RES-10889 Tentative Tract Map ApprovalRESOLUTION NO. 10889
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ORANGE TO (A) CERTIFY THE ADEQUACY
OF FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 1839-
14 (B) ADOPT FINDINGS OF FACT, (C) ADOPT A
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS,
AND (D) ADOPT A MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM FOR RELATED PROJECT
ENTITLEMENTS DESIGNATED AS TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP NO. 0035 -14, MAJOR SITE PLAN NO.
0790 -14, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2981 -15,
AND DESIGN REVIEW NO. 4764 -14 FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF 40 NEW DETACHED TWO -
STORY SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENCES ON THE
FORMER 16 ACRE MARYWOOD PASTORAL
CENTER SITE LOCATED AT 2811 EAST VILLAREAL
DRIVE.
WHEREAS, the City Council has authority per City of Orange Environmental
Review Guidelines to certify Environmental Impact Report 1839 -14 (SCH 42015041033);
and
WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a project in accordance with requirements
of the Municipal Code of the City of Orange and is known as the Marywood Residential
Development Project which consists of Tentative Tract Map No. 0035 -14, Major Site Plan
No. 0790 -14, Conditional Use Permit No. 2981 -15, Design Review No. 4764 -14, and
Environmental Review No. 1839 -14, all of which are collectively referred to herein as the
Project "; and
WHEREAS, The Project, which by necessity includes Environmental Impact Report
1839 -14 (SCH #2015041033), was filed by The New Home Company, in accordance with the
provisions of the City of Orange Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the environmental impacts of the project have been analyzed through
Draft Environmental Impact Report No. 1839 -14, changes and revisions (Errata) to Draft
Environmental Impact Report 1839 -14, the Response to Comments, technical appendices,
and the Mitigation Monitoring Program, pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), local CEQA Guidelines, and the State CEQA
Guidelines, a copy of which is on file with the Community Development Department of the
City of Orange; and
WHEREAS, Draft Environmental Impact Report No. 1839 -14 was circulated for
public review and comment within a State mandated 45 -day public review period as required
by CEQA, with the comment period that occurred between June 19, 2015 and ended on
August 3, 2015; and
WHEREAS, responses to the comments received on Draft Environmental Impact
Report No. 1839 -14 have been prepared to the satisfaction of the City; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a duly advertised public hearing
on Monday, September 21, 2015, and adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 29-
15 which contains a recommendation that the City Council certify Final Environmental
Impact Report No. 1839 -14; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed Final Environmental Impact Report No.
1839 -14; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly advertised public hearing on October 13,
2015 for the purpose of considering Final Environmental Impact Report No. 1839 -14; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, the City Council considered all factors
relating to the proposed Project, including potential environmental impacts addressed in Final
Environmental Impact Report No. 1839 -14.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council finds and declares as
follows:
1. The Draft Environmental Impact Report No. 1839 -14 for the project has been
completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, local CEQA
Guidelines, and State CEQA Guidelines; and
2. Draft Environmental Impact Report No. 1839 -14 reflects the independent judgment and
analysis of the City of Orange; and
3. Based on the information contained in Draft Environmental Impact Report No. 1839-
14, the City Council finds that the environmental impact report provides an adequate
assessment of the potentially significant environmental impacts of the proposed project
and required discretionary permits; and
4. The City Council adopts of the Findings of Fact (Attachment A), and the Statement of
Overriding Considerations (Attachment B), attached hereto and incorporated by this
reference, which documents and supports the conclusion that even with the
implementation of all feasible mitigation measures recommended in Draft
Environmental Impact Report No. 1839 -14, it is infeasible to reduce the project's
impacts on cultural resources to a level of insignificance, and which further sets forth
the overriding benefits of the project which outweigh the unavoidable environmental
impact of the project. Therefore, the City Council finds that the project's benefits
outweigh the adverse impacts; and
City Council Resolution No. 10889 Page 2 of 3
5. The City Council adopts of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
included in Draft Environmental Impact Report No. 1839 -14 and incorporated by this
reference) as the mitigation- monitoring and reporting program for the Project; and
6. The proposed development is below greenhouse gas (GHG) thresholds established by
the State; and
7. Based on the forgoing, the City Council certifies Final Environmental Impact Report
No. 1839 -14, and approves the project.
ADOPTED this 13 day of October, 2015.
Tere E. Smith, Mayor, City of Orange
ATTEST:
Mary E. MprPV, City Clerk, ity O ange
I, MARY E. MURPHY, City Clerk of the City of Orange, California, do hereby certify
that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City
of Orange at a regular meeting therefore held on the 13 day of October, 2015, by the
following vote:
MOTION:
SECOND:
AYES:
ABSTAIN (RECUSED)
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBER:
COUNCILMEMBER:
COUNCILMEMBER:
COUNCILMEMBER:
COUNCILMEMBER:
Murphy
Nichols
Alvarez, Murphy, Nichols
Whitaker
Smith
Mary E. M ;City Clerk, C' ge
City Council Resolution No. 10889 Page 3 of 3
ATTACHMENT A
TO THE CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL
ADOPTING FINDINGS PURSUANT TO
THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT
FINDINGS PURSUANT TO
CEQA SECTION 21081
Marywood Residential
Development Project
This page intentionally left blank.
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Table of Contents
I .Statute and Guidelines 1
II .Record of Proceedings .........................................................................2
Ill Project Description .............................................................................. ...............................4
IV .Adoption of Findings ............................................................................ ...............................4
V.Discretionary Approvals ....................................................................... ...............................4
VI.Findings Regarding Impacts .................................................................5
A. Environmental Issues Determined to Have No Impact and Not Require Further
Studyin the Draft EIR ...................................................................... ...............................5
B. Environmental Impacts Determined to be Less Than Significant under the Draft EIR 6
C. Potentially Significant Environmental Impacts Reduced to Less Than Significant
Through Implementation of Standard Conditions and Project Design Features........19
D. Potential Environmental Impacts Determined to be Mitigated to Below a Level of
Significance.................................................................................... ...............................45
E. Environmental Impacts Determined to be Significant and Unavoidable
AfterMitigation ............................................................................. ...............................60
VII.Findings Regarding Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources ................62
VIII.Findings Regarding Growth Inducing Impacts ................................... ...............................65
IX.Findings Regarding Cumulative Impacts ............................................ ...............................66
X.Findings Regarding Alternatives to the Proposed Project ................ ...............................71
A. Alternatives Eliminated from Detailed Consideration .................. ...............................71
B. Alternatives Carried Forward for Detailed Analysis In the EIR ..... ...............................73
Findings of Fact Page i
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
This page intentionally left blank.
Findings of Fact Page ii
FINDINGS AND FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS FOR THE
MARYWOOD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
CITY OF ORANGE, CA
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2015041033
I. STATUTE AND GUIDELINES
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code Section 21081
and Section 15091 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (CEQA Guidelines),
provide that:
a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been
certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the
project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of
those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for
each finding. The possible findings are:
1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect as identified in the Final EIR. (Finding 1)
2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction
of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such
changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be
adopted by such other agency. (Finding 2)
3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations,
including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained
workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives
identified in the Final EIR. (Finding 3)
b) The findings required by subsection (a) shall be supported by substantial
evidence in the record.
Section 15092 of the State CEQA Guidelines further stipulates that:
b) A public agency shall not decide to approve or carry out a project for which an
EIR was prepared unless either:
1) The project as approved will not have a significant effect on the
environment, or
2) The agency has:
A) Eliminated or substantially lessened all significant effects on the
environment where feasible as shown in findings under Section
15091, and
Findings of Fact Page 1
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
B) Determined that any remaining significant effects on the
environment found to be unavoidable under Section 15091 are
acceptable due to overriding concerns as described in Section
15093.
The City of Orange, as lead agency, prepared a Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
for the Marywood Residential Development Project, State Clearinghouse No. 2015041033.
The Project proposes the development of 40 single family residences on an approximately
16 -acre site in the City, and is described in greater detail in Section III, Project Description,
below.
The EIR for the Project has been prepared and certified as complete by the City of Orange.
The EIR identifies certain significant effects that may occur as a result of the Marywood
Residential Development Project alone or on a cumulative basis in conjunction with other
past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects. These Findings are made
pursuant to CEQA Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091.
II. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
The environmental review process for the Project is summarized below.
In accordance with CEQA, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of a Draft EIR was filed
with the State Clearinghouse on April 8, 2015. The State Clearinghouse assigned
State Clearinghouse Number 2015041033.
2. The NOP was distributed to all responsible and trustee agencies, utility and service
providers, Orange County Clerk/Recorder, and other interested parties on April 3,
2015 for a 30 -day public review in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15082.
The review period was extended on April 23, 2015 and ended on May 25, 2015.
3. The City of Orange distributed a NOP to all property owners within 300 feet of the
Project site, which notified nearby property owners that would be most directly
affected by implementation of the proposed Project, along with public agencies and
interested organizations, that the City is preparing a Draft EIR.
4. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15083, the City of Orange sought
early public consultation and held three scoping meetings to solicit comments from
interested parties on preparation of the Draft EIR. A scoping meeting for public
agencies was held on April 16, 2015 at 3:30 p.m. A scoping meeting for the public
was held on April 16, 2015 from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. An additional scoping
meeting for the public was held on May 7, 2015 from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.
5. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15085, a Notice of Completion (NOC)
of the Draft EIR was filed with the State Clearinghouse on June 16, 2015.
6. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15087, a Notice of Availability (NOA)
was published by the City on June 19, 2015. The Draft EIR was distributed to
agencies, interested organizations, and individuals by the City of Orange. The
distribution list is available at the City of Orange Community Development
Department Planning Counter. As required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15087, the
Findings of Fact Page 2
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
NOA was mailed to the last known name and address of all organizations and
individuals who previously requested such notice in writing; and notice was also
given by the following procedure: newspaper publishing and mail.
7. A forty -five (45) day public review period for the Draft EIR was established pursuant
to State law, which commenced on June 19, 2015 and ended on August 3, 2015.
8. Comments received during the public review period for the Draft EIR were
responded to in a Response to Comments document dated , and
distributed to each public agency commenter at least 10 days prior to certification of
the EIR by the Orange City Council pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088(b),
and were provided to each organization and individual submitting written comments
on the Draft EIR.
9. A Final EIR has been prepared for the Marywood Residential Development Project.
The following components comprise the Final EIR:
a) Draft EIR, June 2015;
b) Comments received on the Draft EIR and responses to those comments,
August 2015; and
c) All attachments, incorporations, and references to the documents delineated
in items "a." and "b." above.
10. The documents and other materials which constitute the administrative record for the
City's actions related to the Project are located at the City of Orange, 300 East
Chapman Avenue, Orange, California 92866. The City Community Development
Department is the custodian of the administrative record for the Project.
The City of Orange is the Lead Agency with respect to the Project pursuant to State CEQA
Guidelines Section 15367. As a Lead Agency, the City is required by CEQA to make
findings with respect to each significant effect of the Project.
The City of Orange has reviewed the EIR. The following sections make detailed findings
with respect to the potential significant environmental effects of the Marywood Residential
Development Project and refer, where appropriate, to the mitigation measures set forth in
the Final EIR.
The Final EIR and the administrative record concerning the Marywood Residential
Development Project provide additional facts in support of the findings herein. The Final EIR
which includes, among other components, the Draft EIR, and the Response to Comments
on the Draft EIR) is hereby incorporated into these Findings in its entirety. Furthermore, the
mitigation measures set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
are incorporated by reference in these Findings. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program () was developed in compliance with Public Resources Code Section
21081.6 and is contained in a separate document. Without limitation, these Findings of Fact
are intended to elaborate on the scope and nature of mitigation measures, the basis for
determining the significance of impacts, the comparative analysis of alternatives, and the
reasons for approving the Marywood Residential Development Project in spite of associated
significant unavoidable adverse impacts.
Findings of Fact Page 3
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Project would establish no more than 40 single - family residences on an
approximately 16 -acre Project site, the current location of the Marywood Pastoral Center.
The New Home Company (Applicant) proposes to construct two -story homes ranging in size
from 3,800 square feet to 4,400 square feet. The proposed residential development would
be sited on variable terraced pads separated by a series of interior 2:1 (horizontal to
vertical) slopes up to approximately 30 feet in height. Residential lot sizes would range from
a minimum of 7,610 square feet, with some lots as large as 18,970 square feet, inclusive of
slope. Each lot would have a minimum width of 60 feet and a minimum depth of 100 feet.
The internal streets measure 36 feet f
lanes and allows for on- street parking
Tandem garage parking is proposed
architectural styles. All internal streets
sides. Water retention and treatment
footprint.
om curb -to -curb, which provides two 18- foot -wide
All homes are designed with three car garages.
to avoid the garage doors from dominating the
end in cul—de —sacs and have sidewalks on both
facilities are incorporated into the proposed site
The existing Marywood Pastoral Center buildings and infrastructure would be demolished.
Approximately 90% of the construction material would be crushed on -site and re -used as fill
material; the remaining waste would be recycled at an approved facility or disposed at a
landfill. Select items of cultural value would be salvaged prior to demolition, such as items
from the Chapel and other buildings including steeple, cross, pews, sign, mosaic the and
other items with religious and architectural value.
Grading would include remediation of historical unsuitable fill material and recompaction to
resolve existing soil settlement issues. The existing western descending slope would also
be reduced in steepness to meet current building codes and be supported by a newly
constructed Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) retaining wall up to approximately 30 feet
in height. The Project also proposes a land exchange with the City to make the property
lines more clearly conform to the slope contours to better define maintenance
responsibilities.
ADOPTION OF FINDINGS
Final EIR SCH No. 2015041033 for the Marywood Residential Development Project
identified significant environmental impacts prior to mitigation that may occur as a result of
implementing the Project. Thus, in accordance with the provisions of CEQA, the Orange
City Council hereby adopts these findings as part of its action to certify Final EIR SCH No.
2015041033 and approve the Marywood Residential Development Project.
V.DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS
The Project addressed in the Final EIR is defined to include the "whole of an action, which
has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a
reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment," and includes the
discretionary approvals by governmental agencies required to implement the Marywood
Residential Development Project. The following are the discretionary approvals that will be
considered by the City:
Findings of Fact Page 4
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
1) Vesting Tentative Tract Map VTTM 17816 (TM 0035 -14);
2) Major Site Plan (MJSP 0790 -14);
3) Design Review Committee (DRC 4764 -14)
4) Environmental Review Number 1839 -14;
5) Conditional Use Permit (CUP 2981 -15) for temporary onsite crushing of specified
demolition material; and
6) Land exchange agreement between the Applicant and the City.
VI. FINDINGS REGARDING IMPACTS
A. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES DETERMINED TO HAVE NO IMPACT AND NOT REQUIRE
FURTHER STUDY IN THE DRAFT EIR
1. Agricultural and Forest Resources
Impact Thresholds Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or
Farmland of Statewide Importance; conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract; conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of forest land,
timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production; result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non - forest use; and involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to
non - agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non - forest use?
Finding The environmental analysis provided in Section 5 of the Draft EIR conducted for
the proposed Project indicated that no impact would occur to agricultural or forest
resources. No comments were received in response to the NOP or the Draft EIR that would
modify this finding.
Facts in Support of Finding Implementation of the Project would not result in the conversion
of any designated prime or otherwise significant farmland or lands currently is forest land
use or designated as forest land. The site does not contain any "prime" agricultural land and
no such land exists in the project environs, which has been urbanized with a variety of
residential and public land uses. The Project site is designated as "Urban and Built -up Land"
on the Orange County Important Farmland Map (2010). Urban and Built -up Land is
occupied by structures with a building density of at least 1 unit to 1.5 acres, or
approximately 6 structures to a 10 -acre parcel. Furthermore, neither the Project site nor the
surrounding area is designated for agriculture. The site has been developed and there is no
opportunity for agricultural resources at or near the Project site. Therefore, implementation
of the proposed Project would have no impact on agricultural resources.
In addition, the Project site is neither zoned nor designated as forest land; no such land is
designated in the City of Orange. The site is currently developed as the Marywood Pastoral
Center, which supports approximately 102,000 square feet of floor area in 14 buildings.
Project implementation would not result in the conversion of any forest land subject to the
Public Resources Code. Therefore, no impacts to forestry resources would occur with the
implementation of the proposed Marywood Residential Development.
2. Mineral Resources
Findings of Fact Page 5
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Impact Thresholds Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the site; result in the loss
of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
Finding The environmental analysis provided in Section 5 of the Draft EIR conducted for
the proposed Project indicated that no impact would occur to mineral resources. No
comments were received in response to the NOP or the Draft EIR that would modify this
finding.
Facts in Support of Finding Neither the City's General Plan nor the State of California has
identified the site or environs as a potential location for mineral resources of State -wide,
regional, or local significance. A review of the City's General Plan, Natural Resources
Element (2010) shows that no mineral resources are known to exist within the Project site.
The site has been substantially altered as a result of grading and development; therefore,
development of the Project site as proposed would not result in the loss of any locally
important mineral resource recovery sites. No impacts to mineral resources would occur as
a result of Project implementation.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS DETERMINED TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT UNDER
THE DRAFT EIR
1. Aesthetics
a) Impact (Short -Term and Long -Term)
Threshold AES -1: Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on scenic vista?
Threshold AES -2: Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings
within a state scenic highway?
Finding The discussion and analysis provided in the EIR concluded that the Project would
have a Less Than Significant Impact on both short-term and long -term aesthetic impacts
described under Threshold AES -1 and Threshold AES -2 that were addressed in the EIR,
and that no Project Design Features, Standard Conditions of approval, or mitigation
measures were required or recommended.
Facts in Support of the Finding No potential impacts would result from short-term
construction activities. Any potential impacts would be considered long -term due to the
Project's proposed site alterations and change to residential land use. Potential long -term
impacts are discussed below.
East Villareal Drive is not classified as a Landscape or Viewscape Corridor in the City's
General Plan. Officially- designated scenic vistas and /or scenic corridors do not exist on or in
the immediate vicinity of the Project site. Designated viewscape corridors outside of the City
of Orange include portions of Jamboree Road, Santiago Canyon Road, and Newport
Boulevard; however, none of these roadways are located in the vicinity of the Project site
and the site cannot be viewed from those roadway segments. Furthermore, the Project site
itself does not contain or constitute a scenic resource such as substantial trees, rock
Findings of Fact Page 6
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
outcroppings, or other elements. East Villareal Drive, along with adjacent roadways to the
Project site are not a City or State - designated scenic highway. The nearest state scenic
highway is SR -91 located approximately two miles to the north of the Project site.
Therefore, no visual or aesthetic impact would occur as a result of Project implementation
and no mitigation would be required.
2. Air Quality
a) Impact (Long- Term):
Threshold AQ -2: Would the project violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation?
Threshold AQ -3: Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment
under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard
including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds
for ozone precursors).
