exterior
lighting, parking area lighting, and interior window spillage. However, the additional light would be
similar to light associated with other adjacent buildings and, as such, would not alter the character of
the area. Furthermore, nighttime lighting associated with the proposed project would be similar to or
less than existing nighttime lighting associated with the on-site nursery facilities, where the
greenhouses are lit during the nighttime hours. In addition,the proposed buildings would include low-
reflectivity materials that would reduce nighttime glare. Although the proposed project would
incorporate a variety of design features to reduce impacts related to lighting, the proposed project
would result in a substantial amount of new nighttime light, and Mitigation Measures 4.1.1 through
4.1.3 are required. Implementation of these measures would reduce lighting impacts to a less than
significant level.
Mitigation Measure 4.1.1: Comprehensive Lighting Plan. Prior to issuance of any
building permits, the project Applicant shall prepare a
comprehensive lighting plan for review and approval by the City
of San Juan Capistrano (City) Development Services Director, or
designee. The lighting plan shall be prepared by a qualified
engineer and shall be in compliance with applicable standards of
the City General Plan Municipal Code. The lighting plan shall
address all aspects of lighting, including infrastructure, on-site
driveways, recreation, safety, signage, and promotional lighting,
if any. The lighting plan shall include the following in
conjunction with other measures, as determined by the
illumination engineer:
1. Exterior on-site lighting shall be shielded and confined
within site boundaries.
2. No direct rays or glare are permitted to shine onto public
streets or adjacent sites.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 35
3. "Walpak"type fixtures are not permitted.
4. Parking area lighting shall include zero cut-off fixtures, and
light standards shall not exceed 20 feet in height.
The site shall not be excessively illuminated based on the
illumination recommendations of the Illuminating Engineering
Society of North America, or, if in the opinion of the City
Development Services Director, or designee, the illumination
creates an unacceptable negative impact on surrounding land
uses or environmental resources. The City Development Services
Director, or designee, may order the dimming of light sources or
other remediation upon finding that the site is excessively
illuminated.
Mitigation Measure 4.1.2: Photometric Study. Prior to the issuance of any building
permits, a photometric study shall be prepared by the project
Applicant in conjunction with a final lighting plan for approval
by the City Development Services Director, or designee. The
survey shall show that lighting values are 1 footcandle or less at
all property lines.
Mitigation Measure 4.1.3: Lighting Inspection. Prior to issuance of the certificate of
occupancy or final building permits, an evening inspection shall
be conducted by the City's Development Services Department
confirm control of light and glare.
Finding: The mitigation measures are feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce potentially
significant impacts related to lighting to a less than significant level for the reasons set forth in the
FEIR.
Biological Resources.
Impact: 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 Wildlife or U.S.Fish
and Wildlife Service. Construction of the proposed project would include the removal of existing
ornamental trees on the project site, including Peruvian pepper trees (also referred to as California
pepper trees in the Tree Preservation Report, provided in the DEIR, Appendix D), Mexican fan
palms, flowering locust trees, and one white alder tree. All of the trees identified in the Biological
Resources Assessment (LSA Associates, Inc. [LSA], February 2, 2014; DEIR, Appendix D) are
nonnative ornamental species; therefore, their removal would not affect sensitive species. However,
bird species, including Allen's hummingbird, could potentially use the nonnative ornamental trees on
the project site for nesting during the likely active breeding season (February 15 through August 15)
for this species. Therefore, implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.4.1, requiring compliance with
the Migratory Bird Treaty Act(MBTA),would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 36
Mitigation Measure 4.4.1: Migratory Bird Treaty Act. If construction activities occur
during the breeding season (February 15—August 15), the
Applicant shall retain qualified biologist to conduct a nesting
bird survey within 5 days prior to commencement of
construction activities to ensure that birds are not engaged in
active nesting within 100 feet of the construction limits. If
nesting birds are discovered during preconstruction surveys, the
biologists shall identify an appropriate buffer(i.e., up to 500 feet
depending on the circumstances and specific bird species)where
no construction activities or other disturbances are allowed to
occur until after the birds have fledged from the nest. Prior to
commencement of grading activities and issuance of any
building permits, the City of San Juan Capistrano Director of
Development Services, or designee, shall verify that all project
grading and construction plans include specific documentation
regarding the requirements of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
(MBTA), that preconstruction surveys have been completed and
the results reviewed by staff, and that the appropriate buffers (if
needed) are noted on the plans and established in the field with
orange snow fencing.
Finding: The mitigation measure is feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce potentially
significant impacts related to any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species
to a less than significant level for the reasons set forth in the FEIR.
Impact: Interfere 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. Although some animal species are expected to periodically move about the
project site, the site is entirely surrounded by other development and does not function as a wildlife
movement corridor or special linkage. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the
fragmentation or isolation of wildlife habitat. However, existing landscaping could potentially
provide suitable habitat for nesting birds, including those protected by the MBTA and/or the
California Fish and Game Code. While no nesting birds were observed on site during the time of the
Biological Resources Assessment (Appendix D), the existing trees on and adjacent to the project site
could support nesting birds. Depending on when the proposed construction would take place, active
nesting birds could potentially be temporarily adversely impacted by construction activities.
Therefore, implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.4.1,requiring compliance with the MBTA,would
reduce impacts on wildlife species to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measure 4.4.1: Migratory Bird Treaty Act. If construction activities occur
during the breeding season (February 15—August 15), the
Applicant shall retain qualified biologist to conduct a nesting
bird survey within 5 days prior to commencement of
construction activities to ensure that birds are not engaged in
active nesting within 100 feet of the construction limits. If
nesting birds are discovered during preconstruction surveys, the
biologists shall identify an appropriate buffer(i.e., up to 500 feet
depending on the circumstances and specific bird species) where
no construction activities or other disturbances are allowed to
occur until after the birds have fledged from the nest. Prior to
commencement of grading activities and issuance of any
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 37
building permits, the City of San Juan Capistrano Director of
Development Services, or designee, shall verify that all project
grading and construction plans include specific documentation
regarding the requirements of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
(MBTA), that preconstruction surveys have been completed and
the results reviewed by staff, and that the appropriate buffers (if
needed) are noted on the plans and established in the field with
orange snow fencing.
Finding: The mitigation measure is feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce potentially
significant impacts related to the movement or migration of wildlife species or wildlife nursery sites
to a less than significant level for the reasons set forth in the FEIR.
Cultural and Paleontological Resources.
Impact: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to Section 15064.5 of CEQA. The records search and field search (refer to the DEIR,
Appendix E) did not identify any archaeological resources on or in the immediate vicinity of the
project site, although buried archaeological (prehistoric) materials may be present on the project site
in previously undisturbed native soils. Therefore, implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.5.1,
Archaeological Monitor and Native American Monitor, and Mitigation Measure 4.5.2,
Archaeological Monitoring Plan and Accidental Discovery, are required and would reduce impacts to
unknown archaeological resources to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measure 4.5.1: Archaeological Monitor and Native American Monitor. Prior
to issuance of grading permits, and in adherence to the
recommendations of the cultural resources survey, the Applicant
shall retain, with approval of the City of San Juan Capistrano
(City) Development Services Director, or designee, a qualified
archaeological monitor. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the
Applicant, with City approval, shall also retain a Native
American monitor to be selected by the City after consultation
with interested tribal and Native American representatives. Both
monitors shall be present on the project site during ground-
disturbing activities to monitor rough and finish grading,
excavation, and other ground-disturbing activities in the native
soils. Because no cultural resources were identified on the
project site, both monitors are not required to be present on a
full-time basis, but shall spot check ground-disturbing activities
to ensure that no cultural resources are impacted during
construction activities.
Mitigation Measure 4.5.2: Archaeological Monitoring Plan and Accidental Discovery.
Prior to commencement of any grading activities on site, the
Applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist to prepare a
Monitoring Plan. The Monitoring Plan shall be prepared by a
qualified archaeologist and shall be reviewed by the City
Development Services Director, or designee. The Monitoring
Plan should include at a minimum: (1) a list of personnel
involved in the monitoring activities; (2) a description of how the
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 38
monitoring shall occur; (3) a description of the frequency of
monitoring (e.g., full-time, part-time, spot checking); (4) a
description of what resources may be encountered; (5) a
description of circumstances that would result in the halting of
work at the project site (e.g.,what is considered a "significant"
archaeological site); (6)a description of procedures for halting
work on site and notification procedures; and(7)a description of
monitoring reporting procedures. If any significant historical
resources, archaeological resources, or human remains are found
during monitoring, work should stop within the immediate
vicinity(precise area to be determined by the archaeologist in the
field) of the resource until such time as the resource can be
evaluated by an archaeologist and any other appropriate
individuals. Project personnel shall not collect or move any
archaeological materials or human remains and associated
materials. To the extent feasible, project activities shall avoid
these deposits. Where avoidance is not feasible, the
archaeological deposits shall be evaluated for their eligibility for
listing on the California Register of Historic Places. If the
deposits are not eligible, avoidance is not necessary. If the
deposits are eligible, adverse effects on the deposits must be
avoided, or such effects must be mitigated. Mitigation can
include, but is not necessarily limited to: excavation of the
deposit in accordance with a data recovery plan (refer to the
California Code of Regulations [CCR] Title 4(3) Section
5126.4(b)(3)(C)) and standard archaeological field methods and
procedures; laboratory and technical analyses of recovered
archaeological materials; production of a report detailing the
methods, findings, and significance of the archaeological site and
associated materials; curation of archaeological materials at an
appropriate facility for future research and/or display; an
interpretive display of recovered archaeological materials at a
local school, museum, or library; and public lectures at local
schools and/or historical societies on the findings and
significance of the site and recovered archaeological materials.
It shall be the responsibility of the City Department of Public
Works to verify that the Monitoring Plan is implemented during
project grading and construction. Upon completion of all
monitoring/mitigation activities, the consulting archaeologist
shall submit a monitoring report to the City Development
Services Director, or designee, and to the South Central Coastal
Information Center summarizing all monitoring/mitigation
activities and confirming that all recommended mitigation
measures have been met. The monitoring report shall be
prepared consistent with the guidelines of the Office of Historic
Preservation's Archaeological Resources Management Reports
(ARMR): Recommended Contents and Format. The City
Development Services Director, or designee, shall be responsible
for reviewing any reports produced by the archaeologist to
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 39
determine the appropriateness and adequacy of the findings and
recommendations.
Finding: The mitigation measures are feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce potentially
significant impacts related to unknown archaeological resources discovered during project
construction to a less than significant level for the reasons set forth in the FEIR.
Impact: Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature.Parts of the project site are located on sediments mapped as having High sensitivity
for paleontological resources. Although,there are no known localities on the project site,based on the
locality search and field survey (refer to the DEIR, Appendix E), there are sensitive sediments that
may contain fossil remains on the project site. Therefore, there is potential to encounter unknown
(buried) paleontological resources during all ground-disturbing activities. If excavation activities are
anticipated to extend deeper than 15 feet below the surface, implementation of Mitigation Measure
4.5.3,requiring preparation of a Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Program, would reduce
impacts to unknown paleontological resources to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measure 4.5.3: Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Program. If
excavation activities are anticipated to extend deeper than 15 feet
below the surface, the Applicant shall retain a qualified
paleontologist, subject to the review and approval of the City
Development Services Director, or designee, to prepare a
Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Program (PRIMP)
for the proposed project prior to the issuance of any grading
permits. The PRIMP shall be consistent with the guidelines of
the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) and shall include,
but not be limited to,the following:
• The paleontologist, or his/her representative, shall attend a
preconstruction meeting.
• Excavation and grading activities in sediments with a High
paleontological sensitivity rating(Young Alluvial Floodplain
Deposits below a depth of 15 feet, Old Alluvial Floodplain
Deposits, and the Capistrano Formation) shall be monitored
by a qualified paleontological monitor on a full-time basis.
• In the event paleontological resources are encountered when
a paleontological monitor is not present, work in the
immediate area of the find shall be redirected and the
paleontologist contacted to assess the find for scientific
significance. If any fossil remains are discovered in
sediments with a Low paleontological sensitivity rating
(Young Alluvial Floodplain Deposits to a depth of 15 feet
beneath the surface), the paleontologist shall make
recommendations as to whether monitoring shall be required
in these sediments on a full-time basis beginning at a
shallower depth.
• Collected resources shall be prepared to the point of
identification and permanent preservation. This includes
washing and picking of mass samples to recover small
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 40
vertebrate and invertebrate fossils and removal of surplus
sediment around larger specimens to reduce the storage
volume for the repository and the storage cost for the
developer.
• Any collected resources shall be cataloged and curated into
the permanent collections of an accredited scientific
institution.
At the conclusion of the monitoring program, a report of findings
with an appended inventory of specimens shall be prepared.
When submitted to the City, the report and inventory shall
signify completion of the program to mitigate impacts to
paleontological resources.
Finding: The mitigation measure is feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce potentially
significant impacts related to paleontological resources discovered during project construction to a
less than significant level for the reasons set forth in the FEIR.
Impact: Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries.
Although no human remains are known to be on the project site or are anticipated to be discovered
during project construction, Native American representatives indicated that human remains were
previously found on the Cook property, north of the project site. Therefore, precautionary mitigation
is necessary to ensure that the proposed project does not impact or disturb any human remains.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.5.4, Human Remains, would reduce impacts to human
remains, in the unlikely event that human remains are encountered during ground-disturbing
activities,to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measure 4.5.4: Human Remains. Consistent with the requirements of CCR
Section 15064.5(e), if human remains are encountered during
site disturbance, grading, or other construction activities on the
project site, the construction contractor shall halt work within 25
feet of the discovery; all work shall be redirected and the Orange
County (County) Coroner notified immediately. No further
disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a
determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined
to be Native American, the County Coroner shall notify the
Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will
determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With
the permission of the City, the MLD may inspect the site of the
discovery. The MLD shall complete the inspection within 48
hours of notification by the NAHC. The MLD may recommend
scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains
and items associated with Native American burials. Consistent
with CCR Section 15064.5(d), if the remains are determined to
be Native American and an MLD is notified, the City shall
consult with the MLD identified by the NAHC to develop an
agreement for the treatment and disposition of the remains.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 41
Upon completion of the assessment, the consulting archaeologist
shall prepare a report documenting the methods and results and
provide recommendations regarding the treatment of the human
remains and any associated cultural materials, as appropriate,
and in coordination with the recommendations of the MLD. The
report shall be submitted to the City Development Services
Director, or designee, and the South Central Coastal Information
Center. The City Development Services Director, or designee,
shall be responsible for reviewing any reports produced by the
archaeologist to determine the appropriateness and adequacy of
the findings and recommendations.
Finding: The mitigation measure is feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce potentially
significant impacts related to the discovery of human remains on the project site to a less than
significant level for the reasons set forth in the FEIR.
Impact: Result in a cumulative cultural resources impact. The proposed project, in conjunction
with other development in the City, has the potential to cumulatively impact archaeological and
paleontological resources; however, it should be noted that each development proposal received by
the City undergoes environmental review pursuant to CEQA. If there is a potential for significant
impacts to archaeological or paleontological resources, an investigation would be required to
determine the nature and extent of the resources and to identify appropriate mitigation measures. In
addition, applicable City ordinances and General Plan policies would be implemented as appropriate
to reduce the effects of additional development within the City. Therefore, with implementation of
Mitigation Measures 4.5.1 through 4.5.4, the contribution of the proposed project to the potential
cumulative loss of known and unknown cultural resources throughout the City would be less than
cumulatively significant.
Mitigation Measure 4.5.1: Archaeological Monitor and Native American Monitor. Prior
to issuance of grading permits, and in adherence to the
recommendations of the cultural resources survey, the Applicant
shall retain, with approval of the City of San Juan Capistrano
(City) Development Services Director, or designee, a qualified
archaeological monitor. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the
Applicant, with City approval, shall also retain a Native
American monitor to be selected by the City after consultation
with interested tribal and Native American representatives. Both
monitors shall be present on the project site during ground-
disturbing activities to monitor rough and finish grading,
excavation, and other ground-disturbing activities in the native
soils. Because no cultural resources were identified on the
project site, both monitors are not required to be present on a
full-time basis, but shall spot check ground-disturbing activities
to ensure that no cultural resources are impacted during
construction activities.