Threshold AQ -4: Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
Threshold AQ -5: Would the project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
Finding The discussion and analysis provided in the EIR concluded that the Project would
have a Less Than Significant Impact on long -term air quality impacts described under
Thresholds AQ -2 through AQ -5 that were addressed in the EIR, and that no Project Design
Features, Standard Conditions of approval, or mitigation measures were required or
recommended.
Facts in Support of the Finding
The Project is consistent with long -term planning projections accounted for in the applicable
Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) and City General Plan. Long -term occupation of the
proposed Project would neither produce emissions that exceed any South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD) significance thresholds nor result in offsite ambient air
pollutant concentrations that exceed any SCAQMD significance thresholds. In addition,
pollutant emissions would be below Localized Significance Thresholds due to the relatively
small amount of emissions generated by the new resident's vehicles and the Project would
not generate a Carbon Dioxide (CO) hotspot because, (1) Project traffic would not result in
a 2 percent volume to capacity ratio increase at any intersection operating at a level of
service (LOS) D or worse, and (2) the Project would not cause an intersection to drop from
LOS C to LOS D. Further, long -term occupation of the proposed 40 homes would not result
in activities that generate emissions in excess of SCAQMD thresholds for regional
emissions and localized impacts of criteria pollutants as shown in Tables 6.2 -11 and 6.2 -12
of the Draft EIR. As such, the proposed Project would not be considered cumulatively
considerable under SCAQMD's policy as it does not exceed Project- specific air quality
significance thresholds. The proposed Project is located in a residential area, sufficiently
removed from potential sources of Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) emissions typical of
industrial facilities, high volume roadways, dry cleaners, and gasoline dispensing facilities as
Findings of Fact Page 7
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
described in California Air Resources Board's (CARB) 2005 Land Use Handbook. Neither
the Project nor adjacent land uses involve agriculture, industrial plants, or other uses
identified by SCAQMD as having the potential for emitting substantial odors. Therefore,
potential impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation required.
3. Biological Resources
a) Impact (Short- Term):
Threshold 810 -1 Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a
candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Threshold 810 -2 Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, and regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife or U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
including protections provided pursuant to Section 1600 et seq.) ?
Threshold 810 -3 Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
Threshold 810 -5: Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
Threshold 810 -6 Would the project have conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or
other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
Finding The discussion and analysis provided in the EIR concluded that the Project would
have a Less Than Significant Impact on short-term biological resource impacts described
under Thresholds BIO -1, BIO -2, BIO -3, BIO -5 and BIO -6 that were addressed in the EIR,
and that no Project Design Features, Standard Conditions of approval, or mitigation
measures were required or recommended.
Facts in Support of the Finding No potential impacts would result from short-term
construction activities. Any potential impacts would be considered long -term due to the
Project's proposed site alterations and change to residential land use. Therefore, Potential
impacts under Thresholds BIO -1, BIO -2, BIO -3 and BIO -5 were evaluated in Section 6.3.6.2
of the EIR for long -term impacts. In addition, the Project is not located within the boundaries
of or adjacent to the Orange County Central /Coastal NCCP /HCP area, and thus, has no
impact under Threshold BIO -6. Therefore, no potentially significant impacts would occur
with Project implementation and no mitigation is required.
Findings of Fact Page 8
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
b) Impact (Long- Term):
Threshold BIO -1: Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a
candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Threshold BIO -2: Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, and regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife or U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
including protections provided pursuant to Section 1600 et seq.) ?
Threshold BIO -3: Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
Threshold BIO -4: Would the project have interfere substantially with the movement of
any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede
the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
Threshold BIO -6: Would the project have conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or
other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
Finding The discussion and analysis provided in the EIR concluded that the Project would
have a Less Than Significant Impact on long -term biological resource impacts described
under Thresholds BIO -1, BIO -2, BIO -3, BIO -4 and BIO -6 that were addressed in the EIR,
and that no Project Design Features, Standard Conditions of approval, or mitigation
measures were required or recommended.
Facts in Support of the Finding No potential impacts would result from long -term
occupation of the proposed 40 homes. The Project site contains no special status plant or
wildlife species, or habitats. All removed ornamental and ruderal vegetation would be
replaced per City approved landscape plans during Project construction and final
landscaping. The Project site is not located within the boundaries or adjacent to the Orange
County Central /Coastal NCCP or HCP area. No jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. as defined
by the USACE pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act or jurisdictional Waters of
the State as defined by the CDFW pursuant to Section 1600 -1603 of the California Fish and
Wildlife Code were identified within the Project site. There is no evidence of defined
hydrology (stream bed /banks, ordinary high water mark, etc.) and no characteristic wetland
or riparian vegetation was found. The Project site is neither considered a wildlife corridor or
nursery site nor is it located adjacent to such resources. Further, based on the analysis
provided in Table 6.3 -4 of the Draft EIR, the Project is consistent with the General Plan's
Natural Resource Element. Therefore, no potentially significant impacts would occur with
Project implementation and no mitigation is required.
Findings of Fact Page 9
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
4. Geology and Soils
a) Impact (Short- Term):
Threshold GEO -1: Would the proposed project expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death
involving: i) rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the
most recent Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by
the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault (Refer to Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42); ii) strong seismic ground shaking? iii)
seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction; and /or iv)
landslides?
Threshold GEO -3: Would the proposed project be located on a geologic unit or soil that
is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the
proposed project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide,
lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
Threshold GEO -4: Would the proposed project be located on expansive soil, as defined
in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
substantial risks to life or property?
Finding The discussion and analysis provided in the EIR concluded that the Project would
have a Less Than Significant Impact on short -term geology and soils impacts described
under Thresholds GEO -1, GEO -2 and GEO -4 that were addressed in the EIR, and that no
Project Design Features, Standard Conditions of approval, or mitigation measures were
required or recommended.
Facts in Support of the Finding No potential impacts would result from short -term
construction activities as grading of the Project site would be conducted consistent with the
final grading plans approved by the City. Any potential impacts would be considered long-
term due to the Project's proposed site alterations and change to residential land use.
Therefore, Potential impacts of exposure to people were evaluated in Section 6.5.6.2 of the
EIR. No potentially significant short -term impacts would occur and no mitigation is required.
b) Impact (Short-Term and Long- Term):
Threshold GEO -5: Would the proposed project have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater?
Findin : The discussion and analysis provided in the EIR concluded that the Project would
have a Less Than Significant Impact on short-term and long -term geology and soils impacts
described under Threshold GEO -5 that was addressed in the EIR, and that no Project
Design Features, Standard Conditions of approval, or mitigation measures were required or
recommended.
Findings of Fact Page 10
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Facts in Support of the Finding The Project does not include use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems. City sewer utilities are available for the collection,
transport, and disposal of wastewater. The proposed residential development would
connect to the existing sewer facilities (refer to Section 6.13 of the EIR). Thus, no significant
impacts related to the use of septic tanks would occur and no mitigation measures are
required.
5. Greenhouse Gas
a) Impact (Short-Term and Long- Term):
Threshold GHG -2: Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse
gases?
Finding The discussion and analysis provided in the EIR concluded that the Project would
have a Less Than Significant Impact on short-term and long -term impacts under Threshold
GHG -2, and that no Project Design Features, Standard Conditions of approval, or mitigation
measures were required or recommended.
Facts in Support of Finding The Project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. The proposed Project
would utilize equipment compliant with state and federal emissions requirements, such as
equipment with Tier 4 engines, and adhere to AB 32 Scoping Plan control measures
adopted by the State of California during construction and operation. The proposed Project
would also be consistent with the RTP /SCS because the Project is consistent with existing
general plan and zoning designations for the Project site and consistent with General Plan
policies. Consistency with SCAQMD GHG policies would also be met through consistency
with the City General Plan and through Project emission levels below the 3,000 MT
CO2e /year SCAQMD threshold. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur and
no mitigation is required. The proposed Project would be consistent with the GHG reduction
goals of AB32 as described in the statewide GHG emissions reduction strategy outlined in
the Scoping Plan. In addition, GHG emissions would be reduced through the integration of
green building practices, the use of renewable energy, reducing per capita water use,
adoption of a new low carbon fuel standard and through increased fuel efficiency as
mandated in AB 32 and related programs adopted by the State of California.
6. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
a) Impact (Long- Term):
Threshold HAZ -1: Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through:
Routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials;
A reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving
the release of hazardous materials into the environment, and /or
Hazardous emissions or handling hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an
existing or proposed school?
Findings of Fact Page 11
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Threshold HAZ -2: Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard
to the public or the environment?
Threshold HAZ -3: Would the project be located within an airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been adopted, be within two miles of a public
airport, public use airport or private airstrip and result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the Project Area?
Finding The discussion and analysis provided in the EIR concluded that the Project would
have a Less Than Significant Impact under Thresholds HAZ -1 through HAZ -3, and that no
Project Design Features, Standard Conditions of approval, or mitigation measures were
required or recommended.
Facts in Support of Finding The proposed Project is a residential development that does
not include any land uses that would either create or result in a significant hazard to the
public. Although it is likely that some chemicals, including herbicides, pesticides, and related
materials would be utilized on -site by residents and landscapers, these materials would not
exceed regulatory limits permitted for household use and would not pose a significant threat
to the health or welfare of the general public. As required by law, these household
hazardous materials would be stored and disposed of in accordance with regulatory
requirements. As a result, no significant impacts would occur and no mitigation measures
are required.
The Project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites based on review of the
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) GeoTracker system. The nearest listed
sites are located approximately 0.5 mile to the east of the Project site along Santiago
Boulevard and North Tustin Street. The listed sites contain one permitted UST site and 6
Leaking Underground Storage tank (LUST) cleanup sites associated with automotive
service and gasoline fueling stations. Currently, five of the LUST sites have been cleaned
and completed cleanup clearance. The remaining LUST site has also been cleaned and is
eligible for clearance.
The Project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of an airport
or private air strip. Fullerton Municipal Airport is the closest airport and is located over nine
miles to the east from the Project site. Therefore, no people would be exposed to long -term
safety hazards under Thresholds HAZ -1 through HAZ -3 and no mitigation would be
required.
7. Hydrology and Water Quality
a) Impact (Long -Term and Short- Term):
Threshold HWQ -4: Would the project place residences within a 100 -year flood hazard
area, impede or redirect flood flows, as mapped on a federal Flood
Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map. Expose people or structures to inundation by seiche,
tsunami, or mudflow?
Findings of Fact Page 12
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Finding: The discussion and analysis provided in the EIR concluded that the Project would
have a Less Than Significant Impact under Threshold HWQ -4, and that no Project Design
Features, Standard Conditions of approval, or mitigation measures were required or
recommended.
Facts in Support of Finding The Project is located outside Flooding Hazards Zones per the
City of Orange General Plan. No portion of the 16 -acre Project site is located within the
FEMA 100 Year Floodway or a 100 Year Floodplain of the Santa Ana River. In addition, the
Project site is not located near a large body of water that would expose construction
workers or residential occupants to a potential seiche, tsunami, mudflow, or dam inundation.
As a result, no impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are required.
8. Land Use
a) Impact (Long- Term):
Threshold L UP- 1: Would the project physically divide an established community?
Threshold LUP -2: Would the project conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the Project (including,
but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal
program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
Threshold LUP -3: Would the project conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural community conservation plan?
Finding: The discussion and analysis provided in the EIR concluded that the Project would
have a Less Than Significant Impact on the three land use impacts that were addressed in
the EIR, and that no Project Design Features, Standard Conditions of approval, or
mitigation measures were required or recommended.
Facts in Support of the Finding The Project is consistent with the existing community's land
use and residential development fabric that exists throughout the Project area, which is
characterized by single - family detached residential development of the same type as that
proposed. The existing land uses and zoning designations are consistent with the long -
range plans and programs adopted by the City for the Project site in its General Plan. In
addition, the Project is also consistent with the goals and policies articulated in the Land
Use Element of the City of Orange General Plan. The proposed Project is consistent with all
of the residential development standards included in the City of Orange Zoning Code, such
as setbacks, height, minimum lot size, lot coverage, etc. Adequate on -and off - street parking
would allow for a design exception for the use of tandem parking for the floor plans with five
bedrooms. The Project is not located within a coastal program, habitat conservation plan or
natural community conservation plan. Therefore, impacts to land use would be less than
significant with Project implementation.
9. Noise
a) Impact (Short-Term and Long- Term):
Findings of Fact Page 13
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Threshold N01-1: Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
Threshold N01-2: Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Threshold N0I -3: A substantial permanent, temporary, or periodic increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the
project? Are the thresholds set out below the ones that will be
applied for this threshold?
Where the existing ambient noise level is less than 65 dB, a
project related permanent increase in ambient noise levels of 5 dB
CNEL or greater.
Where the existing ambient noise level is greater than 65 dB, a
project related permanent increase in ambient noise levels of 3 dB
CNEL or greater.
Threshold N0I -4: 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, public
use airport, or private airstrip, would the project expose people
residing or working in the Project Area to excessive noise levels?
Findin : The discussion and analysis provided in the EIR concluded that the Project would
have a Less Than Significant Impact on short-term impacts for Threshold NOI -4 and a Less
Than Significant Impact on long -term impacts for Thresholds NOI -1 through NOI -4 that
were addressed in the EIR, and that no Project Design Features, Standard Conditions of
approval, or mitigation measures were required or recommended.
Facts in Support of the Finding The Project site is not located within an airport land use
plan or within two miles of an airport or private air strip. Fullerton Municipal Airport is the
closest airport and is located over 9 miles to the east from the Project site.
Based on the analysis provided in Table 6.3 4 of the EIR, the Project is consistent with the
General Plan. Project operations would consist of residential uses consistent with adjacent
land uses. No heavy machinery or equipment would be operated in the long -term that could
lead to excessive groundborne vibration levels. Therefore, potential impacts would be less
than significant and no mitigation required.
Potential increases in traffic noise exposure due to vehicle trips generated by the proposed
Project were evaluated using forecast traffic volumes on local roadways in the Project
opening year (2017) with and without the proposed Project. As shown in Table 6.10 -11 of
the Draft EIR, the proposed Project would only cause at most a 0.7 -dB increase during the
AM peak hour along East Villareal Drive just west of Santiago Boulevard. Furthermore, less
of an increase in traffic noise levels would occur at all other locations around the Project
site. As noted in Section 6.10.1 of the EIR, a 3 -dB increase is barely perceptible to the
human ear. A 0.7 -dB increase would neither be perceptible nor trigger City thresholds
described in Section 6.10.3 of the EIR; therefore, impacts would be less than significant and
no mitigation would be required. In addition, the noise effect of such an increase in daily
volumes on the CNEL at locations along the roadway would be a 0.5 -dB increase.
Findings of Fact Page 14
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Therefore, increase in daily average traffic noise levels would also be less than significant
and no mitigation would be required.
10. Population and Housing
a) Impact (Long- Term):
Threshold PH -1: Would the project induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or
other infrastructure) ?
Threshold PH -2: Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing or
people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
Finding The discussion and analysis provided in the EIR concluded that the Project would
have a Less Than Significant Impact on the two population and housing impacts that were
addressed in the EIR, and that no Project Design Features, Standard Conditions of
approval, or mitigation measures were required or recommended.
Facts in Support of the Finding The Project proposes to construct 40 single - family
residential dwelling units. No existing housing is present onsite that would need to be
removed. The addition of 40 single - family residential dwelling units, which would result in a
potential population increase of approximately 123 persons, is consistent with the long -term
population and housing projections for the region and would not conflict with any of the
goals or policies adopted by the City of Orange Housing Element. The Project would not
require the implementation of any new backbone /infrastructure facilities such as sewer
trunks and /or water transmission facilities, reservoirs, roadway extensions, etc. because
existing facilities are available to the site. Therefore, impacts to population and housing
would be less than significant with Project implementation.
11. Recreation
a) Impact (Long- Term):
Threshold REC -2: Does the proposed project include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have
an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Findin : The discussion and analysis provided in the EIR concluded that the Project would
have a Less Than Significant Impact on Threshold REC -2, and no Project Design Features,
Standard Conditions of approval, or mitigation measures were required or recommended.
Facts in Support of the Finding Approval of the proposed Project would result in the
construction of 40 single - family dwelling units on an approximate 16 -acre site surrounded by
an existing residential neighborhood. No new recreational facilities are proposed that would
adversely affect the physical environment. Although future residents of the Project would
create an incremental demand for parks and recreational facilities, Project implementation
does not require expansion of recreational facilities as stipulated in Section 16.60 of the
Findings of Fact Page 15
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
City's Municipal Code because the scale and scope of the proposed development is
relatively small and potential incremental impacts would be offset by the payment of the in-
lieu fees. Therefore, no impacts would occur and no mitigation is required.
12. Traffic and Circulation
a) Impact (Short-Term and Long- Term):
Threshold TRA -1: Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the
circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation
including mass transit and non - motorized travel and relevant
components of the circulation system, including but not limited to
intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle
paths, and mass transit?
Threshold TRA -2: Would the project conflict with an applicable congestion management
program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and
travel demand measures, or other standards established by the
county congestion management agency for designated roads or
highway?
Threshold TRA -3: Would the project result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results
in substantial safety risks?
Threshold TRA -5: Would the project result in inadequate emergency access?
Threshold TRA -6: Would the project conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise
decrease the performance or safety of such facilities?
Finding: The discussion and analysis provided in the EIR concluded that the Project would
have a Less Than Significant Impact on short -term impacts for Threshold TRA -3 and a Less
Than Significant Impact on long -term impacts for Thresholds TRA -1, TRA -2, TRA -3, TRA -5
and TRA -6 that were addressed in the EIR, and that no Project Design Features, Standard
Conditions of approval, or mitigation measures were required or recommended.
Facts in Support of the Finding The Project proposes construction of 40 single - family
homes on an existing developed property within an existing residential community. No direct
association with air travel or air traffic exists and no increased demand on air travel or
airport facilities would occur from construction workers. Therefore, no short-term or long-
term impacts would occur and no mitigation is required.
The Circulation Element of the City of Orange General Plan includes policies related to the
Local Circulation System; Regional Circulation System; Public Transportation; Sidewalks,
Trails, and Bikeways; Parking Facilities and Circulation System Aesthetics. The issue area
goals and policies applicable to the Project were evaluated for the Project's consistency with
the Circulation Element in Table 6.14 -11 of the EIR. No potentially significant impacts were
found and no mitigation was recommended.
Findings of Fact Page 16
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
The proposed development is projected to generate approximately 381 trip -ends per day.
The additional 381 trip -ends would not cause any of the roadway segments to operate at an
unacceptable level of service (LOS) (i.e., LOS E or F) when the traffic is added to either
existing or buildout (2017) traffic conditions. Furthermore, Existing + Project +Cumulative
average daily trips (ADTs) are also not anticipated to cause roadways to operate below
acceptable levels of service as shown in Table 6.14 -12 of the Draft EIR. Therefore, the
Project's potential impacts to roadway segments are considered less than significant. Per
the General Plan Circulation Element Table CM -3, there are no specified roadway capacity
ADT volume ranges for roadway segments operating at above LOS D or LOS E (i.e. those
operating at LOS A, LOS B, or LOS C).