Mitigation Measure 4.5.2: Archaeological Monitoring Plan and Accidental Discovery.
Prior to commencement of any grading activities on site, the
Applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist to prepare a
Monitoring Plan. The Monitoring Plan shall be prepared by a
qualified archaeologist and shall be reviewed by the City
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 42
Development Services Director, or designee. The Monitoring
Plan should include at a minimum: (1) a list of personnel
involved in the monitoring activities; (2) a description of how the
monitoring shall occur; (3) a description of the frequency of
monitoring (e.g., full-time, part-time, spot checking); (4) a
description of what resources may be encountered; (5) a
description of circumstances that would result in the halting of
work at the project site (e.g.,what is considered a "significant"
archaeological site); (6) a description of procedures for halting
work on site and notification procedures; and(7)a description of
monitoring reporting procedures. If any significant historical
resources, archaeological resources, or human remains are found
during monitoring, work should stop within the immediate
vicinity(precise area to be determined by the archaeologist in the
field) of the resource until such time as the resource can be
evaluated by an archaeologist and any other appropriate
individuals. Project personnel shall not collect or move any
archaeological materials or human remains and associated
materials. To the extent feasible, project activities shall avoid
these deposits. Where avoidance is not feasible, the
archaeological deposits shall be evaluated for their eligibility for
listing on the California Register of Historic Places. If the
deposits are not eligible, avoidance is not necessary. If the
deposits are eligible, adverse effects on the deposits must be
avoided, or such effects must be mitigated. Mitigation can
include, but is not necessarily limited to: excavation of the
deposit in accordance with a data recovery plan (refer to the
California Code of Regulations [CCR] Title 4(3) Section
5126.4(b)(3)(C)) and standard archaeological field methods and
procedures; laboratory and technical analyses of recovered
archaeological materials; production of a report detailing the
methods, findings, and significance of the archaeological site and
associated materials; curation of archaeological materials at an
appropriate facility for future research and/or display; an
interpretive display of recovered archaeological materials at a
local school, museum, or library; and public lectures at local
schools and/or historical societies on the findings and
significance of the site and recovered archaeological materials.
It shall be the responsibility of the City Department of Public
Works to verify that the Monitoring Plan is implemented during
project grading and construction. Upon completion of all
monitoring/mitigation activities, the consulting archaeologist
shall submit a monitoring report to the City Development
Services Director, or designee, and to the South Central Coastal
Information Center summarizing all monitoring/mitigation
activities and confirming that all recommended mitigation
measures have been met. The monitoring report shall be
prepared consistent with the guidelines of the Office of Historic
Preservation's Archaeological Resources Management Reports
(ARMR): Recommended Contents and Format. The City
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 43
Development Services Director, or designee, shall be responsible
for reviewing any reports produced by the archaeologist to
determine the appropriateness and adequacy of the findings and
recommendations.
Mitigation Measure 4.5.3: Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Program. If
excavation activities are anticipated to extend deeper than 15 feet
below the surface, the Applicant shall retain a qualified
paleontologist, subject to the review and approval of the City
Development Services Director, or designee, to prepare a
Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Program (PRIMP)
for the proposed project prior to the issuance of any grading
permits. The PRIMP shall be consistent with the guidelines of
the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) and shall include,
but not be limited to,the following:
• The paleontologist, or his/her representative, shall attend a
preconstruction meeting.
• Excavation and grading activities in sediments with a High
paleontological sensitivity rating(Young Alluvial Floodplain
Deposits below a depth of 15 feet, Old Alluvial Floodplain
Deposits, and the Capistrano Formation) shall be monitored
by a qualified paleontological monitor on a full-time basis.
• In the event paleontological resources are encountered when
a paleontological monitor is not present, work in the
immediate area of the find shall be redirected and the
paleontologist contacted to assess the find for scientific
significance. If any fossil remains are discovered in
sediments with a Low paleontological sensitivity rating
(Young Alluvial Floodplain Deposits to a depth of 15 feet
beneath the surface), the paleontologist shall make
recommendations as to whether monitoring shall be required
in these sediments on a full-time basis beginning at a
shallower depth.
• Collected resources shall be prepared to the point of
identification and permanent preservation. This includes
washing and picking of mass samples to recover small
vertebrate and invertebrate fossils and removal of surplus
sediment around larger specimens to reduce the storage
volume for the repository and the storage cost for the
developer.
• Any collected resources shall be cataloged and curated into
the permanent collections of an accredited scientific
institution.
At the conclusion of the monitoring program, a report of findings
with an appended inventory of specimens shall be prepared.
When submitted to the City, the report and inventory shall
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 44
signify completion of the program to mitigate impacts to
paleontological resources.
Mitigation Measure 4.5.4: Human Remains. Consistent with the requirements of CCR
Section 15064.5(e), if human remains are encountered during
site disturbance, grading, or other construction activities on the
project site, the construction contractor shall halt work within 25
feet of the discovery; all work shall be redirected and the Orange
County (County) Coroner notified immediately. No further
disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a
determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined
to be Native American, the County Coroner shall notify the
Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will
determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With
the permission of the City, the MLD may inspect the site of the
discovery. The MLD shall complete the inspection within 48
hours of notification by the NAHC. The MLD may recommend
scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains
and items associated with Native American burials. Consistent
with CCR Section 15064.5(d), if the remains are determined to
be Native American and an MLD is notified, the City shall
consult with the MLD identified by the NAHC to develop an
agreement for the treatment and disposition of the remains.
Upon completion of the assessment, the consulting archaeologist
shall prepare a report documenting the methods and results and
provide recommendations regarding the treatment of the human
remains and any associated cultural materials, as appropriate,
and in coordination with the recommendations of the MLD. The
report shall be submitted to the City Development Services
Director, or designee, and the South Central Coastal Information
Center. The City Development Services Director, or designee,
shall be responsible for reviewing any reports produced by the
archaeologist to determine the appropriateness and adequacy of
the findings and recommendations.
Finding: The mitigation measures are feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce the project's
contribution to a significant cumulative impact to cultural and paleontological resources to a less than
significant level for the reasons set forth in the FEIR.
Geology and Soils.
Impact: Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk
of loss,injury,or death involving:
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking. The closest mapped active faults to the project site are the
Newport-Inglewood and San Joaquin Hills faults, which are approximately 4.7 miles south and 7.8
miles west of the site, respectively. Ground shaking impacts are mitigated through proper site
preparation and design, implementation of site-specific geotechnical recommendations, and seismic
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 45
design criteria. Therefore, implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.6.1, Conformance with the
Project Geotechnical Study, and Mitigation Measure 4.6.2, California Building Code Compliance and
Seismic Standards, are required and would reduce the potential for seismic ground-shaking impacts to
a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measure 4.6.1: Conformance with the Project Geotechnical Study. Prior to
issuance of grading permits, the Applicant shall submit a final
written report, subject to review and approval by the City of San
Juan Capistrano (City) Assistant Director of Engineering and
Public Works, or designee, indicating that design, grading, and
construction shall be performed in accordance with the
requirements of the City of San Juan Capistrano Municipal Code
and the California Building Code(CBC) applicable at the time of
grading, appropriate local grading regulations, and the
requirements of the project geotechnical consultant. All grading
operations and construction shall be conducted in conformance
with the recommendations included in the Geotechnical Due-
Diligence Evaluation, Proposed Retirement Community,
Armstrong Nursery/Del Obispo Property, City of San Juan
Capistrano, California (Draft Geotechnical Due-Diligence
Evaluation; GMU Geotechnical, Inc.,August 1,2013).
Specific requirements in the Draft Geotechnical Due-Diligence
Evaluation include:
• Removal and recompaction of existing fill soils and upper
alluvial soils to depths between 5 and 10 feet during site
grading;
• Specifications related to grading equipment to be used
during grading, excavating, and fill placement;
• Soil sampling to determine infiltration rates when infiltration
rates are determined;
• Seismic design considerations and requirements for
foundations (i.e., ribbed slabs, post-tensioned slabs) and
additional testing prior to final design; and
• Requirements for concrete design, protection for buried
metal utilities, and corrosion study.
Additional site testing and final design evaluation shall be
conducted by the project geotechnical consultant to refine and
enhance these requirements. If the project geotechnical
consultant identifies modifications or refinements to the
requirements, the project Applicant shall require appropriate
changes to the final project design and specifications.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 46
Mitigation Measure 4.6.2: California Building Code Compliance and Seismic
Standards. Prior to issuance of building permits for planned
structures, the Director of the City of San Juan Capistrano
Development Services Director, or designee, and the project
soils engineer shall review the building plans to verify that the
structural design conforms to the requirements of the
geotechnical study and the City Municipal Code. Structures and
retaining walls shall be designed in accordance with the seismic
parameters presented in the Draft Geotechnical Due-Diligence
Evaluation (2013) and applicable sections of Section 1613 of the
most current CBC.
Finding: The mitigation measures are feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce potentially
significant impacts related to strong seismic ground shaking to a less than significant level for the
reasons set forth in the FEIR.
Impact: Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. The proposed project would result
in a net increase in storm water runoff; however, the proposed project would include underground
infiltration chambers located near the catch basins, as well as a hydromodification system located
near the intersection of Alipaz Street and Via Positiva, which would be designed to reduce peak flow
to below that of existing conditions. Because the proposed project would not increase off-site
discharge, the proposed project would not contribute to downstream erosion or loss of topsoil.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.9.3, Water Quality Management Plan (refer to Section 4.9,
Hydrology and Water Quality),would reduce impacts related to soil erosion or loss of topsoil to a less
than significant level.
Mitigation Measure 4.9.3: Water Quality Management Plan.Prior to submittal of grading
plans for review and approval, the Applicant shall submit a Final
Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to the City Assistant
Director of Engineering and Public Works for review and
approval. The WQMP shall be consistent with the City's Model
WQMP and Hydromodification Management Plan. Project-
specific source control, treatment control, and hydromodification
control BMPs contained in the Final WQMP shall be
incorporated into final design. The BMPs shall be properly
designed and maintained to target pollutants of concern and
reduce runoff from the project site. The WQMP shall include an
operations and maintenance plan for the prescribed treatment
control BMPs to ensure their long-term performance.
Finding: The mitigation measure is feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce potentially
significant impacts related to substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil to a less than significant
level for the reasons set forth in the FEIR.
Impact: 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.
Compressible/Collapsible Soils. The Draft Geotechnical Due-Diligence Evaluation concluded
that with conformance with the project Geotechnical Study, there would be no impacts on the
proposed project related to the settlement of native alluvial soils on the project site due to the
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 47
loads of new fills and foundations associated with the project. Therefore, implementation of
Mitigation Measure 4.6.1 requiring conformance with the project Geotechnical Study, would
reduce impacts related to compressible/collapsible soils to a less than significant level.
Corrosive Soils and Soluble Sulfate Content. Laboratory testing conducted as part of the Draft
Geotechnical Due-Diligence Evaluation indicated that on-site soils are moderately corrosive to
concrete and highly corrosive to metals. Corrosion protection may include, but is not limited to,
sacrificial metal, the use of protective coatings, and/or cathodic protection. Implementation of
Mitigation Measures 4.6.1, requiring conformance with the project Geotechnical Study, and
Mitigation Measure 4.6.3, requiring measures to protect ferrous metals and copper structures
from potentially corrosive soils,would reduce potential impacts related to corrosive soils to a less
than significant level.
Mitigation Measure 4.6.1: Conformance with the Project Geotechnical Study. Prior to
issuance of grading permits, the Applicant shall submit a final
written report, subject to review and approval by the City of San
Juan Capistrano (City) Assistant Director of Engineering and
Public Works, or designee, indicating that design, grading, and
construction shall be performed in accordance with the
requirements of the City of San Juan Capistrano Municipal Code
and the California Building Code(CBC) applicable at the time of
grading, appropriate local grading regulations, and the
requirements of the project geotechnical consultant. All grading
operations and construction shall be conducted in conformance
with the recommendations included in the Geotechnical Due-
Diligence Evaluation, Proposed Retirement Community,
Armstrong Nursery/Del Obispo Property, City of San Juan
Capistrano, California (Draft Geotechnical Due-Diligence
Evaluation; GMU Geotechnical, Inc.,August 1,2013).
Specific requirements in the Draft Geotechnical Due-Diligence
Evaluation include:
• Removal and recompaction of existing fill soils and upper
alluvial soils to depths between 5 and 10 feet during site
grading;
• Specifications related to grading equipment to be used
during grading, excavating, and fill placement;
• Soil sampling to determine infiltration rates when infiltration
rates are determined;
• Seismic design considerations and requirements for
foundations (i.e., ribbed slabs, post-tensioned slabs) and
additional testing prior to final design; and
• Requirements for concrete design, protection for buried
metal utilities, and corrosion study.
Additional site testing and final design evaluation shall be
conducted by the project geotechnical consultant to refine and
enhance these requirements. If the project geotechnical
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 48
consultant identifies modifications or refinements to the
requirements, the project Applicant shall require appropriate
changes to the final project design and specifications.
Mitigation Measure 4.6.3: Corrosive Soils. Prior to the issuance of any building permits,
the City Assistant Director of Engineering and Public Works, or
designee, shall verify that structural design conforms to the
requirements of the geotechnical study with regard to the
protection of ferrous metals and copper that will come into
contact with on-site soils. In addition, on-site inspections shall be
conducted during construction by the project geotechnical
consultant and/or City Building Official to ensure compliance
with geotechnical specifications as incorporated into project
plans.
Finding: The mitigation measures are feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce potentially
significant impacts related to compressible and corrosive soils to a less than significant level for the
reasons set forth in the FEIR.
Impact: Be located on expansive soil, as defined by the California Building Code (CBC),
creating substantial risks to life or property. Laboratory testing conducted as part of the Draft
Geotechnical Due-Diligence Evaluation (refer to the DEIR, Appendix F) indicated that soils on the
project site are considered to possess a low-to-medium expansion potential. Therefore, with
implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.6.1, Conformance with the Project Geotechnical Study,
potential impacts related to expansive soils would be considered to be less than significant.
Mitigation Measure 4.6.1: Conformance with the Project Geotechnical Study. Prior to
issuance of grading permits, the Applicant shall submit a final
written report, subject to review and approval by the City of San
Juan Capistrano (City) Assistant Director of Engineering and
Public Works, or designee, indicating that design, grading, and
construction shall be performed in accordance with the
requirements of the City of San Juan Capistrano Municipal Code
and the California Building Code(CBC) applicable at the time of
grading, appropriate local grading regulations, and the
requirements of the project geotechnical consultant. All grading
operations and construction shall be conducted in conformance
with the recommendations included in the Geotechnical Due-
Diligence Evaluation, Proposed Retirement Community,
Armstrong Nursery/Del Obispo Property, City of San Juan
Capistrano, California (Draft Geotechnical Due-Diligence
Evaluation; GMU Geotechnical, Inc.,August 1,2013).
Specific requirements in the Draft Geotechnical Due-Diligence
Evaluation include:
Removal and recompaction of existing fill soils and upper
alluvial soils to depths between 5 and 10 feet during site
grading;
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 49
• Specifications related to grading equipment to be used
during grading, excavating, and fill placement;
• Soil sampling to determine infiltration rates when infiltration
rates are determined;
• Seismic design considerations and requirements for
foundations (i.e., ribbed slabs, post-tensioned slabs) and
additional testing prior to final design; and
• Requirements for concrete design, protection for buried
metal utilities, and corrosion study.
Additional site testing and final design evaluation shall be
conducted by the project geotechnical consultant to refine and
enhance these requirements. If the project geotechnical
consultant identifies modifications or refinements to the
requirements, the project Applicant shall require appropriate
changes to the final project design and specifications.
Finding: The mitigation measures are feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce potentially
significant impacts related to expansive soil to a less than significant level for the reasons set forth in
the FEIR.