It is important to note, information taken from the Traffic Impact Study was incorrectly
transferred and presented in Table 6.14 -12 of the Draft EIR, which gives the false
appearance of a much higher trip -end generation estimate than would actually occur as the
result of 40 additional homes. Therefore, Table 6.14 -12 has been revised in the Final EIR to
clarify and represent an accurate assessment of the Project's potential long -term traffic
impacts on roadways. It is also important to note that the Traffic Impact Study and analysis
provided within the text of the Draft EIR were accurately presented. As shown in the revised
table, total trip -ends on East Villareal Drive in the year 2017 (Project Buildout) would be
approximately 2,600; including Project traffic, cumulative project traffic and accounting for 3
percent growth in the area. The approximate 2,600 trip -end estimate is well below the
10,800 capacity of East Villareal Drive. Thus, the revised table reconfirms the conclusions
and determinations made in the Draft EIR, that long -term traffic impacts to roadways would
be less than significant and that no mitigation is required. The revised table is shown below.
For existing traffic conditions, all the study area intersections are currently operating at
acceptable levels of service during peak hours (i.e., LOS C or better). The proposed
development is projected to generate approximately 381 trip -ends per day, with 31 vehicles
per hour during the AM peak hour and 40 vehicles per hour during the PM peak hour. For
Findings of Fact Page 17
Project
Project
Buildout
Buildout With
Roadway Existing Without Capacity nificant?
fficProjectTraffic
Project Traffic
Year 2017)
Year 2017)
East Villareal Drive 2,200 2,300 2,600 10,800 No
Santiago Boulevard 18,700 19,300 19,400 21,600 No
21,600/
Meats Avenue 14,600 15,100 15,200 No
Lincoln Avenue 28,000 28,900 29,000 50,700 No
Nohl Ranch Canyon
9,200 9,600 9,600 21,600 No
Road
Note:
Assumes a background traffic growth rate of 1% per year for a period of three (3) years as approved by the City.
z Highest ADTs used for each roadway segment scenario taken from Exhibit L in the TIS. Includes cumulative projects.
3 Highest ADTs used for each roadway segment scenario taken from Exhibit M in the TIS. Includes cumulative projects.
Capacity is based on LOS D, which is the City's lowest acceptable level of service.
Source: TIS (RK Engineering, 2014); Correspondence with City of orange; Orange General Plan
For existing traffic conditions, all the study area intersections are currently operating at
acceptable levels of service during peak hours (i.e., LOS C or better). The proposed
development is projected to generate approximately 381 trip -ends per day, with 31 vehicles
per hour during the AM peak hour and 40 vehicles per hour during the PM peak hour. For
Findings of Fact Page 17
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Existing Plus Project traffic conditions, the study area intersections are projected to operate
at acceptable levels of service during the peak hours. The Project is not expected to
significantly impact any of the study area intersections. For Project Buildout (Year 2017)
Without Project traffic conditions, all study area intersections are projected to operate at
acceptable levels of service during the peak hours. In addition, for Project Buildout (Year
2017) With Project traffic conditions, all study area intersections are also projected to
operate at acceptable levels of service during the peak hours. A summary of the level of
service analysis for each condition is included in Table 6.14 -16 of the EIR. No significant
impacts would occur and no mitigation is required.
The proposed Project would be consistent with the RTP /SCS because the Project is
consistent with existing general plan and zoning designations for the Project site and
consistent with General Plan policies. The Project would also be consistent with the
RTP /SCS by providing additional housing through infill development within an established
community.
The Project would provide emergency access via East Villareal Drive. Driveway design for
the Site's access point and internal roadways would be built consistent with City design
requirements to allow for movement of emergency response vehicles entering, exiting and
within the Site.
The nearest public transit facilities are a Class II Bike lane and OCTA bus Route No. 166,
both located approximately 0.35 mile from the Project site on Santiago Boulevard. The
Project would not directly or indirectly impact these facilities.
No significant impacts would result from Project implementation under the thresholds as
described above.
13. Utilities
a) Impact (Short- Term):
Threshold U -1: Would the project cause wastewater treatment and facilitates that:
Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control Board,
Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities; and or,
Lead to a determination by the wastewater treatment provider
which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments.
Threshold U -2: Would the project require or result in the construction of new storm
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental effects.
Threshold U -3: Would the project have sufficient water supply available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources so as not to require
new or expanded entitlements.
Findings of Fact Page 18
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Findin : The discussion and analysis provided in the EIR concluded that the Project would
have a Less Than Significant Impact during short -term construction activities on the three
utility thresholds that were addressed in the EIR and that no Project Design Features,
Standard Conditions of approval, or mitigation measures were required or recommended.
Facts in Support of the Finding Raw sewage would be generated on -site by construction
workers during the Project's site preparation and construction phases. The amount of raw
sewage that would be generated during site preparation and construction activities is
difficult to quantify; however, it is expected to be a small amount and would be
accommodated by the use of portable restroom facilities placed on the site that are typical
of construction sites. These facilities, which would be maintained by the construction
contractor, would have no effect on existing wastewater infrastructure as they would be self -
contained units. Therefore, no short -term impacts are anticipated to existing wastewater
treatment or wastewater facilities and no mitigation is required. In addition, no new- or
expansion of existing storm water facilities would be required to serve the Project's short-
term construction activities.
Water usage would occur during the site preparation and construction phase for the
proposed Project for dust control and construction vehicle washing to minimize the amount
of fugitive dust and the transport of dirt from the site. Combined with other incidental uses,
the amount of water to be used for construction activities is difficult to quantify, but
construction water use will be substantial. However, construction water use is temporary.
Grading activities, which require the majority of construction water, are projected to last for
75 working days. Once grading is complete, the demand for construction water would
substantially decrease. Therefore, due to the temporary nature and short duration for
construction water, potential impacts are less than significant. In addition, it would be
necessary to provide an interim supply of water for fire suppression during construction in
cases of emergency. No significant water demand for fire suppression is anticipated,
therefore potential impacts are less than significant and no mitigation is required.
C. POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS REDUCED TO LESS THAN
SIGNIFICANT THROUGH IMPLEMENTATION OF STANDARD CONDITIONS AND
PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
1. Aesthetics
a) Impact (Short- Term):
Threshold AES -3: Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character
or quality of the site and its surroundings?
Description of the Impact Construction staging areas, including earth stockpiling, storage of
equipment and supplies, and related activities would contribute to a generally "disturbed"
condition, which may be perceived as a potential visual impact.
Finding: The City makes Finding 1 and determines that this potential impact is Less Than
Significant as a result of compliance with the Standard Conditions described below.
Facts in Support of Finding Implementation of the proposed Project would result in site
preparation (e.g., grading, etc.) and construction activities that could have some short-term
Findings of Fact Page 19
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
effects, which would temporarily change the character of the area; however, it is important
to note that these potential effects are similar to those which are typical of similar
development projects in the City that undergo development and redevelopment. While
these activities may be unsightly during the site preparation and construction phases, they
are not considered significant impacts because they are temporary in nature and would
cease upon completion of the proposed construction program. In addition, Section
15.52.110 of the City's Municipal Code requires perimeter fencing of construction sites,
which would help to screen unsightly construction activities from off -site locations. This is a
standard condition, which was not included in the Draft EIR but has been added to the Final
EIR as standard condition SC AES -9.
SC AES -9 Perimeter fencing of the construction site shall be constructed consistent with
Section 15.52.110 of the City's Municipal Code.
Therefore, no visual or aesthetic impact would occur as a result of project implementation
and no mitigation would be required.
b) Impact (Short- Term):
Threshold AES -4: Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Description of the Impact Project construction lighting may create temporary sources of
light that affect nighttime views.
Finding: The City makes Finding 1 and determines that this potential impact is Less Than
Significant as a result of compliance with the Standard Conditions described below.
Facts in Support of Finding The Standard Condition described below and in Section 6.10.5
of the EIR would reduce potential short-term impacts during Project construction.
SC NOW Project construction activities shall be limited to the City's restricted hours of
7 AM and 8 PM on weekdays and between 9 AM and 8 PM on Sundays and
holidays.
PDF NOI -2 Crushing and grading operations shall be further restricted as follows:
Crushing operations shall be restricted to Monday through Friday
between the hours of 7:30 AM and 4:30 PM. No crushing shall be
permitted on a Saturday, Sunday or Holiday.
Grading operations shall be restricted to Monday through Friday between
the hours of 7:30 AM and 5:00 PM, with limited grading as necessary
permitted on Saturdays between the hours of 8:00 AM and 4:30 PM.
Mechanics may service the equipment up to two hours after each shift.
All other construction activities shall conform to the City's Noise
Ordinance, OMC Section 8.24, and shall be further limited to Monday
through Saturday, 7:00 am to 8:00 pm. No construction activities shall be
permitted on Sundays or federal holidays.
Consistent with standard condition SC NOI -1, Project construction would be restricted to the
City's permitted construction hours between 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM on weekdays including
Findings of Fact Page 20
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Saturday. Construction would not be permitted on a Sunday or a Federal holiday. This
would limit the majority of activities to occur during the daytime without the need of
temporary auxiliary lights for illuminating construction activities on the Project site. In
addition, Project construction is anticipated to last an eight -hour workday between the hours
of 7:00 AM and ending at 3:00 PM during daylight only. Furthermore, project design feature
PDF NOI- 2 has been added to the Final EIR to provide further restrictions on permitted
hours for crushing, grading and other construction activities. Therefore, no adverse light or
glare impacts on adjacent properties or views would result from temporary construction
activities and no mitigation is required.
c) Impact (Long -Term Impact):
Threshold AES -3: Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character
of quality of the site and its surroundings?
Description of the Impact Implementation of the Project would result in the construction of
single - family homes that would replace the existing Marywood Pastoral Center, which could
potentially substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its
surroundings.
Finding The City makes Finding 1 and determines that this potential impact is Less Than
Significant as a result of compliance with the Standard Conditions described below.
Facts in Support of the Finding The following Standard Conditions were described in
Section 6.1.6.2 of the EIR:
SC AES -1 The proposed Project shall comply with the goals, policies and standards of
the City of Orange General Plan that promote "high- quality" urban design and
aesthetic resource preservation and neighborhood compatibility.
SC AES -2 The project shall include an integrated and coordinated architectural
theme for the residential structures consistent with the surrounding
residential developments as approved by the Design Review Committee.
Design shall include:
Building forms, masses, roof design, and authentic details and accent
features that are consistent with the building architectural style;
Building materials consistent with the building architectural style;
A variety of roof forms, ridge heights, and gable direction utilized to
reduce building massing from on- and off -site views; and,
Windows on prominent locations designed and articulated in a manner
that is consistent with the building architectural style.
SC AES -3 Plans submitted during building plan check shall show that mechanical
equipment such as air conditioning units and other utilities are properly
screened from view.
SC AES -4 Landscape planting shall be consistent with the street tree requirements
contained in Chapter 12.28 of the Orange Municipal Code, and landscape
requirements contained in Chapter 16.50 of the Orange Municipal Code.
Findings of Fact Page 21
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
SC AES -8 The Project would include setbacks from property lines consistent with the
zoning requirements in order to create visual separation between
developments.
Compliance with SC AES -1 through SC AES -4 would ensure community integration and
compliance with City Standards, goals and policies that promote and preserve
neighborhood compatibility through the design of the proposed homes, along with the future
landscaping. In addition, implementation of SC AES -8 would ensure appropriate separation
of housing is achieved through setbacks and buffers consistent with the site's zoning code
designation. Based on current conditions, implementation of the Project would not result in
significant impacts to aesthetic resources or degrade the existing visual character of the
Project site or surrounding areas. Therefore, through compliance with these Standard
Conditions, impacts related to the visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings
would be less than significant.
d) Impact (Long- Term):
Threshold AES -4: Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Description of the Impact The Project would replace existing external light sources of the
Marywood Pastoral Center with new external light sources, which could potentially create
light that adversely affects nighttime views in the area.
Finding: The City makes Finding 1 and determines that this potential impact is Less Than
Significant as a result of compliance with the standard conditions described below.
Facts in Support of the Finding Standard Conditions will be implemented by the Project that
substantially avoid the potential significant effects on the environment as summarized above
and described in detail in Section 6.1.6.2 of the EIR.
SC AES -5 Exterior lighting shall be designed to minimize glare and "light trespass" to
adjacent on -site buildings, off -site properties, and adjacent roadways. These
features include lighting fixtures that are programmable, shielded, and
hooded. Walkway lighting is placed low to the ground. Grouped mailbox
enclosures would integrate lighting.
SC AES -6 The proposed Project shall install street lighting for the proposed
Project's private internal streets that best fits the community; however, the
lighting shall meet the City's standards. The final design would be reviewed
and approved by the City's Public Works Director in coordination with the
Community Development Director, or their designees prior to the issuance of
the first building permit. Improvements shall be completed to the satisfaction
of the City's Public Works Director in coordination with the Community
Development Director, or their designees no later than the issuance of the
first certificate of occupancy for any structure.
SC AES -7 As prescribed by Orange Municipal Code (OMC) Section 17.12.030, exterior
lighting shall be energy- efficient and shielded or recessed so that direct glare
and reflections are confined to the maximum extent feasible within the
Findings of Fact Page 22
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
boundaries of the parcel, and shall be directed downward and away from
adjoining properties and public rights -of -way. No lighting shall blink, flash, or
be of unusually high intensity or brightness. All lighting fixtures shall be
appropriate in scale, intensity, and height to the use they are serving.
Security lighting shall be provided at all entrances /exits.
With the implementation of SCs AES -5 through AES -7, which requires that lighting for the
Project be designed to meet the objectives in the Municipal Code, illumination would not
create a significant source of new off -site light or glare. As a result, the introduction of
exterior lighting would comply with the City's lighting requirements and would not result in
potentially significant adverse impacts. No mitigation would be required.
2. Air Quality
a) Impact (Short-Term and Long Term):
Threshold AQ -1: Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
Description of the Impact The Project would potentially result in air emissions that are
inconsistent with the applicable Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) generated by short-
term construction activities and by long -term use of inefficient building technologies.
Finding: The City makes Finding 1 and determines that this potential impact is Less Than
Significant as a result of compliance with the Standard Conditions described below.
Facts in Support of the Finding Standard Conditions will be implemented by the Project that
substantially avoid the potential significant effects on the environment as summarized below
and described in detail in Section 6.2.5 of the EIR.
SC AQ -1 Adherence to SCAQMD Rule 402, which prohibits air contaminants or other
materials that cause injury, detriment, nuisance or annoyance to any
considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the
comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public, or which
cause, or have a natural tendency to cause injury or damage to business or
property to be emitted within the SCAB.
SC AQ -2 Adherence to SCAQMD Rule 403, which sets requirements for dust control
associated with grading and construction activities (refer to Tables 4, 5, and
6 in Appendix D of the Air Quality Report).
SC AQ -3 Adherence to SCAQMD Rules 431.1 and 431.2, which require the use of low
sulfur fuel for stationary construction equipment.
SC AQ -4 Adherence to SCAQMD Rule 1108, which sets limitations on ROG content in
asphalt.
SC AQ -5 Adherence to SCAQMD Rule 1113, which sets limitations on ROG content in
architectural coatings.
Findings of Fact Page 23
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Proposed Project construction activities would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the adopted AQMP with implementation of Standard Conditions SC AQ -1 through SC AQ -5.
Construction of the Project would produce emissions of nonattainment pollutants primarily
from diesel - powered sources at levels below thresholds of significance, as determined by
project- specific dispersion modeling analysis shown in Table 6.2 -10 of the EIR. In addition,
the AQMP proposes emission - reduction measures that are designed to bring the SCAB into
attainment of the CAAQS and NAAQS. The attainment strategies in the AQMP include
mobile source control measures and clean fuel programs that are enforced at the state and
federal levels on engine manufacturers and petroleum refiners and retailers. As a result,
proposed project construction activities would comply with these control measures.
SCAQMD also adopts AQMP control measures into the SCAQMD rules and regulations,
which are then used to regulate sources of air pollution in the SCAB. Therefore, compliance
with these requirements would ensure that potential short-term impacts would not obstruct
implementation of the AQMP.
The regional emissions inventory for the SCAB is compiled by the SCAQMD and the SCAG.
Regional population, housing, and employment projections developed by SCAG, are based,
in part, on the City and County's General Plan land use designations. These projections
form the foundation for the emissions inventory of the AQMP. These demographic trends
are incorporated into the Regional Transportation Plan compiled by SCAG, to determine
priority transportation projects and determine vehicle miles traveled within the SCAG region.
The proposed Project is less than 500 units and is therefore not considered regionally
significant by SCAG under CEQA (CCR, Section 15206). Because the proposed Project is
not regionally significant, long -term changes in the population, housing, or employment
growth projections do not have the potential to substantially affect SCAG's demographic
projections and therefore the assumptions in SCAQMD's AQMP. Furthermore, the proposed
Project is consistent with the City of Orange General Plan land use designations. Therefore,
the additional growth associated with the proposed Project has been accounted for in the
AQMP. Potential long -term impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation is
required.
b) Impact (Short- Term):
Threshold AQ -5: Would the project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
Description of the Impact The Project would temporarily generate emissions through the
operation of construction equipment and use of various construction materials that could
result in potentially significant objectionable odors.
Finding The City makes Finding 1 and determines that this potential impact is Less Than
Significant as a result of compliance with the Standard Conditions described below.
Facts in Support of the Finding Standard Conditions will be implemented by the Project that
substantially avoid the potential significant effects on the environment as summarized below
and described in detail in Section 6.2.5 of the EIR.
SC AQ -1 Adherence to SCAQMD Rule 402, which prohibits air contaminants or other
materials that cause injury, detriment, nuisance or annoyance to any
considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the
Findings of Fact Page 24
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public, or which
cause, or have a natural tendency to cause injury or damage to business or
property to be emitted within the SCAB.
SC AQ -4 Adherence to SCAQMD Rule 1108, which sets limitations on ROG content in
asphalt.
Proposed project activities would not create an objectionable odor at the nearest sensitive
receptor pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 402 (SC AQ -1). Proposed project activities would
generate air pollutants due to the combustion of diesel fuel and asphalting activities during
construction. Some individuals may sense that diesel combustion and evaporative
emissions are objectionable, although there is no approved method of quantifying the odor
impacts of these emissions to the public. In addition, SCAQMD Rules 1108 and 1108.1 limit
the amount of VOCs in cutback asphalt and emulsified asphalt products sold within the air
district, further reducing the potential for odor impacts (SC AQ -4). Emissions associated
with construction activities would be dispersed over the construction site, would be short-
term and transient. Therefore, the proposed Project would produce less than significant
odor impacts and no mitigation is required.
3. Biological Resources
a) Impact (Long- Term):
Threshold 810 -5: Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
Description of the Impact Direct impacts would occur up to 212 mature trees during Project
construction and vegetation removal, which could potentially result in an inconsistency with
the City's General Plan.