Impact: Result in a cumulative geology and soils impact. The mitigation measures specified in the
impact categories discussed above are expected to minimize or avoid potential hazards due to on-site
and off-site geologic and seismic factors. When considered in combination with the efforts of local
agencies in their review and approval of future land use proposals,potential geologic and soil impacts
would be identified and mitigated, as appropriate, for individual development projects adjacent to the
project site. While the entire Orange County region is susceptible to seismic and other geologic
hazards, many of the hazards are highly localized. Appropriate use of engineering technologies,
coupled with siting considerations, would substantially lessen the potential cumulative geology and
soil impacts of future development. Therefore, the proposed project's contribution to geology and
soils cumulative impacts would be less than cumulatively significant with implementation of
Mitigation Measure 4.6.1 through 4.6.3.
Mitigation Measure 4.6.1: Conformance with the Project Geotechnical Study. Prior to
issuance of grading permits, the Applicant shall submit a final
written report, subject to review and approval by the City of San
Juan Capistrano (City) Assistant Director of Engineering and
Public Works, or designee, indicating that design, grading, and
construction shall be performed in accordance with the
requirements of the City of San Juan Capistrano Municipal Code
and the California Building Code(CBC) applicable at the time of
grading, appropriate local grading regulations, and the
requirements of the project geotechnical consultant. All grading
operations and construction shall be conducted in conformance
with the recommendations included in the Geotechnical Due-
Diligence Evaluation, Proposed Retirement Community,
Armstrong Nursery/Del Obispo Property, City of San Juan
Capistrano, California (Draft Geotechnical Due-Diligence
Evaluation; GMU Geotechnical, Inc.,August 1,2013).
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 50
Specific requirements in the Draft Geotechnical Due-Diligence
Evaluation include:
• Removal and recompaction of existing fill soils and upper
alluvial soils to depths between 5 and 10 feet during site
grading;
• Specifications related to grading equipment to be used
during grading, excavating, and fill placement;
• Soil sampling to determine infiltration rates when infiltration
rates are determined;
• Seismic design considerations and requirements for
foundations (i.e., ribbed slabs, post-tensioned slabs) and
additional testing prior to final design; and
• Requirements for concrete design, protection for buried
metal utilities, and corrosion study.
Additional site testing and final design evaluation shall be
conducted by the project geotechnical consultant to refine and
enhance these requirements. If the project geotechnical
consultant identifies modifications or refinements to the
requirements, the project Applicant shall require appropriate
changes to the final project design and specifications.
Mitigation Measure 4.6.2: California Building Code Compliance and Seismic
Standards. Prior to issuance of building permits for planned
structures, the Director of the City of San Juan Capistrano
Development Services Director, or designee, and the project
soils engineer shall review the building plans to verify that the
structural design conforms to the requirements of the
geotechnical study and the City Municipal Code. Structures and
retaining walls shall be designed in accordance with the seismic
parameters presented in the Draft Geotechnical Due-Diligence
Evaluation (2013) and applicable sections of Section 1613 of the
most current CBC.
Mitigation Measure 4.6.3: Corrosive Soils. Prior to the issuance of any building permits,
the City Assistant Director of Engineering and Public Works, or
designee, shall verify that structural design conforms to the
requirements of the geotechnical study with regard to the
protection of ferrous metals and copper that will come into
contact with on-site soils. In addition, on-site inspections shall be
conducted during construction by the project geotechnical
consultant and/or City Building Official to ensure compliance
with geotechnical specifications as incorporated into project
plans.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 51
Finding: The mitigation measures are feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce the project's
contribution to a significant cumulative impact related to geology and soils to a less than significant
level for the reasons set forth in the FEIR.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
Impacts: The following impacts are discussed together in the DEIR and the FEIR; each bullet point
represents a potential environmental impact that is discussed below.
• Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport,
use, or disposal of hazardous materials.
• 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.
Based on the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) and the Environmental Document
Review (EDR) of the Phase I ESA (refer to the DEIR, Appendix G), it is not anticipated that
hazardous materials would be encountered during construction. In addition,Mitigation Measure 4.9.1,
in Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this DEIR, requires preparation of a SWPPP to
identify construction BMPs to be implemented as part of the proposed project to reduce impacts to
water quality, including those impacts associated with soil erosion, siltation, spills, and increased
runoff during construction. With implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.9.1, which requires the
Applicant to implement standard BMPs related to hazardous materials storage and use during
construction,impacts would be considered less than significant.
Project operation associated with the residential uses would involve the use of potentially hazardous
materials (e.g., solvents, cleaning agents, paints, pesticides) typical of residential uses that, when
utilized properly,would not result in a significant hazard to residents or visitors.
Operation of the Health Care Center would be characterized by the use and storage of limited
amounts of hazardous materials related to medical activities. County solid waste landfills are only
permitted to accept autoclaved (sterilized) medical wastes. County landfills are not permitted to
accept infectious medical wastes or hazardous wastes. Infectious medical wastes or hazardous wastes
generated by the project will be transported to facilities that are permitted to accept such wastes.
Compliance with Mitigation Measure 4.8.1 will reduce potential hazardous waste impacts related to
operation of the Health Care Center to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measure 4.9.1: Construction General Permit. Prior to approval of grading
plans and issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall
obtain coverage under the State Water Resources Control Board
(SWRCB) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges
Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities
(Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, Permit No. CAS000002, as
amended by Order Nos. 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-0006-
DWQ) (Construction General Permit), or subsequent permit. The
Applicant shall provide the Waste Discharge Identification
Number to the City of San Juan Capistrano (City) Assistant
Director of Engineering and Public Works, or their designee, to
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 52
demonstrate proof of coverage under the Construction General
Permit. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan(SWPPP) shall
be prepared and implemented for the project in compliance with
the requirements of the Construction General Permit. The
SWPPP shall identify construction best management practices
(BMPs) to be implemented to ensure that the potential for soil
erosion and sedimentation is minimized and to control the
discharge of pollutants in storm water runoff as a result of
construction activities.
Mitigation Measure 4.8.1: Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, the Applicant shall
submit a Medical Waste Management Program (MWMP) for
review and approval by the City of San Juan Capistrano's (City)
Development Services Director, or designee. The MWMP shall
include confirmation that the Health Care Center operators
and/or tenant lease agreements require all medical wastes to be
disposed of in accordance with California Health and Safety
Code Sections 117600-118360 (Medical Waste Management
Act), as well as the Orange County Hazardous Waste
Management Plan and all applicable local, State, and federal
laws and regulations.
Finding: The mitigation measures are feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce potentially
significant impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials (routine transport use, or disposal of
hazardous materials)to a less than significant level for the reasons set forth in the FEIR.
Impact: Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. With the
implementation of Standard Conditions 4.3.1 and 4.3.2 in Section 4.3, Air Quality, as well as
implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.8.1, impacts resulting from hazardous emissions or the
handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an
existing or proposed school would be reduced to a level considered less than significant during
construction.
Operation of the proposed residential uses would not emit hazardous emissions or involve handling of
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or
proposed school. Therefore, impacts are considered less than significant, and no mitigation is
required.
Operation of the Health Care Center would result in the use and storage of limited amounts of
hazardous materials related to medical activities within 0.25 mile of existing schools. However,
compliance with Mitigation Measure 4.8.1 will reduce potential hazardous waste impacts to nearby
school facilities to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measure 4.8.1: Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, the Applicant shall
submit a Medical Waste Management Program (MWMP) for
review and approval by the City of San Juan Capistrano's (City)
Development Services Director, or designee. The MWMP shall
include confirmation that the Health Care Center operators
and/or tenant lease agreements require all medical wastes to be
disposed of in accordance with California Health and Safety
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 53
Code Sections 117600-118360 (Medical Waste Management
Act), as well as the Orange County Hazardous Waste
Management Plan and all applicable local, State, and federal
laws and regulations.
Standard Condition 4.3.1: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)
Rule 403 Measures. The proposed project would be required to
implement the following SCAQMD measures:
• Nontoxic chemical soil stabilizers shall be applied to all
inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive
for 10 days or more) according to manufacturer's
specifications.
• Active sites shall be watered at least twice daily (locations
where grading is to occur will be thoroughly watered prior to
earthmoving).
• All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are
to be covered or should maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard
in accordance with the requirements of California Vehicle
Code (CVC) Section 23114 (freeboard means vertical space
between the top of the load and the top of the trailer).
• Construction access roads shall be paved at least 100 feet
onto the site from the main road.
• Traffic speeds on all unpaved roads shall be reduced to 15
miles per hour(mph) or less.
Standard Condition 4.3.2: The proposed project would be required to implement the
following SCAQMD measures:
a. Dust suppression measures:
• Disturbed areas shall be revegetated as quickly as
possible.
• All excavating and grading operations shall be
suspended when wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts)
exceed 25 mph.
• All streets shall be swept once per day if visible soil
materials are carried to adjacent streets (water sweepers
with reclaimed water are recommended).
• A wheel shaker/wheel spreading device consisting of
raised dividers (rails,pipe, or grates) at least 24 feet long
and 10 feet shall be utilized where vehicles enter and
exit unpaved roads onto paved roads.
• All on-site roads shall be paved as soon as feasible,
watered periodically, or chemically stabilized.
• The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earthmoving, or
excavation operations shall be minimized at all times.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 54
b. The construction contractor shall select the construction
equipment used on site based on low-emission factors and
high energy efficiency. The construction contractor shall
ensure that construction grading plans include a statement
that all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained
in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications.
c. The construction contractor shall utilize electric or diesel-
powered equipment in lieu of gasoline-powered engines
where feasible.
d. The construction contractor shall ensure that construction
grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut
off equipment when not in use. During smog season (May
through October), the overall length of the construction
period will be extended, thereby decreasing the size of the
area prepared each day to minimize vehicles and equipment
operating at the same time.
e. The construction contractor shall time the construction
activities so as to not interfere with peak-hour traffic and
minimize obstruction of through traffic lanes adjacent to the
site; if necessary, a flagperson shall be retained to maintain
safety adjacent to existing roadways.
f. The construction contractor shall support and encourage
ridesharing and transit incentives for the construction crew.
g. Compliance with SCAQMD Rule 1113 on the use of
architectural coatings should be ensured. Emissions
associated with architectural coatings would be reduced by
complying with these rules and regulations, which include
using pre-coated/natural-colored building materials and
using water-based or low-VOC coating.
Finding: The mitigation measures are feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce potentially
significant impacts related to hazardous emissions or materials within one-quarter of an existing or
proposed school to a less than significant level for the reasons set forth in the FEIR.
Impact: Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan. During construction of the proposed project, minor delays in
roadway access for emergency vehicles may occur. However, a Traffic Management Plan (TMP), as
identified in Mitigation Measure 4.15.1, in Section 4.15, Transportation/Traffic, would be required to
ensure that emergency vehicles would be able to navigate through streets adjacent to the project site
in the event there is congestion due to construction activities.
The emergency management plans for the City, in conjunction with the emergency plan for the
County, may be activated and directed by a number of individuals within the City or the County,
including, but not limited to, the City Manager, the Fire Chief, and the Police Chief. The proposed
project would be required to comply with all applicable codes and ordinances for emergency vehicle
access, which would ensure adequate access to, from, and on site for emergency vehicles. Adherence
to these codes and ordinances would ensure that operation of the proposed project would not impair
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 55
implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan.
Standard Condition 4.15.1: Capistrano Circulation Fee Program. Prior to issuance of any
grading or construction permits, the City Public Works Director,
or designee, shall verify that the project Applicant has paid the
proposed project's fair share of traffic impact fees into the
Capistrano Circulation Fee Program (CCFP) for future roadway
improvements, in compliance with City Resolution 02-05-21-02.
Finding: The mitigation measure is feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce potentially
significant impacts related to an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan to a
less than significant level for the reasons set forth in the FEIR.
Hydrology and Water Quality
Impacts: The following impacts are discussed together in the DEIR and the FEIR; each bullet point
represents a potential environmental impact that is discussed below.
• Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements.
• Otherwise substantially degrade water quality.
• Potential for discharge of stormwater to affect the beneficial uses of the receiving waters.
Construction. During construction activities, excavated soil would be exposed and there would be an
increased potential for soil erosion compared to existing conditions. Pollutants of concern during
construction include sediments, trash, petroleum products, concrete waste, sanitary waste, and
chemicals. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.9.1 and 4.9.2, which require compliance with
the requirements of the General Construction Permit, including preparation and implementation of a
SWPPP and testing of dewatered groundwater,would reduce potential construction impacts related to
violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements (WDRs), degradation of water
quality,and degradation of beneficial uses to less than significant levels.
Operation. During project operation, pollutants of concern include heavy metals, nutrients,
pesticides,toxic organic compounds, suspended solids/sediments,trash and debris, oil and grease, and
bacteria/viruses/pathogens. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.9.3, which requires
implementation of BMPs that target pollutants of concern in runoff from the project site, would
reduce potential operational impacts related to violation of water quality standards or WDRs,
degradation of water quality, and degradation of beneficial uses to less than significant levels.
Standing water that lasts longer than 72 hours can provide breeding habitat for mosquitos. As
specified in Mitigation Measure 4.9.4,the BMPs would be inspected on a regular basis to ensure there
is no standing water that could serve as mosquito breeding habitat.
Mitigation Measure 4.9.1: Construction General Permit. Prior to approval of grading
plans and issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall
obtain coverage under the State Water Resources Control Board
(SWRCB) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges
Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 56
(Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, Permit No. CAS000002, as
amended by Order Nos. 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-0006-
DWQ) (Construction General Permit), or subsequent permit. The
Applicant shall provide the Waste Discharge Identification
Number to the City of San Juan Capistrano (City) Assistant
Director of Engineering and Public Works, or their designee, to
demonstrate proof of coverage under the Construction General
Permit. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan(SWPPP) shall
be prepared and implemented for the project in compliance with
the requirements of the Construction General Permit. The
SWPPP shall identify construction best management practices
(BMPs) to be implemented to ensure that the potential for soil
erosion and sedimentation is minimized and to control the
discharge of pollutants in storm water runoff as a result of
construction activities.
Mitigation Measure 4.9.2: NPDES Groundwater Discharge Permit. If groundwater
dewatering operation is performed, then the Construction
Contractor shall comply with the requirements of the General
Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges from
Groundwater Extraction and Similar Discharges to Surface
Waters within the San Diego Region Except for San Diego Bay
(WDR) (Order No. R9-2008-0002, Permit No. CAG919002)
(Groundwater Discharge Permit), or subsequent permit. The
Construction Contractor shall comply with all applicable
provisions in the permit, including water sampling, analysis, and
reporting of dewatering-related discharges. At least 30 days prior
to the initiation of groundwater dewatering, the Applicant shall
notify and receive approval of the groundwater dewatering
activities from the City Assistant Director of Engineering and
Public Works, or their designee. The Applicant shall submit a
Notice of Intent for coverage under the permit to the San Diego
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) at least 30
days prior to the start of dewatering. Groundwater discharge
shall not commence until a Notice of Enrollment is received
from the San Diego RWQCB. Upon completion of groundwater
dewatering activities, the Applicant shall submit a Notice of
Termination to the San Diego RWQCB.
Mitigation Measure 4.9.3: Water Quality Management Plan.Prior to submittal of grading
plans for review and approval, the Applicant shall submit a Final
Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to the City Assistant
Director of Engineering and Public Works for review and
approval. The WQMP shall be consistent with the City's Model
WQMP and Hydromodification Management Plan. Project-
specific source control, treatment control, and hydromodification
control BMPs contained in the Final WQMP shall be
incorporated into final design. The BMPs shall be properly
designed and maintained to target pollutants of concern and
reduce runoff from the project site. The WQMP shall include an
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 57
operations and maintenance plan for the prescribed treatment
control BMPs to ensure their long-term performance.
Mitigation Measure 4.9.4: Vector Control Program. Prior to the issuance of grading
permits, the Applicant shall demonstrate to the City Assistant
Director of Engineering and Public Works that the operations
and maintenance plan includes regular inspections of BMPs to
ensure there is no standing water that could serve as mosquito
breeding habitat. The operations and maintenance plan shall
address control of flies and mosquitos and shall include
measures such as garbage management, landscape maintenance,
removal of vegetation and landscape clippings, and management
of pet droppings.
Finding: The mitigation measures are feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce potentially
significant impacts related to hydrology and water quality (water quality standards, waste discharge
requirements, and degradation of water quality)to a less than significant level for the reasons set forth
in the FEIR.