Finding: The City makes Finding 1 and determines that this potential impact is Less Than
Significant and no Standard Conditions of approval or mitigation measures were required or
recommended. However, the Project Design Feature identified below has been
recommended to ensure impacts are less than significant.
Facts in Support of the Finding A Project Design Feature will be implemented by the
Project to ensure potential significant effects on the environment are below significance as
summarized below and described in detail in Section 6.3.5 of the EIR.
PDF BIO -1 Identify existing trees suitable to be preserved onsite and /or transplanted and
reused onsite or sold for transplanting at an off -site location. Trees
scheduled for preservation and transplant should be selected based on
recommendations made in the Project's Tree Evaluation Report by the
Project arborist. The list of trees scheduled for preservation and transplant
shall be reviewed and approved by the City.
The City General Plan's Land Use Element Policy 6.8 calls for maximizing landscaping
along streetscapes and within development projects. Under the topic of Tree Protection and
Planting, Policy 6.8 is also identified within the General Plan's Natural Resources Element
Findings of Fact Page 25
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
as a Climate Change Related Policy in Table NR -1. Although the Project would result in the
removal of up to 212 mature trees, the Project would be consistent with Policy 6.8 as any
existing unhealthy and non - transplantable trees would be replaced with new tree planting
and final landscaping would be consistent with City requirements including complimentary
integration with existing landscape and proposed topography; relationship to architecture;
screening of unsightly areas and from exposure to wind, sun and noise; and efficiency for
maintenance and irrigation. With implementation of final tree planting and landscaping, the
Project's impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level and no mitigation would
be required. Although impacts are considered less than significant, in an effort to preserve
existing viable healthy trees, PDF BIO -1 would be implemented during Project construction
to preserve and /or transplant up to 32 trees as identified in Table 6.3 -2 of the EIR. Trees
selected for preservation and transplant would be selected based on recommendations
made in the Project's Tree Evaluation Report (Appendix D of the EIR) prepared by the
Project arborist.
4. Cultural Resources
a) Impact (Long- Term):
Threshold CUL -4: Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
Description of the Impact A potentially significant impact would occur if construction
activities, specifically remedial grading, uncovers human remains.
Finding: The City makes Finding 1 and determines that this potential impact is Less Than
Significant as a result of compliance with the Standard Condition described below.
Facts in Support of the Finding A Standard Condition will be implemented by the Project
that substantially avoids the potential significant effects on the environment as summarized
below and described in detail in Section 6.4.6 of the EIR.
SC CUL -1 If human remains are encountered, no further disturbance shall occur in
compliance with State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 until the
County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant
to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be
notified of the find immediately. If the remains are determined to be
prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission
NAHC), which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD).
With the permission of the landowner or his /her authorized representative,
the MLD may inspect the site of the discovery. The MLD shall complete the
inspection within 48 hours of notification by the NAHC. The MILD may
recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains
and items associated with Native American burials.
The Project site is not anticipated to disturb or uncover human remains as the site has been
previously developed and no known human remains or burial plots are present. However, in
the event that human remains are discovered, pursuant to State law Standard Condition SC
CUL -1 would be implemented to notify the proper authorities and /or Native American
Findings of Fact Page 26
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
contacts, if discovered remains are determined prehistoric. Implementation of SC CUL -1
would reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.
5. Geology and Soils
b) Impact (Short-Term and Long- Term):
Threshold GEO -1 Would the proposed project expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death
involving: i) rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the
most recent Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by
the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault (Refer to Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42); ii) strong seismic ground shaking? iii)
seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction; and /or iv)
landslides?
Threshold GEO -2 Would the proposed project result in substantial soil erosion or the
loss of topsoil?
Threshold GEO -4 Would the proposed project be located on expansive soil, as defined
in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
substantial risks to life or property?
Description of the Impact The Project would potentially be exposed to short-term erosion
issues resulting from temporarily exposed soils during construction activities and to long-
term soil stability issues resulting from existing unsuitable fill material, soil settlement and
oversteepened slopes.
Finding: The City makes Finding 1 and determines that this potential impact is Less Than
Significant as a result of compliance with the Standard Conditions described below.
Facts in Support of the Finding Standard Conditions are required by the Project that
substantially avoid the potential significant effects on the environment as summarized above
and described in detail in Section 6.5.6 of the EIR.
SC GEO -1 All Project grading shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Orange and
shall comply with the applicable requirements of the City's manual of Grading
and Standard Plans and Specification.
SC GEO -2 The Project shall comply with all applicable City Building Code requirements
and the California Building Code subject to review and approval by the City of
Orange.
SC GEO -3 Proposed fill slopes shall be constructed at a slope ratio of 2:1 (horizontal to
vertical) or flatter as required by the City of Orange.
Excavation and grading necessary to prepare the Site would result in the possibility that the
underlying soils would be exposed and could be subject to erosion if not properly protected
during grading and construction operations. As a result, it would be necessary to
Findings of Fact Page 27
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
incorporate temporary erosion protection during grading and Site development activities
pursuant to Standard Conditions. Exposed soils during grading can be adequately
addressed through the provision of appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) that
would be included in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP) as indicated in
Section 6.8, Hydrology and Water Quality. Implementation of the BMPs prescribed in the
SWPPP and compliance with the City's Manual of Grading and Standard Plans would
ensure that the potential for short-term erosion of the exposed soils during grading and
construction would be less than significant.
The Site is not located within a State of California Earthquake Fault Zone (i.e., Alquist- Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zone) and no active faults were identified on or adjacent the Site during
the site evaluation. The Peralta Hills Fault is classified as a "potentially active" fault, which
trends across the southwestern portion of the Site along the toe of the slope, is estimated to
have last ruptured between 11,000 years before present to 1.6 million years before present
and is therefore not considered an active fault. Due to the Peralta Hills Fault being
sufficiently old in age and based on the distance between the fault and proposed structures,
the possibility of damage due to ground rupture is considered low. Nonetheless, compliance
with SCs GEO -1 through GEO -3 would require that grading, slope stability and building
code requirements are met to ensure the structural integrity of the site and protection
against seismic ground shaking. Therefore, implementation of SCs GEO -1 through GEO -3
would ensure impacts are less than significant.
No unique site characteristics that would expose the Project to significant strong seismic
ground shaking are present. It is anticipated that the residential structures proposed for the
proposed Project would be subject to the effects of ground shaking. However, all of the
structures and facilities proposed would be designed and constructed in accordance with
the current California Building Coded (CBC) to ensure that the potential damage to seismic
shaking would be minimized. Further, compliance and implementation of SCs GEO -1
through GEO -3 and the seismic design criteria recommended in the Geotechnical Report
would ensure potential ground shaking impacts are less than significant.
Since the Site is underlain by primarily fine - grained compacted fill and very stiff to hard
bedrock, the potential for liquefaction is considered to be very low and would, therefore, be
less than significant. Dynamic settlement of dry loose sands can occur as the sand particles
tend to settle and densify as a result of a seismic event. This would also be a low concern
based on site conditions. In addition, due to the very low potential for liquefaction, the
potential for lateral spreading is also considered to be very low. Nonetheless, proposed
remedial grading of unsuitable fill material, recompaction of soils for structural integrity and
minimization of water infiltration that could increase risk would further ensure potential
impacts of lateral spreading are less than significant.
The risk of landsliding due to existing site conditions would be remediated through Project
design with cut and fill grading and remedial grading measures, and through compliance
with SC GEO -1, SC GEO -3 and project design, which provides for remediation of existing
over - steepened slopes and adequate drainage facilities. With implementation of proposed
grading activities and SCs GEO -1 and GEO -3, risk of exposure to landslides would be
improved beyond existing conditions and impacts are therefore considered less than
significant.
Findings of Fact Page 28
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Based on proposed project design cut and fill and remedial grading measures, fill slopes are
anticipated to be both grossly and surficially stable. With implementation of SC GEO -1, SC
GEO -3 and proposed remedial grading activities, risk of exposure to unstable slopes and
erosion would be improved beyond existing conditions and impacts are therefore considered
In order to minimize potential impacts from new residential construction and new irrigation
sources on the Project site, the Geotechnical Engineer recommends the construction of a
mid -slope keyway and subdrain system in the western portion of the Project site above the
existing homes along Denise Avenue. The mid -slope keyway is an engineered fill buttress
designed to interrupt bedding planes and improve slope stability. The addition of a subdrain
system provides a means to intercept, collect, and convey subsurface water to a storm drain
system. Figure 6.5 -7 of the EIR graphically depicts the location of the keyway and
subdrain.
Due to the nature of unsuitable, expansive fill and bedrock soil materials known to underlie
the Project site, without remediation these soils would continue to have a "high" potential for
expansion. Existing expansive soils would require remedial grading to ensure that such
potential impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level. These measures would
include removal and recompaction of the soils within the limits of grading and
recommendations provided in the Project Geotechnical Report consistent with the final
approved grading plan. In addition, proposed storm water detention facilities planned for the
Site would be designed to prevent the infiltration of water that would minimize the saturation
of any remaining expansive soils following remediation. Water infiltration was found to not
be feasible based on existing site conditions (LGC, 2015). Therefore, implementation of
Project site grading and construction consistent with Standard Conditions SC GEO -1
through GEO -3 would reduce potentially significant adverse soils conditions to a less than
significant level.
6. Greenhouse Gas
a) Impact (Short-Term and Long- Term):
Threshold GHG -1: Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly
or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Description of the Impact Short-term Project construction activities and long -term
occupation of the proposed single - family homes would generate greenhouse gases that
may have a significant impact on the environment.
Finding The City makes Finding 1 and determines that this potential impact is Less Than
Significant and no mitigation is required; in addition, a standard condition and project design
feature will be implemented to further reduce the Project's greenhouse gas emissions.
Facts in Support of Finding The EIR identified two applicable thresholds against which the
Project's greenhouse gas emissions would be analyzed: exceedance of SCAQMD's
proposed threshold for residential development (3,000 MTCO2e /year), and if the Project
resulted in a cumulative considerable net increase of greenhouse gas emissions exceeding
the SCQAMD threshold. Based on analysis provided in Section 6.6.6 of the EIR, the Project
would not exceed the greenhouse gas significance threshold set by the South Coast Air
Quality Management District which is 3,000 MTCO2e /year (See Draft EIR at Table 6.6 -1).
Findings of Fact Page 29
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
The City has adopted the quantitative threshold of 3,000 MT CO2e /year for residential
projects. The EIR analyzed both the Project's GHG impacts against this threshold on a
project -only and a cumulative impacts analysis and concluded that the project -only
greenhouse gas emissions were 795 MT /year, and that would not result in a cumulative
considerable contribution to an existing significant impact. Therefore, no significant impacts
would occur and no mitigation is required. Nonetheless, Standard Conditions and Project
Design Features are required by the Project, which would further reduce the Project's
greenhouse gas emissions.
SC GHG -1 The proposed Project shall comply with Title 24 energy- efficient design
requirements as well as the provision of window glazing, wall insulation, and
efficient ventilation methods in accordance with the requirements of the
California Building Code.
PDF GHG -1 The Project would incorporate the following green building design features to
further reduce GHG emissions during project construction and operations.
Recycle Job Site Construction & Demolition Waste
Salvage Reusable Building Materials
Design Resource - Efficient Landscapes and Gardens
Install High- Efficiency Irrigation Systems
Provide for On -Site Water Catchment /Retention
Use Wood /- Joints for Floors and Ceilings
Use OSB
Subfloors and Sheathing
Use Treated Wood that does not contain Chromium /Arsenic
Install House Wrap Under Siding
Use Fiber - Cement Siding Materials
Insulate Hot Water Pipes
Install Faucets and Showerheads with Flow Reducers
Install /C -A T Recessed Fixtures with CFLs
Install Lighting Controls
Install Energy Star Dishwasher
Install Energy- Efficient Windows Double- Paned; Low Emissivity (Low
E) and Low
Vent Range Hood to the Outside
Install Sealed Combustion Units on Furnaces and Water Heaters
Install 13 SEER /11 EER or Higher AC
Install AC with Non -HCFC Refrigerants
Select Safe and Durable Roofing Materials
Install Radiant Barrier
Use Low VOC, Water -Based Wood Finishes
Use Low /No VOC Adhesives
Use Engineered Sheet Goods with no added Urea Formaldehyde
Use Finger- Jointed or Recycled- Content Trim
Install Recycled Content Carpet with low VOCs (standard carpet only)
In conclusion, no significant greenhouse gas emissions would be generated by the
proposed Project per South Coast Air Quality Management District threshold for residential
projects of 3,000 MT CO2e /year. Furthermore, the project's greenhouse gas emissions
Findings of Fact Page 30
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
would be reduced through compliance with SC GHG -1 and PDF GHG -1. Therefore, on a
project and a cumulative impact basis, no significant greenhouse gas emissions were
identified.
7. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
a) Impact (Short- Term):
Threshold HAZ -1: Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through:
Routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials;
A reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving
the release of hazardous materials into the environment, and /or
Hazardous emissions or handling hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an
existing or proposed school?
Description of the Impact Temporary transport, storage, use and /or disposal of gasoline
and diesel fuels, architectural coatings (paints) and cleaning solvents during project
construction could potentially expose people to hazardous materials.
Finding: The City makes Finding 1 and determines that this potential impact is Less Than
Significant and no mitigation is required with implementation of a Standard Condition to
minimize the Project's potential impacts with Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
Facts in Support of the Finding A Standard Condition is required by the Project that
substantially avoids the potential significant effects on the environment as summarized
above and described in detail in Section 6.7.6 of the EIR.
SC HAZ -1 The City of Orange would require the Project to comply with all applicable
federal, state, and local regulations pertaining to the transport, storage, use
and /or disposal of hazardous materials on the site.
Implementation of SC HAZ -1 would ensure that the temporary transport, storage, use
and /or disposal of gasoline and diesel fuels, architectural coatings (paints) and cleaning
solvents would be done in compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local
regulations. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation
would be required.
b) Impact (Short-Term and Long- Term):
Threshold HAZ -4: Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with
an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan;
and /or expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury
or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are
adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with
wildlands?
Findings of Fact Page 31
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Description of the Impact Short-term construction activities and long -term occupation of the
proposed homes could potentially result in interference with City emergency response
plans.
Finding: The City makes Finding 1 and determines that this potential impact is Less Than
Significant and no mitigation is required, but Standard Conditions will be implemented to
minimize the Project's potential impacts.
Facts in Support of the Finding Standard Conditions are required by the Project that
substantially avoid the potential significant effects on the environment as summarized above
and described in detail in Section 6.7.6 of the EIR.
SC PS -1 Prior to the issuance of any building permit the project Applicant shall
submit to the City Fire Chief or designee and Community Development
Director or Designee, a Construction Phase Emergency Fire Access Plan
and an Operational Phase Fire Master Plan for review and approval.
SC PS -2 Prior to the issuance of the grading or building permit, the project
Applicant shall submit to the Police Chief or designee and Community
Development Director or designee a Construction Phase Emergency
Access Plan for review and approval.
SC PS -4 Prior to the approval of the grading plan or issuance of the first grading or
building permit, the project Applicant shall submit to the Police Chief or
designee and Community Development Director or designee an
Operations Emergency Access Plan for on -going proposed project
operations showing all proposed means of emergency access for both
police and other emergency personnel into and around the proposed
project.
Temporary construction activities would create additional traffic on roadways from
construction worker vehicles and delivery trucks traveling to and from the Project site.
Potential impacts resulting from the Project's temporary incremental increase in
construction - related traffic would be negligible to the overall function of the emergency
response system based on the scale of proposed activities. In addition, as part of the City's
Standard Conditions for issuance of a building permit, the Applicant would be required to
submit a Construction Phase Emergency Fire Access Plan and a Construction Phase
Emergency Access Plan to the Fire Chief, Police Chief and Community Development
Director or their Designees (SC PS -1, SC PS -2 and SC PS -4). Preparation of the
emergency access plans and coordination with emergency responders and City staff
through these Standard Conditions would ensure adequate response is available in the
event of an emergency. Therefore, impacts would be considered less than significant and
no mitigation would be required.
There are no evacuation corridors on or adjacent to the proposed Project site based on the
City of Orange General Plan Figure PS -4, Generalized Evacuation Corridors. The nearest
evacuation corridor to the proposed Project site is Meats Avenue approximately 0.6 mile to
the south and Lincoln Avenue approximately one mile to the north, both accessed by
Santiago Boulevard. The existing Marywood Pastoral Center would be redeveloped with 40
single - family units within a developed residential neighborhood. Redevelopment of the Site
Findings of Fact Page 32
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
would have no direct impact on the identified evacuation corridors. In an emergency
response situation, requiring evacuation from the site or emergency responders to enter the
site, residents and visitors of the new homes would contribute to overall usage of local
roads between the site and evacuation corridors. However, the Project's incremental
change caused by redevelopment of the site would be less than significant within the
immediate Project Area and negligible to the overall function of the emergency response
system. Furthermore, Standard Conditions SC PS -4 described in Section 6.12 Public
Services would require the Project Applicant to submit -to and obtain approval -from the City
Police Department an Operations Emergency Access Plan for on -going proposed Project
operations showing all proposed means of emergency access for both police and other
emergency personnel into and around the proposed Project. Therefore, impacts would be
less than significant and no mitigation would be required with implementation of SC PS -4.
According to Figure PS -1 Environmental and Natural Hazard Policy Map of the City of
Orange General Plan Safety Element, the Project site is not located in an area within 0.5
mile of hazardous material sites, concentrated industrial land -use area, 100 -year flood area,
liquefaction hazard area, wildland high fire hazard area, or wildland very high fire hazard
area. The Project site is located within a landslide area due to existing oversteepend hillside
slopes on the west and southwest side of the property (refer to figure 4.5 -2 of the EIR). As
described in detail in Section 6.5 of the EIR, Geology and Soils, potential landslide issues
would be resolved by Project Design Features including remedial grading and slope stability
measures and by compliance with Standard Conditions for grading and building code
compliance. Therefore, potential impacts of Project implementation would be less than
significant and no mitigation would be required.
8. Hydrology and Water Quality
a) Impact (Short- Term):
Threshold HWQ -1: (Water Quality) Violate or degrade any water quality standards, waste
discharge requirements, or adversely affect beneficial uses of
receiving water. Deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge. Result in a potential for
discharge of storm water 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?
Threshold HWQ -2: (Surface Run -off) Result in substantial erosion or siltation, increase
the rate, flow velocity, or volume of runoff on- or off -site?
Threshold HWQ -3: (Stormwater) Create or contribute run -off water, during construction
or post - construction activity, which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of polluted run -off?
Description of the Impact Temporary exposure of the Project site during grading and
construction could result in increased surface run -off, increased flows, erosion and /or
discharge of pollutants that could adversely affect the storm water system or adversely
affect water quality.
Findings of Fact Page 33
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Finding The City makes Finding 1 and determines that this potential impact is Less Than
Significant as a result of compliance with the Standard Conditions described below.
Facts in Support of Finding Standard Conditions are required by the Project that
substantially avoid the potential significant effects on the environment as summarized above
and described in detail in Section 6.8.6.1 of the EIR.
SC HWQ -1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Project Applicant would be required
to submit a notice of intent (NOI) with the appropriate fees to the State Water
Quality Resources Control Board for coverage of such future projects under
the General Construction Activity Storm Water Runoff Permit prior to
initiation of construction activity at a future site. As required by the NPDES
permit, a Storm Water Pollution and Prevention Plan (SWPPP) would be
prepared and would establish BMPs in order to reduce sedimentation and
erosion.
SC HWQ -2 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Project Applicant would prepare a
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP would
establish BMPs in order to reduce sedimentation and erosion and prevent
construction pollutants from leaving the site. The Project would also
incorporate all monitoring elements as required in the General Construction
Permit. The Project Applicant would also develop an erosion and sediment
control plan to be reviewed and approved by the City of Orange prior to
issuance of grading permit.
Although it is anticipated that the concentration of urban pollutants in storm runoff from the
grading and construction activities associated with Project implementation could increase
during the construction phase, the runoff would be controlled through applicable BMPs with
implementation of Standard Conditions SC HWQ -1 and SC HWQ -2 to minimize discharges
of pollutants, including siltation associated with erosion resulting from grading activities. By
controlling peak storm runoff from the Project site and thereby not exceeding the capacity of
the existing storm drain system, potential downstream impacts from erosion would be
minimized. Further, once construction activities are completed, these impacts would cease.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
c) Impact (Long- Term):
Threshold HWQ -1: (Water Quality) Violate or degrade any water quality standards, waste
discharge requirements, or adversely affect beneficial uses of
receiving water. Deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge. Result in a potential for
discharge of storm water 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?
Description of the Impact Development of the Project site as proposed would result in
substantial landform alteration and a change in the existing drainage conditions on the site,
which could result in increased surface run -off, erosion, increased flows that could
Findings of Fact Page 34
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
adversely affect the storm water system, and /or discharge of pollutants that could adversely
affect water quality.
Finding The City makes Finding 1 and determines that this potential impact is Less Than
Significant as a result of compliance with the Standard Conditions and Project Design
Features described below.
Facts in Support of Findings The following Standard conditions and Project Design
Features are required by the Project that substantially avoid the potential significant effects
on the environment described above and analyzed in detail in Section 6.8.6.2 of the EIR.
SC HWQ -3 Future site grading and construction would comply with the drainage controls
imposed by the applicable building code requirements prescribed by the City
of Orange.
SC HWQ -4 The proposed Project would provide drainage collection (inlets) and drainage
conveyance (storm drain pipe or street flow) to collect the run -off and convey
it in a safe manor to the storm drain in East Villareal Drive.
SC HWQ -5 The proposed Project drainage features would be sized in a manner to meet
City of Orange requirements for flow conveyance and flood protection.
SC HWQ -6 The proposed Project would provide an adequate storm drain system,
consistent with storm drain routing alignments established in the hydrologic
analysis.
PDF HWQ -1 The proposed Project would provide a storage facility in the downstream
areas of Planning Area A to provide controls of 100 -year run -off volumes in
excess of the existing 100 -year condition.
PDF HWQ -2 The proposed Project would reduce peak flow rates to a level consistent with
existing conditions. The proposed Project would provide a "flow -by" detention
basin to retard flows that exceed the maximum runoff within the storm drain
system generated in Area A during the 100 -year storm runoff. The facility
would be sized and configured to reduce mainline run -off rates to pre- Project
levels downstream of the basin.
The Project includes source control BMPs represented in structural measures such as
landscape, irrigation, signage considerations, materials, and design of areas; and non-
structural measures such as requirements for cleaning, education, and maintenance. The
Project's structural measures for Site Design including SC HWQ -3 through SC HQW -6 and
PDF HWQ -1 and PDF HWQ -2 are designed to retain water onsite, reduce the rate of run-
off, and treat water for pollutants before release in to the storm water system. Non - structural
source control measures, such as Litter Management to address trash, litter and pet wastes
and Common Area Landscape Management to limit the use of fertilizers and pesticides and
restrict the application of either material within 48 hours prior to predicted rain events
enforced by HOA) would also be used to ensure consistency with the County Model Water
Quality Management Plan and Technical Guidance Document. As analyzed in Section
6.8.6.2 of the EIR, flow rates for the Project site were found to decrease in the post- Project
condition and be adequately handled by the existing storm water system without potential
Findings of Fact Page 35
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
for onsite or offsite flooding. In addition, pollutants were also found to be adequately treated
in the post- Project condition through use of a bioretention basin, as shown on the Project's
TTM. Therefore, potential impacts to hydrology and water quality would be avoided and less
than significant.
d) Impact (Long- Term):
Threshold HWQ -2: (Surface Run -of) Result in substantial erosion or siltation, increase
the rate, flow velocity, or volume of runoff on- or off -site?
Threshold HWQ -3: (Stormwater) Create or contribute run -off water, during construction
or post- construction activity, which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of polluted run -off?
Description of the Impact As indicated in Table 6.8 -9 of the EIR, Project implementation
would result in a shift in the boundaries of four drainage subareas on the Project site, which
would alter existing runoff direction and volumes. Alterations could have potentially
significant impacts to surface run -off and /or stormwater.
Finding: The City makes Finding 1 and determines that this potential impact is Less Than
Significant as a result of compliance with the Project Design Features described below.
Facts in Support of Findings The following Standard Conditions and Project Design
Features are required by the Project that substantially avoid the potential significant effects
on the environment described above and analyzed in detail in Section 6.8.6.2 of the EIR.
PDF HWQ -1 The proposed Project would provide a storage facility in the downstream
areas of Planning Area A to provide controls of 100 -year run -off volumes in
excess of the existing 100 -year condition.
PDF HWQ -2 The proposed Project would reduce peak flow rates to a level consistent with
existing conditions. The proposed Project would provide a "flow -by" detention
basin to retard flows that exceed the maximum runoff within the storm drain
system generated in Area A during the 100 -year storm runoff. The facility
would be sized and configured to reduce mainline run -off rates to pre- Project
levels downstream of the basin.
The proposed Project will consist of 40 single - family, detached residential homes with
minimum 6,000 square foot lots. In general, the post- construction Project site would gently
slope to the south, with surface runoff for each residential lot conveyed as sheet flow to the
street and into the storm drain system. Runoff would then be conveyed southerly in the
proposed storm drain line into the on -site detention basin prior to discharging to the existing
storm drain system located in East Villareal Drive. Runoff would then be conveyed
southwesterly to Santiago Boulevard and then easterly to the Buckeye Storm Channel
OCFCD Facility No. E07S03) and the Collins Channel (E07) prior to discharging to Reach
2 of the Santa Ana River (E01).
Hydraulic calculations presented in the Preliminary Hydrology Study indicate that the
existing pipe crossings at East Villareal Drive would have the capacity to convey the
Findings of Fact Page 36
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
estimated flows for post- construction 100 -year flow conditions. Furthermore, the onsite
storm water system would be appropriately sized to ensure no onsite flooding. Therefore,
with implementation of PDFs HWQ -1 and HWQ -2, proposed drainage and hydrologic
conditions would not result in impacts to existing storm drain systems or offsite flooding.
Potential impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation required.
9. Noise
a) Impact (Short- Term):
Threshold N0I -2: Would the project cause exposure of persons to or generation of
excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Description of the Impact Vibration caused by use of grading equipment during the
project's grading phase could potentially reach levels above human annoyance thresholds.
Finding The City makes Finding 1 and determines that this potential impact is Less Than
Significant as a result of compliance with the Project Design Feature described below.
Facts in Support of Findings Project Design Features are required by the Project that
substantially avoid the potential significant effects on noise during the construction period of
the project.
PDF NOI -1 In the area of grading near existing residential structures (approximately
100 feet) no vibratory rollers or soil compacters shall be permitted.
Necessary compaction shall be achieved with mechanical rollers or soil
compactors.
During the grading phase of the Project, mechanical rollers or soil compactors to be utilized
for soil compaction of the area closest to the homes, such as at the end of East Marywood
Lane, would not be of the vibratory type in accordance with PDF NOI -1. Potential ground
vibration from such equipment is expected to be lower than those from vibratory rollers as
discussed in the EIR Section 6.10.6.1. Furthermore, the backyards and building structures
of these homes are elevated above the finished grade. The vertical separation from the
Project site to the residential lots would result in additional dampening of vibration from the
construction equipment. The combination of these factors and implementation of PDF NOI-
1 would result in vibration levels below the threshold of perceptibility. Therefore, vibration
impacts of Project construction activities would be less than significant and no mitigation
would be required.
10. Public Services and Facilities
a) Impact (Short- Term):
Threshold PS -1: Have a substantial adverse physical impact 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
Findings of Fact Page 37
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire Protection;
Police Protection; Schools; Other?
Description of the Impact The site preparation and construction phases of the project could
result in requests for fire protection services and police services related to the construction
work and construction - related traffic.
Finding The City makes Finding 1 and determines that this potential impact is Less Than
Significant as a result of compliance with the Standard Conditions described below.
Facts in Support of Findings Standard Conditions would be required by the Project that
substantially avoid the potential significant effects on the environment affecting public
services and facilities during the construction period of the project.
Sc PS -1 Prior to the issuance of any building permit the Project Applicant shall submit
to the City Fire Chief or designee and Community Development Director or
Designee, a Construction Phase Emergency Fire Access Plan and an
Operational Phase Fire Master Plan for review and approval.
SC PS -2 Prior to the issuance of the grading or building permit, the Project Applicant
shall submit to the Police Chief or designee and Community Development
Director or designee a Construction Phase Emergency Access Plan for
review and approval.
The Construction Phase Emergency Fire Access Plan would enable emergency responders
to effectively respond to an emergency call by knowing in advance the route to the Project
site, locations of fire hydrants, and vehicular access from adjacent roadways (SC PS -1).
The Construction Phase Emergency Access Plan would include the location of all existing
access points from the adjacent public streets and the on -site emergency access areas
provided to within 150 feet of all construction activities (SC PS -2). With implementation of
SC PS -1 and SC PS -2, potential impacts would be less than significant.
There are no significant short -term construction - related impacts to schools or other public
facilities, such as library services.
b) Impact (Long- Term):
Threshold PS -1: Would the project have a substantial adverse physical impact
associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any
of the public services: Fire Protection; Police Protection; Schools;
Other?
Description of the Impact The Project would result in 40 new single - family residential
homes, which would potentially have a significant impact on existing fire protection, police
protection, schools, and /or library services.
Findings of Fact Page 38
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Finding The City makes Finding 1 and determines that this potential impact is Less Than
Significant as a result of compliance with the Standard Conditions and Project Design
Feature described below.
Facts in Support of Finding Standard Conditions and Project Design Features are required
by the Project that substantially avoid the potential significant effects on the environment as
summarized above and described in detail in Section 6.12.6.2 of the EIR.
SC PS -3 Prior to building permit issuance, the Applicant shall pay the applicable
statutory developer fees in effect at the time of the building permit to
contribute to government facilities, including those for fire, police, schools
and libraries.
SC PS -4 Prior to the approval of the grading plan or issuance of the first grading or
building permit, the Project Applicant shall submit to the Police Chief or
designee and Community Development Director or designee an Operations
Emergency Access Plan for on -going proposed Project operations showing
all proposed means of emergency access for both police and other
emergency personnel into and around the proposed Project.
SC PS -5 Prior to the issuance of any building permit, the Project plans shall
demonstrate compliance with the City Fire Code (Orange Municipal Code
Chapter 15.32) and the California Building Code Article 9, Appendix III -A and
Appendix III -B as interpreted by the OFD related to fire access, fire flow
requirements, the number, placement, height, and spacing of hydrants, and
automatic fire extinguishing systems.
SC PS -6 All fire hydrants are public and shall meet the public fire hydrant standards
and the City of Orange Public Works Water Division standards. Each fire
hydrant shall be provided with Blue Dots in accordance with the OFD, City of
Orange Utilities Department.
SC PS -7 Any manual gate secured by a locking device shall have a Knox box with key
inside to the gate's locking mechanism. The Knox box shall be keyed for
police and fire access and identified on the Project's Fire Master Plan.
PDF PS -1 All residential units shall have illuminated address signs visible from the
street to facilitate address identification by emergency responders. The
location of the signs shall be identified on the final approved construction
plans.
The Project would generate an incremental increase in demand on existing fire, police,
school and library services with the addition of 40 homes. The Project would be required to
pay development fees consistent with SC PS -3, which is intended to offset this incremental
increase in demand and reduce potential impacts to below a level of significance. The
Project would be required to obtain approval of an Operations Emergency Access Plan (SC
PS -4), install Knox boxes at locked gates (SC PS -7), and provide illuminated address signs
for rapid address identification from the street (PDF PS -1), all of which help to ensure
emergency access is provided and response times from fire and police are adequate.
Furthermore, compliance with City Fire Code (SC PS -5) and City fire hydrant standards (SC
Findings of Fact Page 39
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
PS -6) would ensure that proper safety infrastructure is incorporated into the Project site.
Compliance with the Standard Conditions and PDF described above would reduce any
potential impacts to fire, police, school and library services to a level below significance.
11. Recreation
a) Impact (Long- Term):
Threshold REC -1: Would the proposed project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional park or other public park facilities such
that substantial physical deterioration of the facilities would occur or
be accelerated?
Description of the Impact The proposed Project would generate a population of
approximately 122 new residents, which potentially create an incremental demand for parks
and recreational facilities.
Finding: The City makes Finding 1 and determines that this potential impact is Less Than
Significant as a result of compliance with the Standard Condition described below.
Facts in Support of Finding Standard Condition SC REC -1 is required to be satisfied by the
Project that substantially avoids the Project's potential significant effects on recreation
facilities.
SC REC -1 Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant/subdivider shall comply
with the provisions of Chapter 16.60, Park Dedication and Fees of the City
Municipal Code for park land dedication and /or payment of in -lieu fees.
Per the City's Municipal Code, the 40 dwelling units would require a total of 0.366 net acre
of parkland to accommodate the future residents at a rate of 3 acres of parkland per 1,000
residents. However, the City of Orange Municipal Code Section 16.60.060 - Formula for
Fees in -lieu of Dedication includes some flexibility in determining compliance, including
either parkland dedication and /or payment of park land in -lieu fees. For subdivisions
containing 50 dwelling units or less with no suitable areas for park dedication, only the
payment of the in -lieu fee is required to mitigate the Project's incremental increase in
demand for park and recreational facilities. Therefore, compliance with the City's Municipal
Code as prescribed in Section 6.13.5 of the EIR, SC REC -1 would ensure that the Project's
impacts to parks and recreational facilities are reduced to a less than significant level.
12. Traffic and Circulation
a) Impact (Short- Term):
Findings of Fact Page 40
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Threshold TRA -1: Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the
circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation
including mass transit and non - motorized travel and relevant
components of the circulation system, including but not limited to
intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle
paths, and mass transit?
Threshold TRA -4: Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e. g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment).
Description of the Impact Delivery of construction materials to the project site could cause a
significant temporary disruption to the local circulation system with the additional truck traffic
on roadways accessing the site.
Finding The City makes Finding 1 and determines that this potential impact is Less Than
Significant as a result of compliance with the Project Design Feature described below.
Facts in Support of the Finding Project Design Feature PDF -TRA -1 is required by the
Project that will substantially avoid the Project's potential significant short-term effects on
traffic and the circulation system.
PDF TRA -1 The Project Applicant/Construction Contractor shall implement a
Construction Management Plan to time the delivery of construction
materials on a schedule that reduces potential impacts to roadways and
intersections by minimizing vehicle queuing and stacking. Material
delivery shall be limited between the hours of 7 AM and 3 PM. The
Construction Management Plan shall be approved by the City and a copy
shall be kept on -site and made available for inspection by City staff.
Short-term traffic impacts are those resulting from site preparation and construction
activities. Site preparation and construction activities are anticipated to occur from August
2015 through October 2017. During this period, the Project would generate a temporary
increase in traffic on the local roadway system associated with the transport of materials
and equipment and associated with construction workers traveling to and from the Site. The
amount of traffic generated during this time would vary in intensity based on the stage of
construction and type of construction activity taking place. The most intensive amount of
traffic would be generated during the grading phase, which includes the import of
approximately 8,000 cubic yards of soil material necessary for building the retaining wall.
This activity would require the use of trucks utilizing the local roadways to transport the
material to the Site.
Table 6.14 -4 of the EIR provides a summary of the forecast Project construction peak hour
and daily traffic volumes. Review of the table shows that on a "typical" weekday of
construction, the import and export of material to and from the Project site plus the trips
from the construction workers are expected to generate 656 daily trips with 88 trips (49
inbound and 39 outbound) produced during the AM peak hour and 0 trips produced during
the PM peak hour based on construction schedule. It should be noted that the proposed
Project would require additional construction activities, such as site demolition/ preparation,
Findings of Fact Page 41
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
grading, underground of utilities, building construction, etc. However, these additional
construction activities would result in fewer trips generated at one time than that of material
import activities.
The additional 656 ADTs generated during project construction, would not cause local
roadways to exceed the City's acceptable LOS D threshold for any of the study area
roadways. Per the General Plan Circulation Element Table CM -3, there are no specified
roadway capacity ADT volume ranges for roadway segments operating at above LOS D or
LOS E (i.e. those operating at LOS A, LOS B, or LOS C). All roadways will continue to
operate at a LOS D or better with the addition of the 656 ADTs, accounting for existing ADT
conditions and in consideration of each roadway's allowable capacity as shown in Table
6.14 -5 of the EIR. Therefore, no impacts would occur and no mitigation is required.
The results of short-term construction impact analysis are provided in Table 6.14 -6 of the
EIR on the following page. Based on the anticipated worst -case construction traffic scenario
described above and in consideration of existing LOS for the study area intersections, which
are currently operating at levels LOS A, LOS B and LOS C during the AM peak hour,
temporary traffic impacts associated with construction would not reduce the study area
intersections' LOS to an unacceptable level (i.e., LOS E or LOS F). The temporary addition
of 656 total daily trips with 88 trips occurring in the AM peak hour and 0 trips occurring in
the PM peak hour would not cause a significant delay or a change in LOS at any of the
study area intersections. Therefore, potential short-term impacts to intersections would be
less than significant. Nonetheless, as a Project Design Feature, implementation of a
Construction Management Plan would require the delivery of construction materials on a
schedule that reduces potential impacts to roadways and intersections by minimizing vehicle
queuing and stacking (refer to PDF TRA -1 in Section 6.14.5 of the EIR).