Impacts: The following impacts are discussed together in the DEIR and the FEIR; each bullet point
represents a potential environmental impact that is discussed below.
• Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial
erosion or siltation on or off site.
• Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on or off site.
Construction. During construction activities, the project site would be graded, which would change
on-site drainage patterns. During grading, excavated soil would be exposed, and there would be an
increased potential for soil erosion compared to existing conditions. During a storm event, soil
erosion and sedimentation could occur at an accelerated rate. Implementation of Mitigation Measure
4.9.1, which requires compliance with the requirements of the Construction General Permit, would
reduce potential construction impacts related to alterations to drainage patterns, erosion, siltation, and
flooding to less than significant levels.
Operation. The proposed project would increase impervious area, which would increase runoff
volume and velocity from the site. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.9.3, which requires
implementation of BMPs and compliance with the County Hydromodification Management Plan,
would reduce operational impacts related to alterations to drainage patterns, erosion, siltation, and
flooding to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measure 4.9.1: Construction General Permit. Prior to approval of grading
plans and issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall
obtain coverage under the State Water Resources Control Board
(SWRCB) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges
Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities
(Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, Permit No. CAS000002, as
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 58
amended by Order Nos. 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-0006-
DWQ) (Construction General Permit), or subsequent permit. The
Applicant shall provide the Waste Discharge Identification
Number to the City of San Juan Capistrano (City) Assistant
Director of Engineering and Public Works, or their designee, to
demonstrate proof of coverage under the Construction General
Permit. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan(SWPPP) shall
be prepared and implemented for the project in compliance with
the requirements of the Construction General Permit. The
SWPPP shall identify construction best management practices
(BMPs) to be implemented to ensure that the potential for soil
erosion and sedimentation is minimized and to control the
discharge of pollutants in storm water runoff as a result of
construction activities.
Mitigation Measure 4.9.3: Water Quality Management Plan.Prior to submittal of grading
plans for review and approval, the Applicant shall submit a Final
Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to the City Assistant
Director of Engineering and Public Works for review and
approval. The WQMP shall be consistent with the City's Model
WQMP and Hydromodification Management Plan. Project-
specific source control, treatment control, and hydromodification
control BMPs contained in the Final WQMP shall be
incorporated into final design. The BMPs shall be properly
designed and maintained to target pollutants of concern and
reduce runoff from the project site. The WQMP shall include an
operations and maintenance plan for the prescribed treatment
control BMPs to ensure their long-term performance.
Finding: The mitigation measures are feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce potentially
significant impacts related to hydrology and water quality (off-site or downstream flooding, erosion,
or siltation)to a less than significant level for the reasons set forth in the FEIR.
Impact: Create or contribute to runoff water that would exceed the capacity of the storm drain
system.
Construction. Construction of the proposed project has the potential to introduce pollutants into the
storm water drainage system from erosion, siltation, and accidental spills. In addition, grading and
construction activities would compact soil, and construction of structures would increase impervious
area, which can increase runoff during construction. With implementation of Mitigation Measure
4.9.1, which requires compliance with the Construction General Permit, construction impacts related
to exceeding the capacity of, and providing additional sources of polluted runoff to, storm water
drainage systems would be reduced to less than significant levels.
Operation. The proposed project would increase impervious surface area, which would increase
runoff from the site. However, the proposed hydromodification system would reduce the off-site
discharge to below that of existing conditions. Because the proposed project would decrease the flow
to the downstream storm water drainage system, the project would not contribute runoff water that
would exceed the capacity of an existing or planned storm water drainage system. In addition, the
proposed project includes underground infiltration chambers, rain garden swales, catch basin inlet
filters and screens, and grease interceptors to treat storm water runoff from the site during operation.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 59
With implementation of operational BMPs, as specified in Mitigation Measure 4.9.3, impacts related
to substantial additional sources of polluted runoff to the storm drain system would be reduced to less
than significant levels.
Mitigation Measure 4.9.1: Construction General Permit. Prior to approval of grading
plans and issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall
obtain coverage under the State Water Resources Control Board
(SWRCB) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges
Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities
(Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, Permit No. CAS000002, as
amended by Order Nos. 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-0006-
DWQ) (Construction General Permit), or subsequent permit. The
Applicant shall provide the Waste Discharge Identification
Number to the City of San Juan Capistrano (City) Assistant
Director of Engineering and Public Works, or their designee, to
demonstrate proof of coverage under the Construction General
Permit. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan(SWPPP) shall
be prepared and implemented for the project in compliance with
the requirements of the Construction General Permit. The
SWPPP shall identify construction best management practices
(BMPs) to be implemented to ensure that the potential for soil
erosion and sedimentation is minimized and to control the
discharge of pollutants in storm water runoff as a result of
construction activities.
Mitigation Measure 4.9.3: Water Quality Management Plan.Prior to submittal of grading
plans for review and approval, the Applicant shall submit a Final
Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to the City Assistant
Director of Engineering and Public Works for review and
approval. The WQMP shall be consistent with the City's Model
WQMP and Hydromodification Management Plan. Project-
specific source control, treatment control, and hydromodification
control BMPs contained in the Final WQMP shall be
incorporated into final design. The BMPs shall be properly
designed and maintained to target pollutants of concern and
reduce runoff from the project site. The WQMP shall include an
operations and maintenance plan for the prescribed treatment
control BMPs to ensure their long-term performance.
Finding: The mitigation measures are feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce potentially
significant impacts related to hydrology and water quality (exceed capacity of existing or planned
storm drain system)to a less than significant level for the reasons set forth in the FEIR.
Impact: Tributary to an already impaired water body, as listed on the Clean Water Act Section
303(d)list.If so, can it result in an increase in any pollutant for which the water body is already
impaired. San Juan Creek is impaired for dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene (DDE), indicator
bacteria, phosphorus, selenium, total nitrogen as N, and toxicity. The mouth of San Juan Creek is
impaired for indicator bacteria. The shoreline at Doheny State Beach is impaired for enterococcus,
fecal coliform, and total coliform. There is an existing Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for San
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 60
Juan Creek for total coliform, fecal coliform, and enterococci bacteria. During construction activities,
chemicals, liquid products, petroleum products (such as paints, solvents, and fuels), and concrete-
related waste may be spilled or leaked and have the potential to contribute to the toxicity impairment.
During construction, soil erosion and groundwater dewatering could contribute to selenium
impairment if selenium is present on the project site. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.9.1
and 4.9.2,which require implementation of BMPs to minimize erosion and sedimentation and prevent
spills, as well as testing of dewatered groundwater prior to discharge, would reduce potential
construction impacts related to contribution to receiving water impairments to less than significant
levels.
Nitrogen and phosphorus may be present in fertilizers used in landscape maintenance. In addition,
pesticides, herbicides, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) are used in landscape maintenance.
Selenium is naturally occurring and may be present in the suspended solids/sediments in runoff from
the site. As discussed previously, source control, treatment control, and hydromodification control
BMPs would be incorporated into the design of the proposed project to treat storm water runoff prior
to discharge into the storm drain system. The BMPs would target pollutants of concern from the
project site so that runoff from the site would not contribute to the existing nitrogen, phosphorus,
selenium, or toxicity impairment. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.9.3, which requires
implementation of BMPs that target pollutants of concern in runoff from the project site, would
reduce potential operational impacts related to contribution to receiving water impairments to less
than significant levels.
Mitigation Measure 4.9.1: Construction General Permit. Prior to approval of grading
plans and issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall
obtain coverage under the State Water Resources Control Board
(SWRCB) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges
Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities
(Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, Permit No. CAS000002, as
amended by Order Nos. 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-0006-
DWQ) (Construction General Permit), or subsequent permit. The
Applicant shall provide the Waste Discharge Identification
Number to the City of San Juan Capistrano (City) Assistant
Director of Engineering and Public Works, or their designee, to
demonstrate proof of coverage under the Construction General
Permit. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan(SWPPP) shall
be prepared and implemented for the project in compliance with
the requirements of the Construction General Permit. The
SWPPP shall identify construction best management practices
(BMPs) to be implemented to ensure that the potential for soil
erosion and sedimentation is minimized and to control the
discharge of pollutants in storm water runoff as a result of
construction activities.
Mitigation Measure 4.9.2: NPDES Groundwater Discharge Permit. If groundwater
dewatering operation is performed, then the Construction
Contractor shall comply with the requirements of the General
Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges from
Groundwater Extraction and Similar Discharges to Surface
Waters within the San Diego Region Except for San Diego Bay
(WDR) (Order No. R9-2008-0002, Permit No. CAG919002)
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 61
(Groundwater Discharge Permit), or subsequent permit. The
Construction Contractor shall comply with all applicable
provisions in the permit, including water sampling, analysis, and
reporting of dewatering-related discharges. At least 30 days prior
to the initiation of groundwater dewatering, the Applicant shall
notify and receive approval of the groundwater dewatering
activities from the City Assistant Director of Engineering and
Public Works, or their designee. The Applicant shall submit a
Notice of Intent for coverage under the permit to the San Diego
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) at least 30
days prior to the start of dewatering. Groundwater discharge
shall not commence until a Notice of Enrollment is received
from the San Diego RWQCB. Upon completion of groundwater
dewatering activities, the Applicant shall submit a Notice of
Termination to the San Diego RWQCB.
Mitigation Measure 4.9.3: Water Quality Management Plan.Prior to submittal of grading
plans for review and approval, the Applicant shall submit a Final
Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to the City Assistant
Director of Engineering and Public Works for review and
approval. The WQMP shall be consistent with the City's Model
WQMP and Hydromodification Management Plan. Project-
specific source control, treatment control, and hydromodification
control BMPs contained in the Final WQMP shall be
incorporated into final design. The BMPs shall be properly
designed and maintained to target pollutants of concern and
reduce runoff from the project site. The WQMP shall include an
operations and maintenance plan for the prescribed treatment
control BMPs to ensure their long-term performance.
Finding: The mitigation measures are feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce potentially
significant impacts related to hydrology and water quality (tributary to an already impaired water
body)to a less than significant level for the reasons set forth in the FEIR.
Impact: Impact aquatic, wetland, or riparian habitat. According to the Biological Resources
Assessment(Appendix D of the DEIR), there is no aquatic, wetland, or riparian habitat on the project
site. However, runoff from the project site has a potential to impact downstream aquatic, wetland, or
riparian habitat. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.9.1 and 4.9.2, which require compliance
with the requirements of the General Construction Permit, including preparation and implementation
of a SWPPP and testing of dewatered groundwater, would reduce potential construction impacts to
aquatic,wetland,or riparian habitat to less than significant levels.
During operation, pollutants of concern include heavy metals, nutrients, pesticides, toxic organic
compounds, suspended solids/sediments, trash and debris, oil and grease, and bacteria/viruses/
pathogens. Proposed BMPs would reduce off-site discharge to below that of existing conditions per
the County hydromodification requirements. As a result, operation of the proposed project would not
impact aquatic, wetland, or riparian habitat through degradation of water quality or
hydromodification. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.9.3, which requires implementation of
BMPs targeting pollutants of concern in runoff from the project site and compliance with County
hydromodification requirements,would reduce operation impacts to a less than significant level.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 62
Mitigation Measure 4.9.1: Construction General Permit. Prior to approval of grading
plans and issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall
obtain coverage under the State Water Resources Control Board
(SWRCB) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges
Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities
(Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, Permit No. CAS000002, as
amended by Order Nos. 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-0006-
DWQ) (Construction General Permit), or subsequent permit. The
Applicant shall provide the Waste Discharge Identification
Number to the City of San Juan Capistrano (City) Assistant
Director of Engineering and Public Works, or their designee, to
demonstrate proof of coverage under the Construction General
Permit. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan(SWPPP) shall
be prepared and implemented for the project in compliance with
the requirements of the Construction General Permit. The
SWPPP shall identify construction best management practices
(BMPs) to be implemented to ensure that the potential for soil
erosion and sedimentation is minimized and to control the
discharge of pollutants in storm water runoff as a result of
construction activities.
Mitigation Measure 4.9.2: NPDES Groundwater Discharge Permit. If groundwater
dewatering operation is performed, then the Construction
Contractor shall comply with the requirements of the General
Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges from
Groundwater Extraction and Similar Discharges to Surface
Waters within the San Diego Region Except for San Diego Bay
(WDR) (Order No. R9-2008-0002, Permit No. CAG919002)
(Groundwater Discharge Permit), or subsequent permit. The
Construction Contractor shall comply with all applicable
provisions in the permit, including water sampling, analysis, and
reporting of dewatering-related discharges. At least 30 days prior
to the initiation of groundwater dewatering, the Applicant shall
notify and receive approval of the groundwater dewatering
activities from the City Assistant Director of Engineering and
Public Works, or their designee. The Applicant shall submit a
Notice of Intent for coverage under the permit to the San Diego
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) at least 30
days prior to the start of dewatering. Groundwater discharge
shall not commence until a Notice of Enrollment is received
from the San Diego RWQCB. Upon completion of groundwater
dewatering activities, the Applicant shall submit a Notice of
Termination to the San Diego RWQCB.
Mitigation Measure 4.9.3: Water Quality Management Plan.Prior to submittal of grading
plans for review and approval, the Applicant shall submit a Final
Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to the City Assistant
Director of Engineering and Public Works for review and
approval. The WQMP shall be consistent with the City's Model
WQMP and Hydromodification Management Plan. Project-
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 63
specific source control, treatment control, and hydromodification
control BMPs contained in the Final WQMP shall be
incorporated into final design. The BMPs shall be properly
designed and maintained to target pollutants of concern and
reduce runoff from the project site. The WQMP shall include an
operations and maintenance plan for the prescribed treatment
control BMPs to ensure their long-term performance.
Finding: The mitigation measures are feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce potentially
significant impacts related to hydrology and water quality (impacts to aquatic, wetland, or riparian
habitat)to a less than significant level for the reasons set forth in the FEIR.
Impact: Result in a potential for discharge of stormwater pollutants from areas of material
storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing),
waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas,loading docks or other
outdoor work areas. Hazardous materials would be stored indoors at the Central Plant. Because
hazardous materials or wastes would be generated, handled,transported, or disposed of in association
with the proposed project, measures would be taken to comply with applicable local, State, and
federal regulations to avoid harm to humans and the environment. Any material generated by the on-
site Health Care Center, pools, landscaping, and vehicle maintenance would be disposed of and
handled in compliance with all applicable regulations. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.9.3,
which requires source control BMPs that target pollutants of concern in runoff from the project site,
would reduce operational impacts related to discharge of storm water pollutants from areas of
materials storage,vehicle or equipment maintenance,waste handling,hazardous materials handling or
storage, delivery areas,loading docks, or other outdoor work areas to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measure 4.9.3: Water Quality Management Plan.Prior to submittal of grading
plans for review and approval, the Applicant shall submit a Final
Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to the City Assistant
Director of Engineering and Public Works for review and
approval. The WQMP shall be consistent with the City's Model
WQMP and Hydromodification Management Plan. Project-
specific source control, treatment control, and hydromodification
control BMPs contained in the Final WQMP shall be
incorporated into final design. The BMPs shall be properly
designed and maintained to target pollutants of concern and
reduce runoff from the project site. The WQMP shall include an
operations and maintenance plan for the prescribed treatment
control BMPs to ensure their long-term performance.
Finding: The mitigation measure is feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce potentially
significant impacts related to hydrology and water quality (discharge of stormwater pollutants) to a
less than significant level for the reasons set forth in the FEIR.
Noise.
Impact: Expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance,or applicable standards of other agencies.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 64
Short-Term Construction-Related Noise Impacts. The nearest noise-sensitive land uses, including
the mobile home park residences and church to the north, the residential uses to the east, and the
elementary school to the south, are approximately 150 feet from the project's construction area and
would be potentially exposed to construction noise up to 80 A-weighted decibels (dBA) maximum
instantaneous noise level (Lma,,) (refer to the DEIR, Appendix J). Although this range of construction
noise would be higher than the ambient noise, it would cease to occur once project construction is
completed. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.11.1, which requires compliance with the
construction hours specified in the City's Noise Ordinance (Section 9-3.531, Noise Standards
[Residential and Nonresidential]), would reduce construction noise impacts to a less than significant
level.
Long-Term Stationary-Source Noise Impacts.
Truck Delivery and Loading/Unloading. The proposed project would include a 6-foot-high
precast concrete or concrete masonry unit (CMU) wall along the boundary between the on-site
residences and the Health Care Center. This wall would reduce noise related to loading/unloading
activity at the Health Care Center to below 54 dBA I . at the nearest proposed outdoor living
areas (patios and/or balconies) on the project site. Therefore, noise from loading and unloading
truck deliveries at the adjacent retail center or the on-site Health Care Center would not generate
noise levels in excess of standards, and no mitigation is required.
Parking Lot Activity. Parking areas for the proposed project on the surface level would be
located more than 50 feet from the nearest on-site outdoor living area. Therefore, noise from the
on- and off-site parking areas would not generate noise levels in excess of standards, and no
mitigation is required.
Dog Park Activity. Dog park activities in areas adjacent to the nearest on- and off-site outdoor
living areas will need to comply with Standard Condition 4.11.1, which requires dog park
activities on the project site to comply with the City's Noise Ordinance (Section 9-3.531, Noise
Standards [Residential and Nonresidential]). Therefore, noise from the on-site dog park activity
areas would have a less than significant impact with compliance with Standard Condition 4.11.1,
and no mitigation is required.
Mitigation Measure 4.11.1: Short-Term Construction Noise Impact. Prior to issuance of
demolition or grading permits, the Applicant shall submit
grading and construction plans for review and approval by the
City of San Juan Capistrano's (City) Director of Development
Services, or designee. The plans shall include a condition that the
construction contractor shall implement the following during
construction activities to reduce potential construction noise
impacts on nearby sensitive receptors:
• During all project site excavation and grading, the project
contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or
mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers
consistent with manufacturer's standards.
• The project contractor shall place all stationary construction
equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the
relatively more sensitive receptors nearest the project site.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 65
• The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in
areas that will create the greatest distance between
construction-related noise sources and relatively more noise-
sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project
construction.
The construction contractor shall limit all construction-related
activities that would result in high noise levels to between the
hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on Saturday. No construction shall
be permitted outside of these hours or on Sundays and federal
holidays.
Standard Condition 4.11.1: Dog Park Activities. Dog park activities on the project site are
required to comply with the City's Municipal Code Noise
Ordinance requirements as identified in Section 9-3.531, Noise
Standards(Residential and Nonresidential).
Finding: The mitigation measure is feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce potentially
significant impacts related to noise (complying with San Juan Capistrano noise standards) to a less
than significant level for the reasons set forth in the FEIR.
Impact: Result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing without the project.
Long-Term Off-Site Traffic Noise Impacts.Project-related traffic noise levels would increase up to
0.6 dBA or lower. Since this range of traffic noise level increases in the outdoor environment would
not be perceptible by the human ear when it occurs gradually over a period of time,no significant off-
site traffic noise impacts from project-related traffic would occur.
Long-Term On-Site Traffic Noise Impacts.
Del Obispo Street. The projected exterior noise level for buildings within 89 feet of the
centerline would be 65 dBA CNEL or higher. The Project Design Features would include the
construction of a 6-foot-high precast concrete or CMU wall with a minimum height of 6 feet
along the perimeter of the residential units (Project Design Feature 4.11.1) to reduce the exterior
noise level of 65 dBA CNEL or lower for ground-level uses. In addition, if private
balconies/patios are located within 89 feet of the centerline, compliance with Mitigation Measure
4.11.2, which would require construction of a 5-foot-high noise wall around each second-level
balcony for units located within 89 feet of the Del Obispo Street centerline,would reduce impacts
to a less than significant level. Therefore, since these residential units are projected to be exposed
to traffic noise levels below 69 dBA CNEL, windows with Sound Transmission Class (STC)
ratings provided by standard building construction (up to STC-28) would be sufficient for
dwelling units directly adjacent to Del Obispo Street.
Alipaz Street. The proposed Health Care Center on the project site would be located
approximately 70 feet from the Alipaz Street centerline and would be potentially exposed to
traffic noise levels up to 66 dBA CNEL. Exterior noise levels are required to be reduced to
65 dBA CNEL or lower in outdoor living areas impacted by traffic noise exceeding 65 dBA
CNEL. Since the buffer area between the Health Care Center and Alipaz Street would not have
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 66
any outdoor recreation uses, no mitigation measures would be required to reduce the exterior
noise level to 65 dBA CNEL or lower.
With windows closed, interior noise levels in the Health Care Center would not exceed the 45
dBA CNEL standard for medical uses. Therefore, windows with STC ratings provided by
standard building construction (STC-24 to STC-28) would be sufficient for the Health Care
Center directly adjacent to Alipaz Street.
Via Positiva. The proposed buildings on the project site would be located approximately 70 feet
from the roadway centerline and would not be exposed to traffic noise exceeding 60 dBA CNEL.
This exterior noise level is below the City's 65 dBA CNEL noise standard for outdoor living
areas. Since the buffer area between the proposed buildings and Via Positiva would not have an
outdoor recreation area, no mitigation is required, and long-term traffic noise impacts would be
less than significant
Mitigation Measure 4.11.2: Balcony Noise Barriers. Prior to issuance of construction
permits, the Applicant shall submit construction plans for
review and approval by the City's Director of Development
Services, or designee. The plans shall include construction of
a minimum 5-foot-high noise wall (combination of solid
material and/or translucent material) around each second-
level balcony for units located within 89 feet of the Del
Obispo Street centerline.
Project Design Feature 4.11.1: Perimeter Wall. The proposed project will construct a
precast concrete masonry unit (CMU) wall with a minimum
height of 6 feet along the entire perimeter of the site
containing the residential units.
Project Design Feature 4.11.2: Mechanical Ventilation. The proposed project will provide
mechanical ventilation, such as an air-conditioning system,
to all residential units, including those along Del Obispo
Street and the Health Care Center.
Finding: The mitigation measure is feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce potentially
significant impacts related to noise (permanent increase in ambient noise levels) to a less than
significant level for the reasons set forth in the FEIR.
Impact: Result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing without the project.
The nearest noise-sensitive land uses, including the mobile home park residences and church to the
north, the residential uses to the east, and the elementary school to the south, are approximately 150
feet from the project's construction area and would be potentially exposed to construction noise up to
80 dBA L,,,aX. Although this range of construction noise would be higher than the ambient noise, it
would cease to occur once project construction is completed. Compliance with Standard Condition
4.11.1, Dog Park Activities, and with Project Design Features 4.11.1 and 4.11.2, Perimeter Wall, and
Mechanical Ventilation, respectively; and implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.11.1, which
requires compliance with the construction hours specified in the City's Noise Ordinance (Section
9-3.531, Noise Standards [Residential and Nonresidential]), would reduce construction and
operational noise impacts to a less than significant level.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 67
Mitigation Measure 4.11.1: Short-Term Construction Noise Impact. Prior to issuance of
demolition or grading permits, the Applicant shall submit
grading and construction plans for review and approval by the
City of San Juan Capistrano's (City) Director of Development
Services, or designee. The plans shall include a condition that the
construction contractor shall implement the following during
construction activities to reduce potential construction noise
impacts on nearby sensitive receptors:
• During all project site excavation and grading, the project
contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or
mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers
consistent with manufacturer's standards.
• The project contractor shall place all stationary construction
equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the
relatively more sensitive receptors nearest the project site.
• The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in
areas that will create the greatest distance between
construction-related noise sources and relatively more noise-
sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project
construction.
The construction contractor shall limit all construction-related
activities that would result in high noise levels to between the
hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on Saturday. No construction shall
be permitted outside of these hours or on Sundays and federal
holidays.
Standard Condition 4.11.1: Dog Park Activities. Dog park activities on the project site are
required to comply with the City's Municipal Code Noise
Ordinance requirements as identified in Section 9-3.531, Noise
Standards(Residential and Nonresidential).
Project Design Feature 4.11.1: Perimeter Wall. The proposed project will construct a precast
concrete masonry unit (CMU) wall with a minimum height of 6
feet along the entire perimeter of the site containing the
residential units.
Project Design Feature 4.11.2: Mechanical Ventilation. The proposed project will provide
mechanical ventilation, such as an air-conditioning system, to all
residential units, including those along Del Obispo Street and the
Health Care Center.
Finding: The mitigation measure is feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce potentially
significant impacts related to noise (temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels) to a less
than significant level for the reasons set forth in the FEIR.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 68
Public Services and Utilities.
Impact: 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.
Construction. Grading and construction activities would disturb soils, and construction of structures
would increase impervious area, which can increase storm water runoff during construction.
However, as specified in Mitigation Measure 4.9.1 (Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality), the
Construction General Permit requires preparation of a SWPPP to identify construction BMPs to be
implemented during project construction in order to reduce impacts to water quality, including those
impacts associated with soil erosion, siltation, spills, and increased runoff. With implementation of
Mitigation Measure 4.9.1, which requires compliance with the Construction General Permit,
construction impacts related to the capacity of the existing storm water drainage systems would be
reduced to less than significant levels.
Operation. The project proposes a series of private storm drains as well as a Storm Water Detention
System. The Storm Water Detention System would limit the developed condition of a 25-year storm
release to pre-developed flows. These improvements to the existing storm drain system would ensure
that the City would be able to adequately handle increased storm water runoff as a result of the
proposed project and would not have a significant impact. In addition, as previously discussed in
Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, the proposed project would be required to comply with
Mitigation Measure 4.9.3, which requires project-specific source control, treatment control, and
hydromodification control BMPs specified in the Final WQMP to be incorporated into final design.
Therefore, with implementation of private storm drains, Storm Water Detention System BMPs, and
Mitigation Measure 4.9.3, operational impacts related to storm water drainage facilities would be less
than significant.
Mitigation Measure 4.9.1: Construction General Permit. Prior to approval of grading
plans and issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall
obtain coverage under the State Water Resources Control Board
(SWRCB) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges
Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities
(Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, Permit No. CAS000002, as
amended by Order Nos. 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-0006-
DWQ) (Construction General Permit), or subsequent permit. The
Applicant shall provide the Waste Discharge Identification
Number to the City of San Juan Capistrano (City) Assistant
Director of Engineering and Public Works, or their designee, to
demonstrate proof of coverage under the Construction General
Permit. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan(SWPPP) shall
be prepared and implemented for the project in compliance with
the requirements of the Construction General Permit. The
SWPPP shall identify construction best management practices
(BMPs) to be implemented to ensure that the potential for soil
erosion and sedimentation is minimized and to control the
discharge of pollutants in storm water runoff as a result of
construction activities.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 69
Mitigation Measure 4.9.3: Water Quality Management Plan.Prior to submittal of grading
plans for review and approval, the Applicant shall submit a Final
Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to the City Assistant
Director of Engineering and Public Works for review and
approval. The WQMP shall be consistent with the City's Model
WQMP and Hydromodification Management Plan. Project-
specific source control, treatment control, and hydromodification
control BMPs contained in the Final WQMP shall be
incorporated into final design. The BMPs shall be properly
designed and maintained to target pollutants of concern and
reduce runoff from the project site. The WQMP shall include an
operations and maintenance plan for the prescribed treatment
control BMPs to ensure their long-term performance.
Finding: The mitigation measures are feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce potentially
significant impacts related to public services and utilities (construction of new storm water drainage
facilities or expansion of existing facilities) to a less than significant level for the reasons set forth in
the FEIR.
Traffic and Circulation.
Impact: Result in inadequate emergency access.
Construction. During project construction, temporary lane closures could restrict access for
emergency vehicles. Therefore, Mitigation Measure 4.15.1, which requires that a TMP be prepared
for the proposed project, would be required to ensure that emergency vehicles would be able to
navigate through streets adjacent to the project site that may experience congestion due to
construction activities. With implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.15.1, potential impacts related
to emergency access during project construction would be less than significant.
Operation. As part of the project approval, emergency access to/from the site would be required to
meet all applicable City codes and standards. Subject to review and approval of plans relative to
adequate vehicular access, the development plans would not restrict or preclude access for emergency
vehicles and, therefore, the proposed project would not result in inadequate emergency access.
Therefore, operational impacts would be considered less than significant, and no mitigation measures
are required.
Mitigation Measure 4.15.1: Traffic Management Plan. Prior to issuance of any grading or
construction permits, the Applicant shall prepare and submit a
Traffic Management Plan(TMP) for approval by the City of San
Juan Capistrano (City) Traffic Engineer, or designee. The TMP
shall be implemented during all phases of the proposed project
construction and shall identify designated construction staging
areas. The TMP shall include the name and phone number of a
contact person who can be reached 24 hours per day regarding
construction traffic complaints or emergency situations. In
addition, the TMP shall take into account and coordinate with
other TMPs that are in effect or have been proposed for other
projects in the City. The TMP shall include, but not be limited
to,the following:
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 70
• Construction activities shall be scheduled to reduce the
effect on traffic flow on arterial streets.
• Construction vehicles, including construction personnel
vehicles, shall not park on public streets.
• Construction vehicles shall not stage or queue where they
interfere with pedestrian and vehicular traffic or block access
to nearby businesses.
• If feasible, any traffic lane closures shall be limited to off-
peak traffic periods, as approved by the Orange County
Sheriff's Department, as appropriate.
• The Orange County Sheriff's Department shall be notified a
minimum of 24 hours in advance of any lane closures or
other roadway work.
• Temporary traffic control provisions shall be implemented
during all construction activities adjacent to public right-of-
way to improve traffic flow on public roadways (e.g., flag
persons).
• Flag persons in adequate numbers shall be provided to
minimize impacts to traffic flow and to ensure safe access
into and out of the site.
• Flag persons shall be trained to assist in emergency response
by restricting or controlling the movement of traffic that
could interfere with emergency vehicle access.
• All emergency access to the project site and adjacent areas
shall be kept clear and unobstructed during all phases of
demolition and construction.
Finding: The mitigation measure is feasible and would avoid or substantially reduce potentially
significant impacts related to emergency access to a less than significant level for the reasons set forth
in the FEIR.
D. SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS THAT CANNOT BE MITIGATED
TO A LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL
As determined in the contents of this FEIR, implementation of the proposed project would not result in
any significant and unavoidable adverse impacts. All potentially significant impacts have been effectively
mitigated to a less than significant level.
III. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
CEQA requires that an EIR describe a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed project or to its
location that could feasibly attain most of the basic project objectives, but would avoid or substantially
lessen any of the significant effects, and that it evaluate the comparative merits of each of the alternatives.
Section 15126.6(b) of the CEQA Guidelines states that the ". . . discussion of alternatives shall focus on
alternatives to the project or its location which are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 71
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." The following section discusses the project alternatives
that were considered and analyzed in the FEIR and summarizes the consistency of these alternatives with
the objectives of the proposed project.
The FEIR identified two alternatives as follows:
1. No Project/No Development(Alternative 1)
2. Reduced Project Alternative(Alternative 2)
The City's findings and facts in support of findings with respect to each of the alternatives considered are
provided below. In making these findings, the City certifies that it has independently reviewed and
considered the information on alternatives provided in the FEIR, including the information provided in
comments on the DEIR and the responses to those comments in the FEIR. The FEIR's discussion and
analysis of these alternatives considered in the FEIR is not repeated in total in these findings, but the
discussion and analysis of the alternatives in the FEIR are incorporated in these findings by reference to
supplement the analysis here. The City also certifies that it has independently reviewed and considered all
other information in the administrative record.
A. Alternative 1: No Project/No Development Alternative
Description. Consistent with Section 15126.6 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the No Project/No
Development Alternative (Alternative 1) assumes the existing land uses and condition of the project site
at the time the NOP was published (January 2014) would continue to exist without changes. The setting
of the project site at the time the NOP was published is described throughout Chapter 4.0 of this EIR with
respect to individual environmental issues, and forms the baseline of the impact assessment of the
proposed project. Alternative 1 represents the environmental conditions that would exist if no new
development of any kind were to occur on the project site. Alternative 1 anticipates that the nursery
facilities and associated distribution center on the project site would continue to operate without any
improvements or changes.