Temporary construction activities would not require alteration of existing roadways,
including the roadway of East Villareal Drive that serves the Project site's single access
point. In addition, entry and exit of construction worker vehicles and delivery trucks would be
managed through implementation of a Construction Management Plan to reduce potential
impacts on roadways and intersections by minimizing vehicle queuing and stacking (refer to
PDF TRA -1 in Section 6.14.5 of the EIR). Therefore, potential impacts from temporary
construction activities would be less than significant and no mitigation is required.
b) Impact (Short- Term):
Threshold TRA -5: Would the project result in inadequate emergency access?
Description of the Impact Standard Conditions are required by the Project that will
substantially avoid the Project's potential significant short-term effects on emergency
access.
Finding: The City makes Finding 1 and determines that this potential impact is Less Than
Significant as a result of compliance with the Standard Conditions described below.
Facts in Support of the Finding Standard Conditions SC PS -1 and SC PS -2 are required by
the Project that will substantially avoid the Project's potential significant short-term effects
on emergency access.
Findings of Fact Page 42
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
SC PS -1 Prior to the issuance of any building permit the project Applicant shall
submit to the City Fire Chief or designee and Community Development
Director or Designee, a Construction Phase Emergency Fire Access Plan
and an Operational Phase Fire Master Plan for review and approval.
SC PS -2 Prior to the issuance of the grading or building permit, the project
Applicant shall submit to the Police Chief or designee and Community
Development Director or designee a Construction Phase Emergency
Access Plan for review and approval.
As part of the City's Standard Conditions for issuance of a building permit, the Applicant
would be required to submit a Construction Phase Emergency Fire Access Plan (SC PS -1)
and a Construction Phase Emergency Access Plan (SC PS -2) to the Fire Chief, Police Chief
and Community Development Director or their Designees. Preparation of the emergency
access plans and coordination with emergency responders and City staff through these
Standard Conditions would ensure adequate response is available in the event of an
emergency. Therefore, impacts would be considered less than significant and no mitigation
would be required.
13. Utilities
a) Impact (Short- Term):
Threshold U -4: Would the project be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs
and comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations
related to solid waste?
Description of the Impact Project demolition would generate approximately 9,500 tons of
solid waste and additional green waste, which could potentially impact the City's ability to
meet CIWMP's waste reduction goals as well as requirements outlined by Assembly Bill
939.
Finding: The City makes Finding 1 and determines that this potential impact is Less Than
Significant as a result of compliance with implementation of Project Design Features
described below.
Facts in Support of the Finding Project Design Features are required by the Project that
substantially avoid the potential significant effects on the environment as summarized above
and described in detail in Section 6.15.6 of the EIR.
PDF U -3 The Project shall re -use approximately 90 percent of all demolished building
and hardscape material. This material would include reusable crushed
concrete and asphalt as engineered base /fill.
PDF U -4 During Project construction, green waste (plants and vegetation), metals,
clean wood and cardboard shall be separated on -site for hauling and
recycling at a processing facility identified by County of Orange OC Waste &
Recycling or equivalent.
Findings of Fact Page 43
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Implementation of PDF U -3 and PDF U -4 would divert construction waste through reuse
and recycling of materials; thus, serving to meet the City's and CIWMP's waste reduction
goals as well as to meet requirements outlined by Assembly Bill 939. Therefore, potential
impacts would be less than significant.
b) Impact (Long- Term):
Threshold U -1: Would the project cause wastewater treatment and facilitates that:
Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control Board; Require or result in the
construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities; and or, Lead to a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project
that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand
in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
Threshold U -2: Would the project require or result in the construction of new storm
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Threshold U -3: Would the project have sufficient water supply available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources so as not to require
new or expanded entitlements?
Threshold U -4: Would the project be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs
and comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations
related to solid waste?
Description of the Impact Development and occupancy of the Project would generate
sewer /wastewater, solid waste, increased water consumption, and solid waste all of which
could potentially impact the ability of utilities to adequately serve the needs of the Project.
Finding: The City makes Finding 1 and determines that this potential impact is Less Than
Significant as a result of compliance with the Standard Conditions and Project Design
Features described below.
Facts in Support of the Finding Standard Conditions and Project Design Features are
required by the Project that substantially avoid the potential long -term significant effects on
the environment of the Project on utilities.
SC U -1 The Project would comply with the City of Orange Municipal Code including
Chapter 7.01, Water Quality and Stormwater Discharges; Chapter 13, Public
Utilities, Section I, Water System and Section II, Sewer System; and Chapter
8.28, Garbage.
SC U -2 All in -tract sewer /wastewater collection facilities would be designed to meet
the requirements and standards prescribed by the Orange County Sanitation
District and City of Orange Sewer Department, Public Works.
Findings of Fact Page 44
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
SC U -3 All in -tract water mains and related facilities would be designed to meet the
requirements and standards prescribed by the City of Orange Water Division.
PDF U -1 The plant palette in the landscaping plan shall include drought - tolerant
species that reduce the demand for domestic water supply.
PDF U -2 A high- efficiency, low -flow drip irrigation system shall be used in the Project
site's landscaped common areas to reduce the demand for domestic water
supply. Turf will also be minimized on residential lots, with the majority of the
proposed plant palette consisting of drought tolerant species. All new
landscaped areas must be irrigated with either drip or microspray irrigation.
PDF U -5 The Project will utilize water efficient indoor fixtures, such as low flow shower
heads and toilets and on- demand water heating pumps.
The Project would connect to an existing eight -inch sewer line located within East Villareal
Drive. Connection to the existing system would not cause issues with water quality, an
increase in need for infrastructure or an exceedance of existing capacity. Therefore, no
significant unavoidable impacts would occur. Furthermore, implementation of SC U -1 and
SC U -2 would ensure sewer facilities would be adequate to accommodate the proposed
Project. The Project would be constructed on an existing developed site currently served by
OCWD and OWD. The Project would connect to an existing 18 inch waterline located within
East Villareal Drive. Because the Project is a relatively small (40 homes) infill Project that is
consistent with long -term planning and land -use objectives set by the UWMP and the
General Plan, no significant impacts would occur and no mitigation would be required. In
addition, SC U -1 and SC U -3 would ensure the Project complies with the City's Municipal
Code regarding water system design and capacity requirements. Furthermore,
implementation of PDF U -1 and PDF U -2 would provide for drought tolerant landscaping
and an efficient irrigation system in the Project's common areas to further promote water
conservation goals of MWD and CDWR. In addition, Page 6.15 -22 of the Draft EIR notes
that the Project includes the use of water efficient indoor fixtures, such as low flow shower
heads and toilets and on- demand water heating pumps. These measures have been added
as project design feature PDF U -5 in the Final EIR for consistency. The County's ability to
meet the long -term demands for solid waste disposal would ensure that no significant
unavoidable adverse impacts would occur with Project implementation. In addition, SC -1
would ensure the Project complies with the City's Municipal Code regarding proper storage,
handling and disposal of municipal solid waste. Therefore, potential impacts to utilities
and /or utilities systems would be less than significant.
D. POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS DETERMINED TO BE MITIGATED TO
BELOW A LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
1. Air Quality
a) Impact (Short- Term):
Findings of Fact Page 45
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Threshold AQ -1: Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
Threshold AQ -2: Would the project violate any air quality standard or contributes
substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation?
Description of the Impacts (Impact AQ -1 and Impact AQ -2) Construction activities would
result in a 0.8 pound per day exceedance of allowable NOx emissions in 2015; Construction
activities would result in a 0.8 pound per day exceedance of allowable NOx emissions in
2015; Peak construction activities may result in a 10.6 pound per day exceedance of
allowable PM10 in 2015; and may result in a 0.9 pound per day and 0.2 pound per day
exceedance of allowable PM2.5 in 2015 and 2016, respectively.
Finding The City makes Finding 1 that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental effect described above and identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding The Project would be subject to South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD) Rules 402, 403, 431.1, 431.2, 1108 and 1108 through
implementation of Standard Conditions SC AQ -1 through SC AQ -5 during construction.
SCAQMD does not require a permit for construction activities, per se, but rather, sets forth
general and specific requirements for all construction sites in the South Coast Air Basin
SCAB). The general requirements prohibit a person from causing or allowing certain types
of emissions at regulated quantities. SCs AQ -1 through AQ -5 are designed to reduce
impacts associated with the significance thresholds listed in Section 6.2.4 of the EIR. As a
Standard Condition, the Project's construction contractor is required to implement Best
Available Control Technology (BACT) during construction activities to ensure no violations
are made with SCAQMD rules. In addition, adherence with Title 24 energy efficiency
standards would also be required through SC AQ -6. Finally, Project Design Features PDF
AQ -1 and PDF AQ -2 would be used to minimize impacts of fugitive dust on the adjacent
Childtime Daycare and homes. These Standard Conditions and Project Design Features
were used to form the basis of analysis in the EIR and below.
SC AQ -1 Adherence to SCAQMD Rule 402, which prohibits air contaminants or other
materials that cause injury, detriment, nuisance or annoyance to any
considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the
comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public, or which
cause, or have a natural tendency to cause injury or damage to business or
property to be emitted within the SCAB.
SC AQ -2 Adherence to SCAQMD Rule 403, which sets requirements for dust control
associated with grading and construction activities (refer to Tables 4, 5, and
6 in Appendix D of the Air Quality Report).
SC AQ -3 Adherence to SCAQMD Rules 431.1 and 431.2, which require the use of low
sulfur fuel for stationary construction equipment.
SC AQ -4 Adherence to SCAQMD Rule 1108, which sets limitations on ROG content in
asphalt.
Findings of Fact Page 46
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
SC AQ -5 Adherence to SCAQMD Rule 1113, which sets limitations on ROG content in
architectural coatings.
SC AQ -6 Adherence to Title 24 energy- efficient design requirements as well as the
provision of window glazing, wall insulation, and efficient ventilation methods
in accordance with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code.
PDF AQ -1 The crushing machinery/operations will be located near the area currently
occupied by the Chapel, which represents the center of the Project site, to
minimize impacts on surrounding land uses. The location of crushing
machinery/operations shall be identified on the final grading plans.
PDF AQ -2 Stockpiles associated with the crushing /grading operations shall be either
covered or other equivalent measures, such as soil binders, shall be applied
to minimize the release of dust from the stockpiles.
MM AQ -1 Off -road construction equipment shall be equipped with Tier 4 engines,
unless that technology is not available for a particular type of equipment, in
which case, the cleanest burning engine technology shall be used.
MM AQ -2 Vehicle speed on unpaved roads shall be reduced to 15 miles per hour.
MM AQ -3 Exposed areas shall be watered three times per day.
Proposed project construction would not produce emissions that exceed an SCAQMD
significance threshold after mitigation. Table 6.2 -5 of the EIR summarizes the unmitigated
peak daily emissions associated with construction of the proposed Project. The table shows
that only NOx emissions in 2015 would exceed the significance threshold by 0.8 pounds per
day above the allowable 100 pounds per day. NOx emissions in 2015 would result mostly
from the combustion of diesel fuel in off -road construction equipment during
excavation /grading activities and the diesel fuel combustion emissions associated with haul
trucks used to import 8,000 cubic yards of material for construction of a retaining wall. As
shown in Table 6.2 -6 of the EIR, implementation of MM AQ -1 would reduce NOx emissions
from the projected 100.8 pounds per day without mitigation to 42.5 pounds /day with
mitigation, well below the allowable threshold of 100 pounds per day. MM AQ -1 would
mitigate impacts to less than significant.
As shown in the Project- specific dispersion analysis (Tables 6.2 -9 and 6.2 -10 of the EIR),
PM,o and PM2.5 localized impacts would be below the significance thresholds with
implementation of mitigation measures MM AQ -1 through MM AQ -3. Therefore, consistent
with the dispersion analysis, mitigation measures MM AQ -1 through MM AQ -3 would be
required by the Project to ensure potential impacts are less than significant.
b) Impact (Short- Term):
Findings of Fact Page 47
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Threshold AQ -3: Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment
under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard
including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds
for ozone precursors)?
Description of the Impact Emissions generated during temporary construction activities
could have a significant impact on criteria pollutants.
Finding: The City makes Finding 1 that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental effect described above and identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Findings Mitigation Measures MM AQ -1 through MM AQ -3 required by
the Project would help to reduce potentially significant effects on the environment.
MM AQ -1 Off -road construction equipment shall be equipped with Tier 4 engines,
unless that technology is not available for a particular type of equipment, in
which case, the cleanest burning engine technology shall be used.
MM AQ -2 Vehicle speed on unpaved roads shall be reduced to 15 miles per hour.
MM AQ -3 Exposed areas shall be watered three times per day.
Only one related project would be located within 1 mile of the proposed Project. A proposed
automated car wash at an existing gas station located at 2844 North Santiago Boulevard
would be within 1 mile, but more than 500 feet from the proposed Project. Although this
project may occur in the vicinity of and contemporaneously with the proposed Project, the
proposed Project would have a relatively short construction schedule of less than 2 years,
with the majority of construction occurring in the first 6 months. Therefore, any construction
impacts would be short in duration and unlikely to overlap substantially with other projects in
the vicinity.
In addition, SCAQMD developed a policy to address cumulative impacts of CEQA projects
SCAQMD, 2003). The policy considers the cumulative threshold to be the same as the
project threshold being analyzed. As determined by the Project— specific dispersion analysis
shown in Tables 6.2 -9 and 6.2 -10 of the El R, construction of the proposed Project would not
exceed SCAQMD thresholds for regional emissions or localized impacts of criteria
pollutants with implementation of mitigation measures MM AQ -1 through MM AQ -3. As
such, the proposed Project would not be considered cumulatively considerable under
SCAQMD's policy as it does not exceed Project- specific air quality significance thresholds.
Therefore, the Project's cumulative contribution would be less than significant and no
additional mitigation is required.
c) Impact (Short- Term):
Threshold AQ -4: Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
Findings of Fact Page 48
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Description of the Impact (Impact AQ -3) Construction activities would result in DPM
emissions (as PM,o exhaust), which is considered a Toxic Air Contaminant, for residential
and occupational receptors that are below applicable thresholds of significance but may
pose a temporary nuisance.
Finding: The City makes Finding 1 that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental effect described above and identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding Mitigation Measures MM AQ -1 through MM AQ -3 required by
the Project would help to reduce potentially significant effects on the environment.
MM AQ -1 Off -road construction equipment shall be equipped with Tier 4 engines,
unless that technology is not available for a particular type of equipment, in
which case, the cleanest burning engine technology shall be used.
MM AQ -2 Vehicle speed on unpaved roads shall be reduced to 15 miles per hour.
MM AQ -3 Exposed areas shall be watered three times per day.
Health effects from carcinogenic Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) are usually described in
terms of individual cancer risk, which is based on a 70 -year lifetime exposure to TACs. The
proposed Project construction period of two years, with the majority of activity occurring
during the first six months, would be much less than the 70 years used for risk
determination. With mitigation measures MM AQ -1, MM AQ -2 and MM AQ -2, the maximum
daily emission for DPM (as PM,o exhaust) would be less than one pound per day during
construction activities, as shown in Table 6.2 -6 of the EIR. Furthermore, the proposed
Project would also not exceed the SCAQMD localized significance thresholds for PM,o or
PM2.5, as shown in Table 6.2 -10 of the EIR. The proposed Project would not expose
sensitive receptors to substantial TAC emissions. Therefore, impacts would be less than
significant with mitigation measures MM AQ -1 through MM AQ -3.
2. Biological Resources
a) Impact (Short- Term):
Threshold 810 -4 Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established
native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
Description of the Impact (Impact BIO -11 If vegetation removal and /or demolition activities
are scheduled during nesting bird season (February 1 to September 15), activities could
potentially impact nesting birds, eggs, or active nests, which could lead to a violation of the
MTBA and a significant impact.
Finding: The City makes Finding 1 that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental effect described above and identified in the Final EIR.
Findings of Fact Page 49
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Facts in Support of the Finding Mitigation Measures MM BIO -1 required by the Project
would reduce potentially significant impacts on breeding and nesting birds.
MM BIO -1 If vegetation removal and /or demolition activities cannot be avoided during
the period of February 1 through September 15, a qualified biologist shall
survey all potential nesting habitat within the property and a 500 foot radius
within five days prior to commencing vegetation removal and /or construction
activities to determine the presence or absence of nesting activity. If no
nesting activities are observed, work activities may begin.
If an active bird nest is identified, the nest site shall be marked /flagged in all
directions onsite at an appropriate distance determined by a qualified
biologist (based on the site conditions), typically 500 feet for endangered,
threatened, and candidate species and all raptors, and 300 feet for other
species. No work shall occur within the buffer area until after the nest
becomes inactive, or unless a qualified biologist monitors the nest during
construction activities within the buffer and does not observe any signs of
stress or erratic behavior that indicate a negative effect on nesting. If the
biologist observes signs of stress, all construction activities within the buffer
area shall cease immediately.
Should vegetation removal and /or construction cease for over a two week
period, new nesting surveys must be conducted within five days of restarting
work if vegetation that could support nesting birds is present.
Although no nesting activity was observed during the field study, the Project site does host
breeding, nesting and /or roosting habitat for bird species. The eucalyptus and palm trees
have the potential to provide potential roosting habitat for raptors and the existing structures
may provide habitat for nesting birds such as swallows or cavity nesters, etc. Therefore, if
vegetation removal, ground disturbance, or demolition activities occur between February 1
and September 15, mitigation measure MM BIO -1 would be implemented to ensure
protection of nesting birds and active nests and to avoid potential violations of the MBTA.
With implementation MM BIO -1, impacts would be less than significant.
3. Cultural Resources
a) Impact (Long- Term):
Threshold CUL -2: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
Description of the Impact (Impact CUL -11 A potentially significant impact would occur if
construction activities, specifically remedial grading in undisturbed native soils, uncovers an
archeological resource.
Finding: The City makes Finding 1 that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental effect described above and identified in the Final EIR.
Findings of Fact Page 50
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Facts in Support of the Finding Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into the Project, or are otherwise being implemented that substantially mitigate
or avoid the significant effects on the environment as summarized above and described in
detail in Section 6.4.6 of the EIR.
MM CUL -1 If an archaeological discovery is made during construction, work in the
immediate vicinity (30 feet in each direction) of the find shall be halted and a
qualified archaeologist shall be retained to assess the nature and
significance of the find and make recommendations.
a. If the discovery is not significant, it shall be mapped and photographed in
place, then removed by the qualified archaeologist.
b. If the discovery is significant, the qualified archaeologist shall notify the
applicant and the City immediately.
c. In consultation with the applicant and the City, the qualified archaeologist
shall develop a plan of mitigation which will likely include salvage
excavation, processing soil matrix, laboratory cleaning, sorting, and
analysis, historic and /or prehistoric research to establish a context within
which to analyze the find, preparation of a detailed report, and curation
of the find in a local qualified repository (a university, museum, or
curation facility with permanent and secure storage that allows access to
collections for research purposes and maintains environmental conditions
suitable for the conservation of fossils /artifacts) such as the Cooper
Center for Archaeology and Paleontology in Santa Ana.
d. If the discovery is prehistoric in nature, local Native Americans shall be
consulted.