As previously stated, the existing General Plan land use designation for the project site is Agri-Business.
The base land use designation of Agri-Business allows for the production and sale of agricultural crops.
Specifically, allowable uses within the Agri-Business designation include field and row crops, orchards
and vineyards, nurseries, and greenhouses, as well as animal breeding, boarding, raising, and training. In
addition to the base land use, the General Plan allows a density of 0.1 floor-to-area ratio (FAR) for
projects located in the Agri-Business land use designation.
The existing zoning designation for the project site is Agri-Business (A). Allowable uses within the Agri-
Business zoning district include detached employee quarters, farming uses, home businesses, horse
stables, mobile homes, nurseries, greenhouses, plant storage, and packing plants for agricultural products.
The City's Zoning Code allows a height of 35 feet and a density of 0.10 FAR for projects located in the
Agri-Business zoning district.
Alternative lwould allow for the existing on-site nursery facilities to continue to operate as they currently
do into the foreseeable future. There would be no improvements implemented on the project site. In
addition, the adoption of the proposed Spieker CCRC Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment (GPA),
and Rezone Amendment allowing the development of a CCRC as a permitted use on the project site
would not occur. Alternative 1 would allow existing conditions on the project site to remain unchanged.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 72
Environmental Effects. The project site is currently developed with an active commercial nursery and
distribution center consisting of several greenhouses, growing areas, storage sheds, office space for
employees, and loading docks for regional distribution. This alternative assumes that these nursery
facilities and land uses would continue into the future. While maintenance of these facilities would occur,
it is assumed that no renovations or new construction would occur at the site.
The project site is bordered on the south by Via Positiva, with agri-business, community park, and
educational uses located beyond. An existing retail center and Del Obispo Street are adjacent to the
western project boundary, with single-family residential uses located beyond Del Obispo Street.
Multifamily residential units are located beyond the eastern project boundary, along Alipaz Street. To the
north, the project site is bound by religious, school, and residential uses, including a senior residential
facility.
Under Alternative 1, the visual setting of the project site would not be altered. No new air pollutant
emissions or greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions would be generated by new visitors or short-term
construction since no new construction is proposed. The existing vegetation and wildlife on site would
not be disturbed compared with existing conditions. Unknown potential subsurface archaeological and
paleontological resources would remain undisturbed. There would be no impacts related to geology, soils,
and hazardous materials. There would be no change to the project site with regard to the percentage of the
site that would remain pervious or the volume of runoff during a storm event and runoff treatment from
BMPs that are included in the proposed project. The existing land uses would continue to be consistent
with the City's General Plan and zoning documents, and no General Plan or Zoning Amendments would
be required.No short-term construction noise impacts or long-term operational noise impacts would occur
to the surrounding area. No additional population would result from the continued existing uses and
conditions on the site. No additional demands for fire or police services would occur, and no additional
demand for recreational facilities would result for Alternative 1. Further,no additional vehicle trips would
be generated by construction or operations at the site, no new sources of solid waste would be created,
and no increase in demand for electricity or natural gas would occur under Alternative 1.
Ability to Achieve Project Objectives. Alternative 1 would not achieve any of the 12 project objectives.
Without the proposed project, the project site would not be developed with the proposed CCRC uses.
Alternative 1 would not help the City achieve its goal of providing a retirement community option not
currently provided in the City, and would not provide progressive care services for seniors. Furthermore,
this alternative would not provide new employment opportunities within the City,nor would it expand the
economic base of the City. In addition, implementation of sustainable, or "green," features would not
occur under this alternative.
Findings. The City Council finds, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(3), that specific
legal, economic, social, technical, or other considerations make Alternative 1 identified in the DEIR and
the FEIR infeasible.
Facts in Support of the Finding. Alternative 1 has the least impact to the environment because it would
not require removal of the existing on-site nursery facilities and the associated distribution center, and no
construction would occur. While Alternative 1 would lessen or avoid the environmental impacts of the
proposed project, the beneficial impacts of the proposed project—including the provision of a unique
retirement community option not currently provided by the City, the provision of new employment
opportunities and new tax revenues—would not occur, and none of the project objectives would be met.
Upon weighing the options of this alternative, the environmental benefits that might be achieved with this
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 73
alternative are outweighed, independently and separately,by the alternative's failure to achieve any of the
project objectives. In light of these considerations, this alternative has been rejected in favor of the
proposed project.
B. Alternative 2: Reduced Project Alternative
Description. This Reduced Project Alternative (Alternative 2) assumes the project site would be
developed with residential, open space, and recreational uses similar to those included under the proposed
project, but without the Health Care Center and the associated assisted living and skilled nursing uses.
This alternative would eliminate 101,520 square feet of assisted living and skilled nursing uses proposed
as part of the Health Care Center. Therefore, development included under Alternative 2 would no longer
constitute a CCRC use, but would be considered an age-restricted residential community containing
market-rate units. Although recreational amenities such as a pool and a clubhouse would be provided
under Alternative 2, no residential dining or health-related services would be provided. The eliminated
square footage from the Health Care Center would primarily become passive open space, with a small
portion redistributed to residential uses. Alternative 2 would require a GPA and a Rezone Amendment in
order to allow residential development on the site, which is currently designated Agri-Business in both
the General Plan and the Zoning Code. Table B summarizes the uses assumed on the project site under
this Alternative.
Table B: Alternative 2: Square Footage
Number of Total Proposed
Land Use Units Square Footage Tsguare Footage
Residential Units
Apartments 100 650-1,800 110,000
Attached Multifamily 100 1,000-1,600 140,000
Single-Family 218 1,200-2,200 380,000
Total Residential Units 630,000
Recreation
Outdoor Recreation and N/A N/A 54,722
Clubhouse
Total Recreation 54,722
Open Space
Landscaped Areas N/A N/A 548,800
Open Spa e 77,568
Total Open Space 626,368
Other Facilities
Maintenance Building, N/A N/A 19,747
Rental/Sales Office
Total Other Facilities 19,747
Source:LSA Associates(April 2014).
N/A=not applicable
C. Environmental Effects
Aesthetics. Similar to the proposed project,Alternative 2 would have less than significant impacts related
to scenic vistas, scenic resources, light, glare, and the existing visual character of the project site and its
surroundings. As previously stated, Alternative 2 would result in the development of an age-restricted
residential community consisting of apartments, attached multifamily units, and single-family detached
residential units. Unlike the proposed project, all residential buildings proposed as part of Alternative 2
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 74
would be constructed at a maximum height of 35 feet, consistent with the City's Zoning Code.
Furthermore, this alternative would, like the proposed project, be required to comply with the City's
Lighting Code. Overall, the building massing on site would be less than that of the proposed project
because the Health Care Center would be eliminated; therefore, since this alternative would result in a
smaller project overall, the overall visual changes to the project site would be less than those associated
with the proposed project. Therefore, the overall visual impacts of Alternative 2 would be less than
significant and less than those of the proposed project.
Agricultural and Forestry Resources. Similar to the proposed project, Alternative 2 would have less
than significant impacts related to agriculture and forestry resources. Although Alternative 2 does not
include the development of the proposed Health Care Center, it is anticipated that all current nursery
operations on the site would be removed under this alternative. Similar to the proposed project, the
nursery and distribution facilities (State-designated Unique Farmland) would be relocated within the
State. Additionally, this alternative would also be considered to have less than significant impacts to the
loss of agriculture based on the California LESA Model analysis since the total proposed site acreage is
the same as with the proposed project. Although Alternative 2 would result in a significant amount of
open space (approximately 14 acres), this would likely not be enough land to be economically feasible to
remain in agricultural production. In addition, agricultural production could be an inconsistent land use
adjacent to residential uses due to exposure to agricultural chemicals, dust, noise, and odors. The open
space under this alternative could, however, be used as a neighborhood garden. Overall, agricultural
impacts associated with Alternative 2 are considered to be similar to those of the proposed project based
on the relocation of the nursery and distribution facilities and because the LESA Model concluded that the
loss of agriculture on the site would be less than significant.
Air Quality. Similar to the proposed project, Alternative 2 would have less than significant impacts
related to air quality. Construction and operational emissions associated with Alternative 2 would be
reduced because this alternative eliminates 101,520 square feet of building associated with the Health
Care Center. Air quality impacts would be incrementally reduced during construction when compared to
the project due to the reduced amount of building construction. Therefore, similar to the proposed project,
Alternative 2 would not exceed significance thresholds for criteria pollutants with the implementation of
mitigation and standard SCAQMD measures. Operational impacts would be slightly reduced compared to
the proposed project with the elimination of the Health Care Center and the associated reduction of
vehicular trips. Overall, there would be fewer air quality emissions for Alternative 2 compared to the
proposed project.
Biological Resources. Similar to the proposed project, Alternative 2 would have less than significant
impacts related to biological resources. As previously discussed, Alternative 2, similar to the proposed
project, would remove all existing nursery facilities and vegetation on the project site. Further, this
alternative would implement a landscape plan similar to that of the proposed project. Similar to the
proposed project, Alternative 2 would also be required to implement mitigation measures to reduce
potentially significant impacts to nesting bird species and to comply with the terms and conditions
outlined in the Orange County NCCP/HCP. Therefore, biological impacts associated with Alternative 2
are considered to be similar to those of the proposed project.
Cultural Resources. Similar to the proposed project,Alternative 2 would not significantly impact known
cultural, paleontological, or historic resources. Because Alternative 2 would not include development of
the Health Care Center,this alternative would result in less on-site construction and,therefore, a reduction
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 75
in the total excavation and grading on the project site. Therefore, because the area of disturbance is
reduced, this alternative's potential impacts to unknown cultural resources would be slightly less than
those of the proposed project. However, similar to the proposed project, Alternative 2 would be required
to adhere to mitigation to protect any unknown archaeological or paleontological resources. Overall,
impacts to cultural resources for Alternative 2 would be similar to those of the proposed project.
Geology and Soils. Similar to the proposed project, Alternative 2 would have less than significant
impacts related to geology and soils with implementation of mitigation and adherence to the
recommendations of the geology study to mitigate potential geological hazards. Construction and
excavation activities associated with implementation of this alternative would be less than those
associated with the proposed project due to the elimination of construction activities associated with the
Health Care Center. Therefore, impacts to geology and soils associated with Alternative 2 are considered
to be similar to,but incrementally less than,those of the proposed project.
Global Climate Change. Similar to the proposed project, Alternative 2 would have less than significant
impacts related to GHG emissions and global climate change. Specifically, Alternative 2, like the
proposed project, would be designed to meet and exceed all Title 24 standards, which would reduce
energy consumption. Overall, GHG emissions would be incrementally less during construction when
compared to the proposed project due to the elimination of the Health Care Center. Specifically, GHG
emissions would be lower due to the reduced amount of building materials that would need to be
produced and transported to the project site to complete the construction. Construction GHG emissions
would also be reduced because grading activities and equipment emissions on the project site would be
reduced under Alternative 2. Operational emissions would also be reduced with the elimination of the
Health Care Center and the associated reduction of vehicle trips and lower energy demand. Overall, GHG
emissions would be reduced for Alternative 2 compared to the proposed project.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Similar to the proposed project, Alternative 2 would have less than
significant impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials. Although there would be a reduced
amount of construction required, Alternative 2, similar to the proposed project, would be required to
implement mitigation measures and comply with regulations for handling hazardous materials during
construction activities. Alternative 2 would result in reduced impacts related to hazardous materials
during project operation because the elimination of the Health Care Center would result in the elimination
of hazardous medical waste associated with the operation of on-site medical uses. Therefore, under
Alternative 2, impacts related to hazardous materials are considered less than those of the proposed
project.
Hydrology and Water Quality. Similar to the proposed project, construction of Alternative 2 could
potentially impact water quality related to erosion and pollutants. Water quality impacts associated with
construction under this alternative would be slightly reduced compared to the proposed project due to the
fact that this alternative includes the construction of 101,520 fewer square feet of building space than the
proposed project. Further, because Alternative 2 would not develop the project site with the Health Care
Center proposed as part of the project, there would be a slight reduction in impervious surface area
compared to the proposed project. In addition, there would also be a reduction in grading activity
compared to the proposed project. Alternative 2, similar to the proposed project, would be required to
implement a WQMP and BMPs to address pollutants of concern; compliance with regulatory
requirements and mitigation would ensure these impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, with
compliance with regulatory requirements, operational impacts would be less than significant for this
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 76
alternative, similar to the proposed project. Overall, impacts related to hydrology and water quality for
Alternative 2 would be less than those for the proposed project.
Land Use. Similar to the proposed project, Alternative 2 would have less than significant impacts related
to land use and planning. Under this alternative, as well as the proposed project, there would be no
impacts related to the division of an existing community. However, unlike the proposed project, the age-
restricted residential uses proposed under this alternative would not compromise a CCRC use. However,
the proposed age-restricted residential uses under Alternative 2 would be consistent with the existing
surrounding land use pattern in the area. Similar to the proposed project, the proposed age-restricted
residential uses included as part of this alternative would also require the approval of a GPA and a Rezone
Amendment to change the existing General Plan and zoning designation on the project site from Agri-
Business to High-Density Residential to allow for the proposed 418 residential units on the project site.
Although the proposed project would require a GPA and a Rezone Amendment, similar to the proposed
project, Alternative 2 would be consistent with the policies contained in the City's General Plan, the
SCAG RCP, and the Orange County NCCP/HCP. Specifically, Alternative 2 would be consistent with
SCAG policies aimed at encouraging development near existing commercial centers and freeways.
Furthermore, similar to the proposed project, Alternative 2 would develop the project site within a
designated "developed" area outside of protected habitat reserves established by the Orange County
NCCP/HCP. Therefore, impacts related to land use for Alternative 2 are considered to be similar to those
associated with the proposed project.
Noise. Similar to the proposed project, Alternative 2 would have less than significant impacts related to
noise. Construction activity associated with Alternative 2 would be less, due to the elimination of the
proposed Health Care Center, but would generally result in similar noise and vibration levels since the
construction and excavation areas, methods, and equipment would be similar. Without mitigation, the
following impacts would be potentially significant under both the proposed project and Alternative 2: (1)
short-term construction noise generated during excavation, grading, and building construction; and (2)
long-term traffic noise impacts at the proposed residential units along Del Obispo Street. With
implementation of mitigation, both the proposed project and Alternative 2 would reduce potentially
significant construction impacts to a less than significant level. Alternative 2 would result in fewer daily
vehicle trips than the proposed project primarily due to the elimination of the proposed Health Care
Center and would,therefore,result in lower mobile-source noise levels. However, similar to the proposed
project, implementation of mitigation measures would reduce adverse traffic noise impacts both off site
and at the proposed residential uses on the project site to below a level of significance. Because there
would be less development constructed with this alternative, overall impacts related to noise for
Alternative 2 are considered to be less than those associated with the proposed project.
Population and Housing. Similar to the proposed project, Alternative 2 would have a less than
significant impact on population and housing. Although Alternative 2 would provide the same number of
residential units as the proposed project, the elimination of the Health Care Center and assisted living
units would result in fewer residents and fewer employment opportunities. In addition, the expanded
recreation, dining, and resident services for the proposed project would not be included under Alternative
2 and the employment opportunities associated with those amenities and facilities would be eliminated.
Therefore, the impacts under this alternative related to population and housing would be comparable to,
but less than,those associated with the proposed project.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 77
Public Services and Utilities. Similar to the proposed project, Alternative 2 would have a less than
significant impact on public services and utilities. Public services and utilities include fire protection,
police protection, public schools, public libraries, solid waste, public transportation, water, wastewater,
electricity, and natural gas. Because the amount of development on site would be reduced with the
elimination of the Health Care Center under Alternative 2, the demands for public services and utilities
would be slightly reduced compared to the proposed project. Overall, impacts related to public services
and utilities under Alternative 2 are considered incrementally less than under the proposed project.
Recreation. Similar to the proposed project, Alternative 2 would have a less than significant impact on
recreational facilities. Alternative 2 includes the development of an age-restricted residential community
that would include many of the same on-site recreational amenities included as part of the proposed
project, including passive park space, a dog park, a tennis court, a pool, and a clubhouse. The same
number of residential units would be constructed under Alternative 2 as would be constructed as part of
the proposed project. As such, the demand for additional recreational amenities would be similar to the
proposed project. Overall, impacts related to recreational facilities under Alternative 2 are similar to those
associated with the proposed project.
Transportation/Traffic. Similar to the proposed project,Alternative 2 would have a less than significant
impact on transportation/traffic. Specifically, Alternative 2 would generate fewer trips than the proposed
project due to the elimination of the Health Care Center on the project site. Alternative 2 would result in
approximately 1,584 ADT trips, which would be 175 fewer total ADT trips compared to the proposed
project(1,759 ADT trips).
D. Ability to Achieve Project Objectives
Similar to the proposed project, Alternative 2 would establish appropriate General Plan land use and
zoning designations on the project site that would allow for on-site residential units (Objective 1) and
would not include development of the project site that would interfere with the continuation of
commercial uses on the 8-acre retail center adjacent to the project site (Objective 3). In addition,
Alternative 2 would include design features (Objectives 10 and 12)that would promote sustainability and
would be consistent with the San Juan Capistrano Green Building Program (Objective 11). Alternative 2
would achieve many of the project objectives but would not develop a unique retirement community
option (i.e., a CCRC) on the project site not currently provided in the City (Objective 7). Although
Alternative 2 would include the development of 418 market-rate age-restricted residential units on the
project site, this alternative would be inconsistent with the proposed project's goal of specifically
providing a high-quality CCRC for persons age 60 years and over(Objective 4). Alternative 2 would also
not create a mixed-use environment with residential, healthcare, and service uses that would provide
progressive care services for on-site residents (Objectives 2 and 5). Alternative 2 would not provide on-
site shuttles that would contribute to greater livability for on-site residents (Objective 6), nor would it
create new employment opportunities within the medical fields or for dining and resident services as
under the proposed project (Objective 8). Further, because Alternative 2 includes removal of the on-site
Health Care Center, this alternative would not increase the City's tax base generating revenue to the same
degree as the proposed project (Objective 9). Therefore, the elimination of the Health Care Center under
Alternative 2 would not maximize the potential of the site as a unique retirement community. This
alternative would meet many of the project objectives but not to the same degree as the proposed project.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 78
E. Finding
The City Council finds, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(3), that specific legal,
economic, social, technical, or other considerations make Alternative 2 identified in the DEIR and the
FEIR infeasible.
F. Facts in Support of the Finding
Although Alternative 2 would achieve many of the project objectives—specifically the project objectives
aimed at establishing appropriate land use designations on the project site (Objective 1), preserving
current uses within the adjacent 8-acre retail center (Objective 3), and including conservation and
sustainability features to be consistent with the City's Green Building Program (Objectives 10 through
12)—this alternative would not maximize the potential of the project site to serve as a comprehensive
retirement community option in the City of San Juan Capistrano (Objectives 2,4, 5, 6, and 7). In addition,
Alternative 2 would not expand the economic base of the City or provide employment opportunities as
proposed under the project(Objectives 8 and 9).
Although Alternative 2 would eliminate 101,520 square feet of assisted living and skilled nursing uses
proposed as part of the Health Care Center, it would develop the same number of residential units as the
proposed project. This alternative would develop the site with an age-restricted residential use but would
not provide the assisted living and skilled nursing uses or the on-site dining options as provided with the
proposed project. As a result, fewer employment opportunities would be created. Alternative 2 would not
integrate residential and health care uses, and seniors in need of daily medical assistance or long-term
care would have to move to other facilities to receive such care. The Reduced Project Alternative would
result in a less positive contribution to the local economy and would not increase the City's tax base
generating revenue to the same degree as the proposed project. As a result, this alternative is less
desirable to the City than the proposed project and is considered to be infeasible.
IV. GENERAL FINDINGS
1. The plans for the project have been prepared and analyzed so as to provide for public involvement in
the planning and CEQA processes.
2. To the degree that any impacts described in the FEIR are perceived to have a less than significant
effect on the environment or that such impacts appear ambiguous as to their effect on the environment
as discussed in the DEIR, the City has responded to key environmental issues and has incorporated
mitigation measures to reduce or minimize potential environmental effects of the proposed project to
the maximum extent feasible.
3. Comments regarding the DEIR received during the public review period have been adequately
responded to in written Responses to Comments attached to the FEIR. Any significant effects
described in such comments were avoided or substantially lessened by the standard conditions and
mitigation measures described in the FEIR.
4. The analysis of the environmental effects and mitigation measures contained in the DEIR and the
FEIR represents the independent judgment and analysis of the City.
Spieker Continuing Care Retirement Community Specific Plan Project
CEQA Findings of Fact
Page 79
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
JUNE 2014 SPIEKER CCRC SPECIFIC PLAN
CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA
7.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
7.1 MITIGATION MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21081.6 (enacted by the passage of Assembly Bill 3180)
mandates that the following requirements shall apply to all reporting or mitigation monitoring
programs:
• The public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes made to the
project or conditions of project approval 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 that 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 agency or a
responsible agency,prepare and submit a proposed reporting or monitoring program.
• The lead agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other materials that
constitute the record of proceedings upon which its decision is based.
• A public agency shall provide measures to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the
environment that are fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures.
Conditions of project approval may be set forth in referenced documents that address required
mitigation measures or, in the case of the adoption of a plan, policy, regulation, or other project,
by incorporating the mitigation measures into the plan,policy,regulation, or project design.
• Prior to the close of the public review period for a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR), a
responsible agency, or a public agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by the
project, shall either (1) submit to the lead agency complete and detailed performance objectives
for mitigation measures that would address the significant effects on the environment identified
by the responsible agency or agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by the
project, or (2) 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 that mitigate impacts to resources that are subject to the statutory authority of, and
definitions applicable to, that agency. Compliance or noncompliance with that requirement by a
responsible agency or agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by a project 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.
PNCA1301\Preprint DEIR\7.0 MMRP.docx«05/27/14» 7-1
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
SPIEKER CCRC SPECIFIC PLAN JUNE 2014
CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA
7.2 MITIGATION MONITORING PROCEDURES
The mitigation monitoring and reporting program has been prepared in compliance with PRC Section
21081.6. It describes the requirements and procedures to be followed by the City of San Juan
Capistrano (City) to ensure that all mitigation measures adopted as part of the Spieker Continuing
Care Retirement Community (CCRC) Specific Plan (proposed project) will be carried out as
described in this Draft EIR.
Table 7.A lists each of the mitigation measures specified in this Draft EIR and identifies the party or
parties responsible for implementation and monitoring of each measure.
7-2 P:\JCA1301\Preprint DEIR\7.0 MMRP.docx«05/27/14»
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
JUNE 2014 SPIEKER CCRC SPECIFIC PLAN
CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA
Table 7.A: Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program
Responsible
Party/Approving Timing for
Mitigation Measures Agency Mitigation Measure
4.1: Aesthetics
Mitigation Measure 4.1.1: Comprehensive Lighting Plan. Prior to issuance of any building Applicant/City of San Prior to issuance of
permits,the project Applicant shall prepare a comprehensive lighting Juan Capistrano any building permits
plan for review and approval by the City of San Juan Capistrano Development Services
(City)Development Services Director,or designee. The lighting plan Director,or designee
shall be prepared by a qualified engineer and shall be in compliance
with applicable standards of the City General Plan Municipal Code.
The lighting plan shall address all aspects of lighting, including
infrastructure, on-site driveways, recreation, safety, signage, and
promotional lighting, if any. The lighting plan shall include the
following in conjunction with other measures, as determined by the
illumination engineer:
a. Exterior on-site lighting shall be shielded and confined within
site boundaries.
b. No direct rays or glare are permitted to shine onto public streets
or adjacent sites.
c. "Walpak"type fixtures are not permitted.
d. Parking area lighting shall include cut-off fixtures, and light
standards shall not exceed 20 feet in height.
e. The site shall not be excessively illuminated based on the
illumination recommendations of the Illuminating Engineering
Society of North America, or, if in the opinion of the City
Development Services Director, or designee, the illumination
creates an unacceptable negative impact on surrounding land uses
or environmental resources. The City Development Services
Director, or designee, may order the dimming of light sources or
other remediation upon finding that the site is excessively
illuminated.
PAXA1301\Preprint DEIR\7.0 MMRP.docx a05/27/14» 7-3
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
SPIEKER CCRC SPECIFIC PLAN JUNE 2014
CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA
Table 7.A: Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program
Responsible
Party/Approving Timing for
Mitigation Measures Agency Mitigation Measure
Mitigation Measure 4.1.2: Photometric Study. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, a Applicant/City of San Prior to issuance of
photometric study shall be prepared by the project Applicant in Juan Capistrano any building permits
conjunction with a final lighting plan for approval by the City Director of
Development Services Director, or designee. The survey shall show Development
that lighting values are 1 footcandle or less at all property lines. Services,or designee
Mitigation Measure 4.1.3: Lighting Inspection. Prior to issuance of the certificate of City of San Juan Prior to issuance of
occupancy or final building permits, an evening inspection shall be Capistrano Director of certificate of
conducted by the City's Development Services Department to Development occupancy or final
confirm control of light and glare. Services,or designee building permits
4.2: Agriculture and Forestry Service
There are no potentially significant impacts related to agriculture and forestry service,therefore no mitigation is required.
4.3: Air Quality
There are no potentially significant impacts related to air quality,therefore no mitigation is required.
4.4: Biology
Mitigation Measure 4.4.1: Migratory Bird Treaty Act. If construction activities occur during Applicant/City of San Prior to
the breeding season (February 15—August 15), the applicant shall Juan Capistrano commencement of
retain a qualified biologist to conduct a nesting bird survey within 5 Director of grading activities and
days prior to commencement of construction activities to ensure that Development issuance of any
birds are not engaged in active nesting within 100 feet of the Services,or designee building permits
construction limits. If nesting birds are discovered during
preconstruction surveys, the biologists shall identify an appropriate
buffer (i.e., up to 500 feet depending on the circumstances and
specific bird species) where no construction activities or other
disturbances are allowed to occur until after the birds have fledged
from the nest. Prior to commencement of grading activities and
issuance of any building permits, the City of San Juan Capistrano
Director of Development Services, or designee, shall verify that all
project grading and construction plans include specific
documentation regarding the requirements of the Migratory Bird
Treaty Act (MBTA), that preconstruction surveys have been
completed and the results reviewed by staff, and that the appropriate
buffers(if needed) are noted on the plans and established in the field
with orange snow fencing.
7.4 PAXA1301\Preprint DEIR\7.0 MMRP.docx a05/27/14»
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
JUNE 2014 SPIEKER CCRC SPECIFIC PLAN
CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA
Table 7.A: Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program
Responsible
Party/Approving Timing for
Mitigation Measures Agency Mitigation Measure
4.5: Cultural Resources
Mitigation Measure 4.5.1: Archaeological Monitor and Native American Monitor. Prior to Applicant/City of San Prior to issuance of
issuance of grading permits, and in adherence to the Juan Capistrano any grading permits,
recommendations of the cultural resources survey,the applicant shall Director of and in adherence to the
retain, with approval of the City of San Juan Capistrano (City) Development recommendations of
Development Services Director, or designee, a qualified Services,or designee the cultural resources
archaeological monitor. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the survey
applicant, with City approval, shall also retain a Native American
monitor to be selected by the City after consultation with interested
tribal and Native American representatives. Both monitors shall be
present on the project site during ground-disturbing activities to
monitor rough and finish grading, excavation, and other ground-
disturbing activities in the native soils. Because no cultural resources
were identified on the project site, both monitors are not required to
be present on a full-time basis, but shall spot check ground-
disturbing activities to ensure that no cultural resources are impacted
during construction activities.
Mitigation Measure 4.5_2: Archaeological Monitoring Plan and Accidental Discovery. Prior Applicant/City of San Prior to
to commencement of any grading activities on site, the Applicant Juan Capistrano commencement of any
shall retain a qualified archaeologist to prepare a Monitoring Plan. Director of grading activity on
The Monitoring Plan shall be prepared by a qualified archaeologist Development site;during project
and shall be reviewed by the City Development Services Director, or Services,or designee; grading and
designee. The Monitoring Plan should include at a minimum: (1)a City of San Juan construction
list of personnel involved in the monitoring activities; (2)a Capistrano Public
description of how the monitoring shall occur; (3)a description of Works Director
the frequency of monitoring (e.g., full-time, part-time, spot
checking); (4)a description of what resources may be encountered;
(5)a description of circumstances that would result in the halting of
work at the project site (e.g., what is considered a "significant"
archaeological site); (6)a description of procedures for halting work
on site and notification procedures; and (7)a description of
monitoring reporting procedures. If any significant historical
resources, archaeological resources, or human remains are found
PAXA1301\Preprint DEIR\7.0 MMRP.docx a05/27/14» 7-5
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
SPIEKER CCRC SPECIFIC PLAN JUNE 2014
CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA
Table 7.A: Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program
Responsible
Party/Approving Timing for
Mitigation Measures Agency Mitigation Measure
during monitoring, work should stop within the immediate vicinity
(precise area to be determined by the archaeologist in the field)of
the resource until such time as the resource can be evaluated by an
archaeologist and any other appropriate individuals. Project
personnel shall not collect or move any archaeological materials or
human remains and associated materials. To the extent feasible,
project activities shall avoid these deposits. Where avoidance is not
feasible, the archaeological deposits shall be evaluated for their
eligibility for listing on the California Register of Historic Places. If
the deposits are not eligible, avoidance is not necessary. If the
deposits are eligible,adverse effects on the deposits must be avoided,
or such effects must be mitigated. Mitigation can include, but is not
necessarily limited to: excavation of the deposit in accordance with a
data recovery plan (see California Code of Regulations [CCR] Title
4(3)Section 5126.4(b)(3)(C)) and standard archaeological field
methods and procedures; laboratory and technical analyses of
recovered archaeological materials; production of a report detailing
the methods, findings, and significance of the archaeological site and
associated materials; curation of archaeological materials at an
appropriate facility for future research and/or display; an interpretive
display of recovered archaeological materials at a local school,
museum, or library; and public lectures at local schools and/or
historical societies on the findings and significance of the site and
recovered archaeological materials.
It shall be the responsibility of the City Department of Public Works
to verify that the Monitoring Plan is implemented during project
grading and construction. Upon completion of all monitoring/
mitigation activities, the consulting archaeologist shall submit a
monitoring report to the City Development Services Director, or
designee, and to the South Central Coastal Information Center
summarizing all monitoring/mitigation activities and confirming that
all recommended mitigation measures have been met. The
7.6 PAXA1301\Preprint DEIR\7.0 MMRP.docx a05/27/14»
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
JUNE 2014 SPIEKER CCRC SPECIFIC PLAN
CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA
Table 7.A: Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program
Responsible
Party/Approving Timing for
Mitigation Measures Agency Mitigation Measure
monitoring report shall be prepared consistent with the guidelines of
the Office of Historic Preservation's Archaeological Resources
Management Reports(ARMR):Recommended Contents and Format.
The City Development Services Director, or designee, shall be
responsible for reviewing any reports produced by the archaeologist
to determine the appropriateness and adequacy of the findings and
recommendations.
Mitigation Measure 4.5.3: Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Program. If Applicant/City of San Prior to issuance of
excavation activities are anticipated to extend deeper than 15 feet Juan Capistrano any grading permits
below the surface, the Applicant shall retain a qualified Director of
paleontologist, subject to the review and approval of the City Development
Development Services Director, or designee, to prepare a Services,or designee
Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Program (PRIMP) for
the proposed project prior to the issuance of any grading permits.
The PRIMP shall be consistent with the guidelines of the Society of
Vertebrate Paleontology(SVP) and shall include, but not be limited
to,the following:
• The paleontologist, or his/her representative, shall attend a
preconstruction meeting.
• Excavation and grading activities in sediments with a High
paleontological sensitivity rating (Young Alluvial Floodplain
Deposits below a depth of 15 feet, Old Alluvial Floodplain
Deposits, and the Capistrano Formation) shall be monitored by a
qualified paleontological monitor on a full-time basis.