The Project site has undergone extensive grading when the existing Marywood
development was originally constructed. Approximately 40 to 70 feet of artificial fill sediment
was placed on top of native soils. Therefore, the analysis has anticipated that the Project
site has a low sensitivity for uncovering or damaging prehistoric archaeological resources
during construction activities because of the extensive alteration of the site that has
occurred, including the removal of native soils and placement of fill material on portions of
the site. Nonetheless, mitigation measure MM CUL -1 would require work to be halted in the
immediate area and Native American notification be given if a resource is uncovered during
construction. Implementation of CUL -1 would reduce potential impacts to a less than
significant level.
b) Impact (Long- Term):
Threshold CUL -3: Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Description of the Impact (Impact CUL -2) A potentially significant impact would occur if
construction activities, specifically remedial grading in undisturbed native soils, uncovers a
Paleontological resource.
Findings of Fact Page 51
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Finding: The City makes Finding 1 that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental effect described above and identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of the Finding Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into the Project, or are otherwise being implemented that substantially mitigate
or avoid the significant effects on the environment as summarized above and described in
detail in Section 6.4.6 of the EIR.
MM CUL -2 A paleontological monitor shall be present to observe grading operations in
native sediments, estimated at- or below approximately 40 to 70 feet in depth
from the current surface. The monitor shall work under the direct supervision
of a qualified paleontologist (B.S. /B.A. in geology, or related discipline with
an emphasis in paleontology and demonstrated competence in
paleontological research, fieldwork, reporting, and curation).
a. The qualified paleontologist shall be on -site at the pre- construction
meeting to discuss monitoring protocols.
b. The monitor shall be notified 48 hours prior to reaching the
estimated /approximated depths of native /undisturbed sediments.
c. In native /undisturbed sediments, paleontological monitoring shall be full -
time to start. After the qualified paleontologist has had time to assess the
on -site geological conditions for the preservation of fossils, monitoring
levels may be reduced if the on -site conditions are not likely or high for
the potential preservation of fossils.
d. The monitor shall be empowered to temporarily halt or redirect grading
efforts if paleontological resources are discovered.
e. In the event of a paleontological discovery, the monitor shall flag the area
and notify the construction crew immediately. No further disturbance in
the flagged area shall occur until the qualified paleontologist has cleared
the area.
f. In consultation with the qualified paleontologist, the monitor shall quickly
assess the nature and significance of the find. If the specimen is not
significant it shall be quickly removed and the area cleared.
g. If the discovery is significant the qualified paleontologist shall notify the
applicant and the City immediately.
h. In consultation with the applicant and the City, the qualified paleontologist
shall develop a plan of mitigation which will likely include salvage
excavation and removal of the find, removal of sediment from around the
specimen (in the laboratory), research to identify and categorize the find,
curation of the find in a local qualified repository, and preparation of a
report summarizing the find, and curation of the find in a local qualified
repository (a university, museum, or curation facility with permanent and
secure storage that allows access to collections for research purposes
and maintains environmental conditions suitable for the conservation of
fossils /artifacts) such as the Cooper Center for Archaeology and
Paleontology in Santa Ana.
Grading, over - excavation, remediation, or any ground disturbing activities that extend into
native and undisturbed sediments have the potential to impact paleontological resources
Findings of Fact Page 52
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
due to the high sensitivity of the Project site and area for encountering such resources. In
the event that fossils are encountered during grading and site preparation, which constitutes
a potential significant impact under CEQA, mitigation would be required. In order to avoid
potentially significant impacts to paleontological resources, mitigation measure MM CUL -2
has been prescribed. This measure requires paleontological monitoring by a qualified expert
during construction activities in native and undisturbed soils to minimize and /or avoid
potential impacts to resources if uncovered and provides steps to ensure that proper
salvage and curation of the resources occurs. Implementation of MM CUL -2 would reduce
potential impacts to a less than significant level.
4. Geology and Soils
a) Impact (Long- Term):
Threshold GEO -3: Would the proposed project be located on a geologic unit or soil that
is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the
proposed project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide,
lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
Description of the Impact (Impact GEO -1) Impacts to soil stability could be potentially
significant if the Project's proposed remedial grading activities do not resolve existing soil
settlement issues on the Project site prior to construction of the proposed residential units.
Finding The City makes Finding 1 that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental effect described above and identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of the Finding The Project is required to implement mitigation measure
MM GEO -1 described below to ensure remediation of existing settlement issues are
resolved and structural integrity of the soils are achieved as described in detail in Section
6.5.6 of the EIR.
MM GEO -1 A minimum of 10 settlement monuments shall be installed within seven days
after the completion of grading within fill areas greater than approximately 40
feet below finish grade. The settlement monuments shall be read by a
licensed surveyor twice a week for a period of no less than three months.
Shallow footings and slab -on -grade foundations shall be constructed after
settlement monitoring data indicates future total settlements are within
tolerable limits. Tolerable limits shall include a determination by the Project's
geotechnical engineer and foundation designer that the surveyed areas will
maintain a predicted 3 inches or less of settlement for the next 50 years. If a
determination is made that tolerable limits are not met, impacted areas shall
either be surcharged with up to 10 feet of additional fill material followed by
an additional three months of surveying to determine tolerable limits are met;
or construction shall be delayed until additional settlement monitoring
determines tolerable limits are met.
Although remedial grading activities described above are anticipated to resolve existing soil
settlement issues, three months of post - grading monitoring would be implemented through
mitigation measure MM GEO -1 to ensure soil settlement issues have been resolved to the
Findings of Fact Page 53
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
City Engineer's satisfaction. Implementation of MM GEO -1 would ensure potential impacts
are reduced to a less than significant level in the post - grading phase condition.
b) Impact (Long- Term):
Threshold GEO -3: Would the proposed project be located on a geologic unit or soil that
is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the
proposed project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide,
lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
Description of the Impact (Impact GEO -2) Corrosive soils per Caltrans criteria guidelines
may exist on -site upon completion of grading activities that could negatively affect the long-
term integrity of the proposed residential units' foundation systems.
Finding: The City makes Finding 1 that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental effect described above and identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of the Finding Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into the Project, or are otherwise being implemented that substantially mitigate
or avoid the significant effects on the environment as summarized above and described in
detail in Section 6.5 of the EIR.
MM GEO -2 A minimum of five representative soil samples shall be collected and tested
at the completion of rough grading for presence of corrosive soils. If
corrosive soils are detected with pH levels of 5.5 or less; or the chloride
concentration is 500 ppm or greater; or the sulfate concentration is 2,000
ppm or greater; specific remediation methods shall be implemented such as
increased compressive strength for structural concrete, decreased water -to-
cement ratio for structural concrete and /or encapsulation of post- tensioned
cables. Specific remediation methods shall include one or more of the above
listed options as determined by the foundation design engineer and as
approved by the City. If corrosive soils are not detected at levels described
above, no mitigation shall be required.
Based on test results for chloride and sulfate content, onsite soils are considered corrosive
using Caltrans criteria. Adherence to the 2010 CBC regarding design, mix placement and
curing of concrete would avoid potential corrosion and related adverse effects associated
with sulfates in the soil. However, specific mitigation such as increased compressive
strength for structural concrete, decreased water -to- cement ratio for structural concrete
and /or encapsulation of post- tensioned cables to reduce levels below significance would
need to be determined based on as- graded conditions. Therefore, Mitigation Measure MM
GEO -2 would be implemented for post grading soil testing to determine presence of
corrosive soils and proper measures, if applicable, for site treatment including but not
limited to the specific mitigation options discussed above. Implementation of MM GEO -2
would mitigate impacts to less than significant.
5. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Findings of Fact Page 54
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
a) Impact (Short- Term):
Threshold HAZ -1: Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through:
Routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials;
A reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving
the release of hazardous materials into the environment, and /or
Hazardous emissions or handling hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an
existing or proposed school?
Description of the Impact (Impact HAZ -1) Construction workers could be exposed to
asbestos containing materials and /or lead -based paint containing materials during the
Project's demolition phase, resulting in a potentially significant health risk.
Finding The City makes Finding 1 that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental effect described above and identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of the Finding The Project is required to implement mitigation measure
MM HAZ -1 described below to ensure proper disposal of found hazardous materials as
described in detail in Section 6.7 of the EIR.
MM HAZ -1 Testing for the presence and location(s) of asbestos containing materials and
lead -based containing materials shall be performed by a professional service
provider prior to issuance of a demolition permit. Any identified contaminated
materials shall be removed, handled and processed per applicable health
and safety code regulations.
Asbestos - containing materials (ACM) and lead -based paint (LBP) materials would
potentially pose a significant health risk to occupational construction workers during the
Project's demolition phase if not properly identified, handled and processed according to
health and safety laws. Therefore, mitigation measure MM HAZ -1 would provide for
professional sampling, analysis and proper disposal (if found) of ACM and /or LBP
hazardous materials as a condition of the demolition permit. With implementation of MM
HAZ -1, impacts would be reduced to less than significant.
6. Noise
a) Impact (Short - Term):
Threshold N0I -1: Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
Findings of Fact Page 55
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Threshold NOI -3: A substantial permanent, temporary, or periodic increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the
project? Are the thresholds set out below the ones that will be
applied for this threshold?
Description of the Impact (impact NOI -1) Temporary exposure of persons to noise levels in
excess of existing conditions and /or a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise
levels would occur during project construction.
Finding: The City makes Finding 1 that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental effect described above and identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of the Finding Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into the Project, or are otherwise being implemented that substantially mitigate
or avoid the significant effects on the environment as summarized above and described in
detail in Section 6.10 of the EIR.
SC NOW Project construction activities shall be limited to the City's restricted hours of
7 AM and 8 PM on weekdays and between 9 AM and 8 PM on Sundays and
holidays.
PDF AQ -1 The crushing machinery/operations would be located near the area currently
occupied by the Chapel, which represents the center of the Project site. The
location of crushing machinery/operations shall be identified on the final
grading plans.
PDF NOI -1 In the area of grading near existing residential structures (approximately 100
feet) no vibratory rollers or soil compacters shall be permitted. Necessary
compaction shall be achieved with mechanical rollers or soil compactors.
PDF NOI -2 Crushing and grading operations shall be further restricted as follows:
Crushing operations shall be restricted to Monday through Friday
between the hours of 7:30 AM and 4:30 PM. No crushing shall be
permitted on a Saturday, Sunday or Holiday.
Grading operations shall be restricted to Monday through Friday between
the hours of 7:30 AM and 5:00 PM, with limited grading as necessary
permitted on Saturdays between the hours of 8:00 AM and 4:30 PM.
Mechanics may service the equipment up to two hours after each shift.
All other construction activities shall conform to the City's Noise
Ordinance, OMC Section 8.24, and shall be further limited to Monday
through Saturday, 7:00 am to 8:00 pm. No construction activities shall be
permitted on Sundays or federal holidays.
MM NOW a All construction equipment, stationary and mobile, shall be equipped with
properly operating and maintained muffling devices, intake silencers, and
Same Project Design Feature included in Air Quality Section.
Findings of Fact Page 56
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
engine shrouds no less effective than as originally equipped by the
manufacturer.
MM NOI -1 b The construction contractor shall properly maintain and tune all construction
equipment to minimize noise emissions.
MM NOI -1 c The construction contractor shall locate all stationary noise sources (e.g.,
generators, compressors, staging areas) as far from residential receptor
locations as feasible.
MM NOI -1d The construction contractor shall post a contact name and telephone number
of the owner's authorized representative on -site.
MM NOI -1 a The construction contractor shall select quieter tools or construction methods
whenever feasible. Examples of this include the use of plasma cutters, which
produce less noise than power saws with abrasive blades and ordering
precut materials to specifications to avoid on -site cutting.
MM NOI -1f The construction contractor shall maximize the use of enclosures as feasible.
This includes four -sided or full enclosures with a top for compressors and
other stationary machinery. This also includes locating activities, such as
metal stud and rebar cutting, within constructed walled structures to minimize
noise propagation.
Noise would be generated during the construction phase by increased truck traffic
associated with transport of materials and equipment on area roadways and from power
tools, hammers and other equipment typical of a construction site. Project design features
PDF AQ -1 and PDF NOI -1 will be required in order to locate the crushing operation and
specific grading equipment away from receptors to minimize potential impacts from noise
generated during crushing and from vibration generated during grading. Consistent with
standard condition SC NO[-1, the City of Orange exempts construction activities from its
noise level limits between the hours of 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM on weekdays, including
Saturday, and between 9:00 AM and 8:00 PM on Sundays and holidays. The noise exempt
hours are standard for all projects within the City but do not represent this Project's
construction schedule. The majority of activity is anticipated to take place between the hours
of 7:00 AM and 3:30 PM during an 8 -hour workday. Although the City exempts temporary
construction noise from City noise standards, the Project would implement mitigation
measures MM NOI -1a through MM NOI -1f in order to minimize potential impacts of
temporary construction generated noise on adjacent land -uses. In addition, project design
feature PDF NOI -2 has been added to the Final EIR in order to further reduce potential
noise impacts from crushing, grading and other construction activities as described above.
Implementation of the Standard Condition, Project Design Features and mitigation
measures would reduce impacts to below significance.
7. Traffic and Circulation
a) Impact (Long- Term):
Findings of Fact Page 57
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Threshold TRA -4: Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e. g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Description of the Impact (Impact TRA -1) Potentially inadequate site distance for right -out
movements and left -out turn movements from the Project's driveway exist based on City
Standards.
Finding The City makes Finding 1 that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental effect described above and identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of the Finding Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into the Project, or are otherwise being implemented that substantially mitigate
or avoid the significant effects on the environment as summarized above and described in
detail in Section 6.14 of the EIR.
MM TRA -1 Final sight distance shall be reviewed at the Project driveway in conjunction
with the preparation of final grading /construction plans as per City of Orange
standards. During the final review, any additional sight distance obstructions
shall be noted and final design determinations shall be made. Final design
considerations include the following:
Landscape modifications;
Utility box placement;
Road -signs at the approaches to the Project access to signify merging
traffic;
Chevron striping at the Project access; and
Restricted parking for a minimum of 40 feet on both sides of the Project
driveway.
Based on the preliminary review of the site plan, left -turn movements from the proposed
driveway would provide a total of 275 feet of intersection sight distance, rather than the
required 390 feet. However, this distance is greater than the stopping sight distance
standard for a collector road, which is 250 feet. These conditions provide a potentially
significant safety risk. In order to reduce impacts, mitigation measure MM TRA -1 would be
implemented, which includes landscaping restrictions and chevron striping to improve sight
distance as shown in Figures 6.14 -16 and 6.14 -17 of the EIR. With implementation of
mitigation measure MM TRA -1, potential impacts would be reduced to less than significant.
b) Impact (Long- Term):
Threshold TRA -4: Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Description of the Impact (Impact TRA -2) Increased traffic volumes generated by the new
residents of the Project could incrementally contribute to an existing safety condition at the
intersection of East Villareal Drive and Ridgepark Lane.
Findings of Fact Page 58
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Finding: The City makes Finding 1 that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental effect described above and identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of the Finding Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into the Project, or are otherwise being implemented that substantially mitigate
or avoid the significant effects on the environment as summarized above and described in
detail in Section 6.14 of the EIR.
MM TRA -2 Prior to the issuance of the final Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed
Project, the Applicant shall install an all -way stop at the intersection of East
Villareal Drive and Ridgepark Lane. The all -way stop shall include:
Stop signs, stop bars, and stop legend; and
Stop -ahead signs with temporary flashing beacons to remain for a period
of three months.
The findings of the AWS &TCR field review for the intersection of East Villareal Drive and
Ridgepark Lane determined that limited sight distance, the presence of a pedestrian
crosswalk, and the intersection of two residential neighborhood collector streets provide
sufficient justification to warrant a stop sign on Villareal Drive at Ridgepark Lane. Although
this is an existing condition and not a result of Project implementation, additional traffic
generated by the Project once occupation of the new homes takes place would potentially
contribute to this existing safety concern at this intersection. Therefore, mitigation measure
MM TRA -2 would provide for an all -way stop sign at this intersection, stop -ahead signs, and
temporary beacons to signify that a new stop has been added as shown in Figure 6.14 -18
of the EIR. Implementation of MM TRA -2 would reduce potential impacts to below
significance.
c) Impact (Long Term):
Threshold TRA -4: Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e. g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Description of the Impact (Impact TRA -3) Increased traffic volumes generated by the new
residents of the Project could incrementally contribute to an existing safety condition on
Villareal Drive due to existing vehicle speeds.
Finding The City makes Finding 1 that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental effect described above and identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of the Finding Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into the Project, or are otherwise being implemented that substantially mitigate
or avoid the significant effects on the environment as summarized above and described in
detail in Section 6.14 of the EIR.
MM TRA -3a Prior to the issuance of the final Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed
Project, the Applicant shall install traffic calming measures along East
Findings of Fact Page 59
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Villareal Drive in accordance with the recommendations included in the
AWS &TCR.
MM TRA -3b Within 4 months after implementation of mitigation measures MM TRA -1, MM
TRA -2 and MM TRA -3a, the Applicant shall perform a follow -up radar speed
survey on East Villareal Drive to evaluate the effectiveness of the traffic
calming measures and determine if any additional recommendations should
be made to the City.
Within 4 months after implementation of mitigation measures MM TRA -1, MM TRA -2 and
MM TRA -3a, the Applicant shall perform a follow -up radar speed survey on East Villareal
Drive to evaluate the effectiveness of the traffic calming measures and determine if any
additional recommendations should be made to the City.
Traffic calming measures prescribed in MM TRA -3a include restriping existing faded lines
for increased visibility; new striping of white edge -lines to narrow the perception of lane -
width to encourage drivers to slow down; new side -road signs at the approaches of the
Project access to indicate potential merging traffic ahead, and restriping of the double
yellow striped centerline, which includes reflective pavement markers per Caltrans Detail 22,
narrowing the driving lanes to allow vehicles to negotiate bend in the road safely. In
addition, mitigation measure MM TRA -3b would provide for an additional radar speed
survey to be conducted after Project completion and implementation of MM TRA -3a to
evaluate the effectiveness of the traffic calming measures and determine if any additional
recommendations should be made to the City. With implementation of mitigation measures
MM TRA -3a and MM TRA -3b, potential impacts would be reduced to less than significant.
E. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS DETERMINED TO BE SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE
AFTER MITIGATION
1. Cultural Resources
a) Impact (Lon- Term):
Threshold CUL -1: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical
resource as defined in §15064.5?
Description of the Impact (Impact CUL -3) Demolition of the existing Marywood
development would have a significant impact on historic resources under CEQA.