• In the event paleontological resources are encountered when a
paleontological monitor is not present, work in the immediate
area of the find shall be redirected and the paleontologist
contacted to assess the find for scientific significance. If any
fossil remains are discovered in sediments with a Low
paleontological sensitivity rating (Young Alluvial Floodplain
Deposits to a depth of 15 feet beneath the surface), the
paleontologist shall make recommendations as to whether
PAXA1301\Preprint DEIR\7.0 MMRP.docx a05/27/14» 7-7
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
SPIEKER CCRC SPECIFIC PLAN JUNE 2014
CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA
Table 7.A: Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program
Responsible
Party/Approving Timing for
Mitigation Measures Agency Mitigation Measure
monitoring shall be required in these sediments on a full-time
basis beginning at a shallower depth.
• Collected resources shall be prepared to the point of
identification and permanent preservation. This includes washing
and picking of mass samples to recover small vertebrate and
invertebrate fossils and removal of surplus sediment around
larger specimens to reduce the storage volume for the repository
and the storage cost for the developer.
• Any collected resources shall be cataloged and curated into the
permanent collections of an accredited scientific institution.
• At the conclusion of the monitoring program, a report of findings
with an appended inventory of specimens shall be prepared.
When submitted to the City,the report and inventory shall signify
completion of the program to mitigate impacts to paleontological
resources.
Mitigation Measure 4.5.4: Human Remains. Consistent with the requirements of CCR Section Construction Ongoing during site
15064.5(e), if human remains are encountered during site Contractor/City of San disturbance,grading,
disturbance, grading, or other construction activities on the project Juan Capistrano or other construction
site, the construction contractor shall halt work within 25 feet of the Director of activity on the project
discovery; all work shall be redirected and the Orange County Development site
(County) Coroner notified immediately. No further disturbance shall Services,or designee
occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin
and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98.
If the remains are determined to be Native American, the County
Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission
(NAHC),which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant
(MLD). With the permission of the City, the MLD may inspect the
site of the discovery. The MLD shall complete the inspection within
48 hours of notification by the NAHC. The MLD may recommend
scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and
items associated with Native American burials. Consistent with CCR
Section 15064.5(d), if the remains are determined to be Native
American and an MLD is notified, the City shall consult with the
7-8 PAXA1301\Preprint DEIR\7.0 MMRP.docx a05/27/14»
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
JUNE 2014 SPIEKER CCRC SPECIFIC PLAN
CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA
Table 7.A: Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program
Responsible
Party/Approving Timing for
Mitigation Measures Agency Mitigation Measure
MLD identified by the NAHC to develop an agreement for the
treatment and disposition of the remains.
Upon completion of the assessment, the consulting archaeologist
shall prepare a report documenting the methods and results and
provide recommendations regarding the treatment of the human
remains and any associated cultural materials, as appropriate, and in
coordination with the recommendations of the MLD.The report shall
be submitted to the City Development Services Director,or designee,
and the South Central Coastal Information Center. The City
Development Services Director, or designee, shall be responsible for
reviewing any reports produced by the archaeologist to determine the
appropriateness and adequacy of the findings and recommendations.
4.6: Geology and Soils
Mitigation Measure 4.6.1: Conformance with the Project Geotechnical Study. Prior to Applicant/City of San Prior to issuance of
issuance of grading permits, the Applicant shall submit a final Juan Capistrano any grading permits
written report, subject to review and approval by the City of San Assistant Director of
Juan Capistrano (City) Assistant Director of Engineering and Public Engineering and
Works, or designee, indicating that design, grading, and construction Public Works,or
shall be performed in accordance with the requirements of the City designee
of San Juan Capistrano Municipal Code and the California Building
Code (CBC) applicable at the time of grading, appropriate local
grading regulations, and the requirements of the project geotechnical
consultant. All grading operations and construction shall be
conducted in conformance with the recommendations included in the
Geotechnical Due-Diligence Evaluation, Proposed Retirement
Community, Armstrong Nursery/Del Obispo Property, City of San
Juan Capistrano, California (Draft Geotechnical Due-Diligence
Evaluation;GMU Geotechnical,Inc.,August 1,2013).
Specific requirements in the Draft Geotechnical Due-Diligence
Evaluation include:
PAXA1301\Preprint DEIR\7.0 MMRP.docx a05/27/14)) 7-9
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
SPIEKER CCRC SPECIFIC PLAN JUNE 2014
CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA
Table 7.A: Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program
Responsible
Party/Approving Timing for
Mitigation Measures Agency Mitigation Measure
1. Removal and recompaction of existing fill soils and upper
alluvial soils to depths between 5 and 10 feet during site
grading;
2. Specifications related to grading equipment to be used during
grading excavating and fill placement;
3. Soil sampling to determine infiltration rates when infiltration
rates are determined;
4. Seismic design considerations and requirements for foundations
(i.e., ribbed slabs, post-tensioned slabs) and additional testing
prior to final design;and
5. Requirements for concrete design, protection for buried metal
utilities,and corrosion study.
Additional site testing and final design evaluation shall be conducted
by the project geotechnical consultant to refine and enhance these
requirements. If the project geotechnical consultant identifies
modifications or refinements to the requirements, the project
Applicant shall require appropriate changes to the final project
design and specifications.
Mitigation Measure 4.6.2: California Building Code Compliance and Seismic Standards. City of San Juan Prior to issuance of
Prior to issuance of building permits for planned structures, the Capistrano Director of any building permits
Director of the City of San Juan Capistrano Development Services Development for planned structures
Director, or designee, and the project soils engineer shall review the Services,or designee;
building plans to verify that the structural design conforms to the and the project soils
requirements of the geotechnical study and the City Municipal Code. engineer
Structures and retaining walls shall be designed in accordance with
the seismic parameters presented in the Draft Geotechnical Due-
Diligence Evaluation(2013) and applicable sections of Section 1613
of the most current CBC.
Mitigation Measure 4.6.3: Corrosive Soils. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the City of San Juan Prior to issuance of
City Assistant Director of Engineering and Public Works, or Capistrano Assistant any building permits
designee, shall verify that structural design conforms to the Director of
requirements of the geotechnical study with regard to the protection Engineering and
7-10 PAXA1301\Preprint DEIR\7.0 MMRP.docx a05/27/14»
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
JUNE 2014 SPIEKER CCRC SPECIFIC PLAN
CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA
Table 7.A: Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program
Responsible
Party/Approving Timing for
Mitigation Measures Agency Mitigation Measure
of ferrous metals and copper that will come into contact with on-site Public Works,or
soils. In addition, on-site inspections shall be conducted during designee;City
construction by the project geotechnical consultant and/or City Building Official
Building Official to ensure compliance with geotechnical
specifications as incorporated into project plans.
4.7: Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The proposed project would not result in potential significant impacts related to GHGs,and no mitigation is required.
4.8: Hazards and Hazardous Resources
Mitigation Measure 4.8.1: Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, the Applicant shall submit a Applicant/City of San Prior to issuance of
Medical Waste Management Program (MWMP) for review and Juan Capistrano certificate of
approval by the City of San Juan Capistrano's (City) Development Director of occupancy
Services Director, or designee. The MWMP shall include Development
confirmation that the Health Care Center operators and/or tenant Services,or designee
lease agreements require all medical wastes to be disposed of in
accordance with California Health and Safety Code Sections
117600-118360 (Medical Waste Management Act), as well as the
Orange County Hazardous Waste Management Plan and all
applicable local, State,and federal laws and regulations.
4.9: Hydrology and Water Quality
Mitigation Measure 4.9.1: Construction General Permit. Prior to approval of grading plans Applicant/City of San Prior to approval of
and issuance of a grading permit,the Applicant shall obtain coverage Juan Capistrano grading plans and
under the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) National Assistant Director of issuance of any
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit Engineering and grading permit
for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Public Works,or
Disturbance Activities (Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, Permit designee
No. CAS000002, as amended by Order Nos. 2010-0014-DWQ and
2012-0006-DWQ) (Construction General Permit), or subsequent
permit. The Applicant shall provide the Waste Discharge
Identification Number to the City of San Juan Capistrano (City)
Assistant Director of Engineering and Public Works, or their
designee, to demonstrate proof of coverage under the Construction
General Permit. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan(SWPPP)
shall be prepared and implemented for the project in compliance
PAXA1301\Preprint DEIR\7.0 MMRP.docx a05/27/14» 7-11
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
SPIEKER CCRC SPECIFIC PLAN JUNE 2014
CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA
Table 7.A: Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program
Responsible
Party/Approving Timing for
Mitigation Measures Agency Mitigation Measure
with the requirements of the Construction General Permit. The
SWPPP shall identify construction best management practices
(BMPs) to be implemented to ensure that the potential for soil
erosion and sedimentation is minimized and to control the discharge
of pollutants in storm water runoff as a result of construction
activities.
Mitigation Measure 4.9.2: NPDES Groundwater Discharge Permit. If groundwater Construction At least 30 days prior
dewatering operation is performed, then the Construction Contractor Contractor/City of San to the initiation of
shall comply with the requirements of the General Waste Discharge Juan Capistrano groundwater
Requirements for Discharges from Groundwater Extraction and Assistant Director of dewatering
Similar Discharges to Surface Waters within the San Diego Region Engineering and
Except for San Diego Bay (WDR) (Order No. R9-2008-0002, Permit Public Works,or
No. CAG919002) (Groundwater Discharge Permit), or subsequent designee
permit. The Construction Contractor shall comply with all applicable
provisions in the permit, including water sampling, analysis, and
reporting of dewatering-related discharges. At least 30 days prior to
the initiation of groundwater dewatering, the Applicant shall notify
and receive approval of the groundwater dewatering activities from
the City Assistant Director of Engineering and Public Works,or their
designee. The Applicant shall submit a Notice of Intent for coverage
under the permit to the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control
Board (RWQCB) at least 30 days prior to the start of dewatering.
Groundwater discharge shall not commence until a Notice of
Enrollment is received from the San Diego RWQCB. Upon
completion of groundwater dewatering activities, the Applicant shall
submit a Notice of Termination to the San Diego RWQCB.
Mitigation Measure 4.9.3: Water Quality Management Plan. Prior to submittal of grading Applicant/City of San Prior to submittal of
plans for review and approval, the Applicant shall submit a Final Juan Capistrano grading plans for
Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to the City Assistant Assistant Director of review and approval
Director of Engineering and Public Works for review and approval. Engineering and
The WQMP shall be consistent with the City's Model WQMP and Public Works
Hydromodification Management Plan. Project-specific source
control, treatment control, and hydromodification control BMPs
7-12 PAXA1301\Preprint DEIR\7.0 MMRP.docx a05/27/14»
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
JUNE 2014 SPIEKER CCRC SPECIFIC PLAN
CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA
Table 7.A: Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program
Responsible
Party/Approving Timing for
Mitigation Measures Agency Mitigation Measure
contained in the Final WQMP shall be incorporated into final design.
The BMPs shall be properly designed and maintained to target
pollutants of concern and reduce runoff from the project site. The
WQMP shall include an operations and maintenance plan for the
prescribed treatment control BMPs to ensure their long-term
performance.
Mitigation Measure 4.9.4: Vector Control Program. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, Applicant/City of San Prior to issuance of
the Applicant shall demonstrate to the City Assistant Director of Juan Capistrano any grading permits
Engineering and Public Works that the operations and maintenance Assistant Director of
plan includes regular inspections of BMPs to ensure there is no Engineering and
standing water that could serve as mosquito breeding habitat. The Public Works
operations and maintenance plan shall address control of flies and
mosquitos and shall include measures such as garbage management,
landscape maintenance, removal of vegetation and landscape
clippings,and management of pet droppings.
4.10:Land Use
The proposed project would not result in any significant adverse impacts related to land use.No mitigation is required.
4.11:Noise
Mitigation Measure 4.11.1: Short-Term Construction Noise Impact. Prior to issuance of Applicant/City of San Prior to issuance of
demolition or grading permits, the Applicant shall submit grading Juan Capistrano demolition or grading
and construction plans for review and approval by the City of San Director of permits
Juan Capistrano's (City) Director of Development Services, or Development
designee. The plans shall include a condition that the construction Services,or designee
contractor shall implement the following during construction
activities to reduce potential construction noise impacts on nearby
sensitive receptors:
• During all project site excavation and grading, the project
contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or
mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers
consistent with manufacturer's standards.
• The project contractor shall place all stationary construction
equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the
PAXA1301\Preprint DEIR\7.0 MMRP.docx a05/27/14» 7-13
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
SPIEKER CCRC SPECIFIC PLAN JUNE 2014
CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA
Table 7.A: Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program
Responsible
Party/Approving Timing for
Mitigation Measures Agency Mitigation Measure
relatively more sensitive receptors nearest the project site.
• The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in
areas that will create the greatest distance between construction-
related noise sources and relatively more noise-sensitive
receptors nearest the project site during all project construction.
• The construction contractor shall limit all construction-related
activities that would result in high noise levels to between the
hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and
from 8:30 a.m.to 4:30 p.m. on Saturday.No construction shall be
permitted outside of these hours or on Sundays and federal
holidays.
Mitigation Measure 4.11.2: Balcony Noise Barriers. Prior to issuance of construction permits, Applicant/City of San Prior to issuance of
the Applicant shall submit construction plans for review and Juan Capistrano any construction
approval by the City's Director of Development Services, or Director of permits
designee. The plans shall include construction of a minimum 5-foot- Development
high noise wall (combination of solid material and/or translucent Services,or designee
material) around each second-level balcony for units located within
89 feet of the Del Obispo Street centerline.
4.12: Population,Housing,and Employment
There are no potentially significant impacts related to housing,population,and employment,therefore no mitigation is required.
4.13: Public Services and Utilities
Refer to Mitigation Measures 4.9.1 and 4.9.3,above
4.14: Recreation
The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts on recreational facilities.No mitigation measures are required.
4.15: Transportation/Traffic
7-14 PAXA1301\Preprint DEIR\7.0 MMRP.docx a05/27/14»
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
JUNE 2014 SPIEKER CCRC SPECIFIC PLAN
CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA
Table 7.A: Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program
Responsible
Party/Approving Timing for
Mitigation Measures Agency Mitigation Measure
Mitigation Measure 4.15.1: Traffic Management Plan. Prior to issuance of any grading or Applicant/City of San Prior to issuance of
construction permits,the applicant shall prepare and submit a Traffic Juan Capistrano any grading or
Management Plan (TMP) for approval by the City of San Juan Traffic Engineer,or construction permits
Capistrano (City) Traffic Engineer, or designee. The TMP shall be designee
implemented during all phases of the proposed project construction
and shall identify designated construction staging areas. The TMP
shall include the name and phone number of a contact person who
can be reached 24 hours per day regarding construction traffic
complaints or emergency situations. In addition, the TMP shall take
into account and coordinate with other TMPs that are in effect or
have been proposed for other projects in the City. The TMP shall
include,but not be limited to,the following:
• Construction activities shall be scheduled to reduce the effect on
traffic flow on arterial streets.
• Construction vehicles, including construction personnel vehicles,
shall not park on public streets.
• Construction vehicles shall not stage or queue where they
interfere with pedestrian and vehicular traffic or block access to
nearby businesses.
• If feasible, any traffic lane closures shall be limited to off-peak
traffic periods, as approved by the Orange County Sheriffs
Department,as appropriate.
• The Orange County Sheriffs Department shall be notified a
minimum of 24 hours in advance of any lane closures or other
roadway work.
• Temporary traffic control provisions shall be implemented during
all construction activities adjacent to public right-of-way to
improve traffic flow on public roadways(e.g., flag persons).
• Flag persons in adequate numbers shall be provided to minimize
impacts to traffic flow and to ensure safe access into and out of
the site.
• Flag persons shall be trained to assist in emergency response by
PAXA1301\Preprint DEIR\7.0 MMRP.docx a05/27/14» 7-15
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
SPIEKER CCRC SPECIFIC PLAN JUNE 2014
CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA
Table 7.A: Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program
Responsible
Party/Approving Timing for
Mitigation Measures Agency Mitigation Measure
restricting or controlling the movement of traffic that could
interfere with emergency vehicle access.
• All emergency access to the project site and adjacent areas shall
be kept clear and unobstructed during all phases of demolition
and construction.
7-16 PAXA1301\Preprint DEIR\7.0 MMRP.docx a05/27/14»