Finding The City makes Finding 1 that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental effect described above and identified in the Final EIR. However, the City has
determined that while the above - described impact can be partially mitigated by the Project
Design Feature and mitigation measure described below, this impact cannot be mitigated to
a less than significant level. There are no other feasible mitigation measures or alternatives
that would reduce this impact to an acceptable level. Therefore, the City hereby also makes
Finding 3 which would require the adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations as
a condition for Project approval.
Findings of Fact Page 60
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Facts in Support of Finding CEQA establishes that, "a project that may cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of a historical resource is a project that may have a
significant effect on the environment" (PRC §21084.1), and the California Public Resources
Code further defines substantial adverse change as "demolition, destruction, relocation, or
alteration such that the significance of a historical resource would be impaired" (PRC
5020.1(q)). Properties assigned a CHR Status Code of 1 -5 are considered "historical
resources" under CEQA. Accordingly, the proposed Project, which includes the demolition
of the entire existing Marywood structures, would have a substantial adverse effect on this
historic resource, and therefore, a significant impact under CEQA. PDF CUL -1 requires a
detailed salvage program and MM CUL -3 provides for a detailed recordation program to be
implemented if demolition of the site is to occur.
PDF CUL -1 The Project shall implement a religious and architectural salvage program of
items found on -site. The Diocese of Orange has the first right to disperse of
religious and architectural items to local parishes, other Catholic parishes, or
religious /charity organizations at its sole discretion. Any items not dispersed
by the Diocese of Orange shall be offered to The Sisters of Providence of
Saint Mary-of- the -Woods local and national chapters. Remaining items may
be given away or disposed of by the Applicant without any restrictions. The
Diocese, Sisters of Providence of Saint Mary-of- the - Woods, and the
Applicant are encouraged to salvage the following items due to their religious
and /or architectural value:
Chapel steeple and cross
Chapel Dalle de Verre faceted (slab) glass windows
Chapel pews with kneelers and alter rail
Chapel marble altar offertory table & lettering
Chapel Crucifix & Sanctuary Lamp
Chapel tabernacle and marble stand
Chapel hanging light fixtures over nave
Chapel clock (rear wall)
Concrete Relief Floral Panels
Concrete Screen Walls
Concrete Benches
Marywood Sign
White limestone (chapel)
Mosaic tile
Plexiglas
Water Fountain(s)
MM CUL -3 Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit for the proposed Project, a
recordation and architectural salvage program shall be implemented as
described below:
The existing Marywood development shall be documented through a mitigative
recordation program that meets the standards of Historic American Building
Survey (NABS) standards Level 1.
a. The scope of the recordation program shall consist of:
Findings of Fact Page 61
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Systematic photographic documentation of the building's architectural
and structural character and current condition with large format
photography in order to preserve its current appearance in graphic
images.
ii. Written documentation of history, architectural character and construction
history which may be deemed satisfied by the cultural resources survey
report.
iii. A full set of measured drawings.
b. Original copies of the recordation documentation shall be submitted for
curation at the following repositories for future reference and public access:
i. Library of Congress, HABS Collection.
ii. South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) at California State
University, Fullerton.
iii. City of Orange Community Development Department, Planning Division.
iv. City of Orange Public Library, Local History Collection.
v. Archives of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Orange.
vi. Archives of the Sisters of Providence of Saint Mary-of- the - Woods,
Indiana.
2. Implement the salvage of architectural and religious items listed in PDF CUL -1.
Although, implementation of PDF CUL -1 and MM CUL -3 would provide for salvage of
various materials and recordation of the Project site, impacts would not be reduced to a less
than significant level. While these measures prescribed above represent feasible mitigation,
the impacts to the existing Marywood buildings remain significant and unavoidable and a
Statement of Overriding Considerations would be required to be adopted by the City of
Orange.
VII. FINDINGS REGARDING IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT
OF RESOURCES
Implementation of the proposed Project would require the commitment of building materials
such as lumber and other forest products, sand and gravel, photochemical construction
materials, steel, copper, lead, and water for construction of the proposed 40 residential
home development. Given the level of building materials necessary to sustain on -going
regional development, the commitment of such materials to the proposed Project is
insignificant by comparison.
There would be an irretrievable commitment of energy resources such as gasoline and
diesel fuel for the operation of construction equipment. Because these types of resources
are available in sufficient quantities in this region and the proposed Project encompasses a
very limited scope, these impacts would be temporary and are not considered significant. In
addition, up to 90 percent of the demolished material would be reused on site, resulting in a
significant reduction in fuel consumption that would otherwise be required for hauling large
volumes of import material from offsite locations to the site and required for hauling large
volumes of export material to an offsite recycling facility or landfill. In addition, consistent
with Project Design Feature PDF GHG -1 described below and in Section 6.6.5 of the Draft
EIR, multiple green building strategies would be implemented in order to reduce the amount
resources committed.
Findings of Fact Page 62
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
PDF GHG -1 The Project would incorporate the following green building design
features to further reduce GHG emissions during project construction and
operations.
Recycle Job Site Construction & Demolition Waste
Salvage Reusable Building Materials
Design Resource - Efficient Landscapes and Gardens
Install High- Efficiency Irrigation Systems
Provide for On -Site Water Catchment /Retention
Use Wood /- Joints for Floors and Ceilings
Use OSB
Subfloors and Sheathing
Use Treated Wood that does not contain Chromium /Arsenic
Install House Wrap Under Siding
Use Fiber - Cement Siding Materials
Insulate Hot Water Pipes
Install Faucets and Showerheads with Flow Reducers
Install /C -A T Recessed Fixtures with CFLs
Install Lighting Controls
Install Energy Star Dishwasher
Install Energy- Efficient Windows Double- Paned; Low Emissivity (Low
E) and Low
Vent Range Hood to the Outside
Install Sealed Combustion Units on Furnaces and Water Heaters
Install 13 SEER /11 EER or Higher AC
Install AC with Non -HCFC Refrigerants
Select Safe and Durable Roofing Materials
Install Radiant Barrier
Use Low VOC, Water -Based Wood Finishes
Use Low /No VOC Adhesives
Use Engineered Sheet Goods with no added Urea Formaldehyde
Use Finger- Jointed or Recycled- Content Trim
Install Recycled Content Carpet with low VOCs (standard carpet only)
Based on, (1) the relatively small -scale of the residential Project, (2) the Project's obligation
to meet current energy efficiency standards and requirements, and (3) considering the
Project would replace existing energy inefficient facilities of the Marywood Pastoral Center;
the change in energy consumption resulting from Project implementation would be
considered less than significant.
In addition, the proposed Project would not significantly alter the consumption of and /or
demand for non - renewable resources over that anticipated by the City of Orange General
Plan. Although Project implementation would result in an increased demand for some non-
renewable resources, the demands are consistent with the long -range plans for the City of
Findings of Fact Page 63
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Orange. Demand and consumption of non - renewable resources would be within the limits
anticipated for residential development in the long -term. The proposed development of the
Project site would not result in any adverse impacts related to the commitment of resources
in the immediate or distant future.
Findings of Fact Page 64
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
VIII. FINDINGS REGARDING GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS
The following four criteria were considered with regard to the Project's potential growth -
inducing impacts:
Would the proposed Project result in the removal of an impediment to growth such
as the establishment of an essential public service or the provision of new access to
an area?
Would the proposed Project result in economic expansion or growth such as
changes in the revenue base or employment expansion?
Would the proposed Project result in the establishment of a precedent setting action
such as an innovation, a radical change in zoning or a General Plan amendment
approval?
Would the proposed Project result in development or encroachment in an isolated or
adjacent area of open space, as opposed to an infill type of project in an area that is
already largely developed?
The analysis of growth- inducing impacts concludes that based on the four criteria analyzed
in the EIR, the proposed Project would not result in any potentially significant growth -
inducing impacts. Implementation of the proposed Project would result in the development
of the Project site in accordance with the City of Orange General Plan and Zoning
Ordinance, thus meeting the long -range plans adopted by the City of Orange. Further, the
proposed uses (i.e., single - family residential) are not characterized by features that attract
or facilitate new, unanticipated development that would ordinarily be considered growth -
inducing. Conventionally, growth inducement is measured by the potential of a project or a
project's secondary effects (i.e. provision of new infrastructure which supports housing or
creation of jobs) to facilitate development of housing. Further, all of the infrastructure that
exists in the Project area can provide an adequate level of service, including sewer and
water; storm drainage improvements would be made as part of the Project. Circulation or
other infrastructure improvements are not required as a result of project implementation.
Project implementation would not result in any significant direct or indirect additional
residential development that would generate unanticipated new residents or employment
that would be an "attractor" of residents to the area that are not already anticipated. The site
is not located in an isolated area that is constrained by the absence of infrastructure where
the provision of infrastructure would promote further development. None of the accepted
standards that distinguish growth- inducing projects characterize the proposed Project;
therefore, no significant growth- inducing impacts are anticipated as a result of project
implementation.
Findings of Fact Page 65
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
IX. FINDINGS REGARDING CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Cumulative impacts analysis requires consideration of the impacts of other projects in an
area, in conjunction with the proposed Project, to assess the potential for significant
cumulative impacts. For this Draft EIR, the potential environmental effects of the proposed
Project were considered in conjunction with the potential environmental effects of buildout
anticipated for the project area. Two projects were identified by the City of Orange as
proposed (i.e., under review) within a 1.5 -mile radius of the proposed Project. These
projects, summarized in Table 10 -1 of the Draft EIR, were evaluated in the traffic, air, and
noise analyses conducted for the proposed Project and are also considered in the
assessment of cumulative impacts presented in this section. The two projects considered
were: a 2,868 square feet fast -food restaurant with drive through located at 1325 North
Tustin Street, and a 982 square feet automated carwash located at 2844 North Santiago
Boulevard. The fast -food restaurant would replace an existing restaurant at this location.
The car wash location is also an existing commercial site.
Aesthetics
Neither the Project site nor the areas along Tustin Avenue and Santiago Boulevard where
the two cumulative projects are located are designated as a view corridor and /or possess
important visual and aesthetic features. Due to the nature of the cumulative projects as
redevelopment of existing developed sites, the aesthetics are expected to be comparable to
existing conditions after implementation of these projects. Therefore, because the proposed
Project does not result in significant impacts to views or aesthetics, and because the
cumulative projects would also not be expected to result in significant impacts to views or
aesthetics, no significant cumulative impacts are anticipated.
Air Quality
The analysis in Section 6.2 of the Draft EIR concludes construction of the proposed Project
would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for
which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air
quality standard. Within the SCAB, the construction impacts of the two cumulative projects
would be cumulatively significant if their combined construction emissions would exceed the
SCAQMD daily emission thresholds. However, construction /remediation of the proposed
Project would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds for regional emissions and localized impacts
of criteria pollutants once mitigation has been applied. As such, the proposed Project would
not be considered cumulatively considerable under SCAQMD's policy as it does not exceed
project- specific air quality significance thresholds. In addition, the majority of construction
would occur within a six —month period. Therefore, any construction impacts would be short
in duration and unlikely to overlap substantially with other projects in the vicinity. Therefore,
because the proposed Project would not exceed SCAQMD significance thresholds once
mitigation has been applied and would have a short construction time - frame, construction
impacts are not considered to have significant adverse short-term cumulative air quality
impacts.
Long -term occupation of the proposed Project would neither produce emissions that exceed
any South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) significance thresholds nor
result in offsite ambient air pollutant concentrations that exceed any SCAQMD significance
thresholds. In addition, pollutant emissions would be below Localized Significance
Thresholds due to the relatively small amount of emissions generated by the new residents
Findings of Fact Page 66
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
vehicles and the Project would not generate a Carbon Dioxide (CO) hotspot because, (1)
Project traffic would not result in a 2 percent volume to capacity ratio increase at any
intersection operating at a level of service (LOS) D or worse, and (2) the Project would not
cause an intersection to drop from LOS C to LOS D. Further, long -term occupation of the
proposed 40 homes would not result in activities that generate emissions in excess of
SCAQMD thresholds for regional emissions and localized impacts of criteria pollutants as
shown in' Tables 6.2 -11 and 6.2 -12 of the Draft EIR. Therefore, the Project's incremental
effect on long -term (operational) air quality would not be considered cumulatively
considerable, and no significant long -term cumulative air quality impact would occur.
Biological Resources
The proposed Project results in less than significant impacts to biological resources. Based
on the fact that the cumulative projects constitute redevelopment of existing commercial
uses and no natural habitat remains on these sites, the cumulative projects would not cause
significant impacts to biological resources. Therefore, because the proposed Project does
not result in significant impacts to biological resources, and because the cumulative projects
also would not result in significant impacts to biological resources, no significant cumulative
impacts to biological resources were identified.
Cultural Resources
The Project would result in significant adverse impacts to cultural (historic) resources with
the demolition of the existing structures that comprise the Marywood Pastoral Center.
However, this project- specific impact would only contribute to a cumulative impact if the
other two cumulative projects impact significant cultural resources. Based on the
redevelopment nature of the cumulative projects, it is unlikely that any significant cultural or
historical resources remain at those locations. Therefore, because the cumulative projects
are unlikely to result in impacts to cultural or historical resources, the proposed Project
would not contribute to a significant cumulative impact.
Geology and Soils
The proposed Project results in less than significant impacts to soils and geology. Based on
the fact that the cumulative projects are redevelopment projects and disturbance has
already occurred, the redevelopment projects are not likely to result in significant impacts to
soils and geology. Therefore, because the Project does not result in significant impacts to
soils and geology, and because the cumulative projects are unlikely to result in significant
impacts to soils and geology the proposed Project would not result in cumulative impacts to
these resources.
GHG /Climate Change
A detailed greenhouse gas (GHG) analysis was prepared to evaluate the potential GHG
impacts of the proposed Project. Table 4.6 -2 in Section 4.6 of the EIR summarizes the
unmitigated annual GHG emissions associated with construction and operation of the
proposed Project. Construction GHG emissions were amortized over 30 years and added to
annual operational emissions. No credit or reduction in projected emissions was given to the
Project for compliance with SC GHG -1 or implementation of PDF GHG -1. As indicated in
the table, the proposed Project would result in only 795 MTCO2e /year, which is substantially
less than the recommended threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e. Because the two cumulative
projects are small infill /redevelopment projects that constitute reuse of prior developed sites
with similar businesses, it is anticipated that any potential increase in GHG emissions, when
combined with those from the proposed Project, would also not exceed the recognized
Findings of Fact Page 67
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
threshold. Therefore, the Project's incremental effect would not be considered cumulative
considerable, and potential cumulative GHG emissions impacts would be less than
significant.
Hazards /Hazardous Materials
The proposed Project does not result in significant impacts related to hazards or hazardous
materials. During the construction phase of the Project, the proposed Project would
remediate unstable soils, thus removing a potential hazard. In addition, adherence to health
and safety laws and regulations for worker safety relative to lead -based paint and asbestos -
containing materials would also result in less than significant impacts relative to hazardous
materials. No long -term significant impacts were identified as the Project is a residential
project that does not include uses that would create or result in a significant hazard to the
public. While the two cumulative projects are commercial uses that may use chemicals or
other regulated materials, neither of the cumulative project is anticipated to create a
significant impact with respect to the use or release of hazardous materials. Since the
proposed Project results in less than significant impacts and both cumulative projects would
be required to mitigate for any hazardous condition through compliance with applicable
regulatory requirements, the proposed Project contribution is not considered cumulatively
considerable and no significant cumulative impact associated with hazards or hazardous
materials has been identified.
Hydrology and Water Quality
With implementation of the WQMP and the proposed storm drainage system, the proposed
Project would result in less than significant impacts to hydrology, flooding, and water quality.
The cumulative projects would be required to implement appropriate on- and off -site
improvements to ensure these projects do not result in water quality or flooding impacts.
The cumulative projects are the redevelopment of existing commercial sites, and impacts to
hydrology and water quality are expected to be less than significant because these projects
would be required to comply with current MS4 permit conditions. Therefore, because the
Project does not result in significant impacts to hydrology, and because the cumulative
projects are not expected to substantially change current runoff and water quality
conditions, and will themselves be required to comply with current MS4 permit
requirements, no cumulative impacts to hydrology or water quality are anticipated.
Land Use and Planninq
The planned cumulative projects do not constitute additional residential development
opportunities in the City of Orange. Neither the cumulative projects nor the proposed Project
require a change to the General Plan or zoning ordinance. The cumulative projects and the
proposed Project are compatible with surrounding land uses and are consist with the City of
Orange's adopted long range plans, policies and programs. In addition, the cumulative
projects are subject to both environmental and discretionary review by the City of Orange,
and, as part of that review, each cumulative project would also be required to demonstrate
consistency with all applicable plans and programs adopted within the individual jurisdiction.
Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable land use
impact.
Noise
The noise analysis prepared for the project concluded that construction noise levels would
exceed the existing background noise levels at the neighboring noise - sensitive receivers;
however, construction activities would occur only during the hours prescribed in the City's
Findings of Fact Page 68
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Noise Ordinance and for a limited duration. These construction activities are exempt from
the City's noise ordinance and therefore are not significant. Long -term noise effects of the
proposed Project on nearby noise - sensitive uses would be limited to vehicular traffic on the
local roadways generated by the proposed Project. The noise analysis found that the
Project traffic would not cause an increase in the ambient noise levels that would result in
adverse effects on any nearby noise - sensitive uses.
The cumulative projects are located at least one mile from the Project site. Thus,
construction and operational noise generated from these projects are too distant to
contribute to cumulative noise impacts with the proposed Project. Therefore, construction
and operational noise levels from these projects would not be audible noise at the Project
site and would not overlap with noise generated by the proposed Project. As such,
cumulative noise impacts related to construction and long -term project operations would be
less than significant.
Population and Housing
Neither implementation of the proposed Project nor the redevelopment of the two
commercial projects would cause the loss of homes or the displacement of residents. The
existing high school is closed and no students or staff reside at the dormitories. Project
development, in combination with other infill projects within the Project vicinity would result
in a cumulative increase in population and would help meet the City's regional housing
needs. Therefore, because the Project does not result in significant impacts to population
and housing, and because the cumulative projects would not either displace existing
housing or create a substantial demand for new housing, the proposed Project would not
contribute to a cumulative impact to these resources.
Public Services
The incremental increases in demand on public services generated by the proposed 40
residential dwelling units would be less than significant with the implementation of Standard
Conditions SC PS -1 through SC PS -7 and no mitigation is required. The cumulative projects
are commercial not residential developments, and would have no direct effect on schools or
City - provided public services such as libraries. The demand for police and fire protection by
the cumulative projects is consistent with the long -term planning of the City of Orange
relative to protection services. Because the proposed Project would not have a significant
impact on existing public services and the site currently supports existing development, and
because the cumulative projects would also be consistent with the City's plans, the
incremental demands of the proposed Project would not result in cumulative impacts to
public services.
Recreation
Although construction of new residential projects increases demand on existing recreational
services and the need for new recreational services, the incremental demand on services
added by small developments, such as the proposed Project, alone are less than significant.
However, multiple developments occurring within the City can lead to a cumulatively
significant impact on recreation when considered collectively over time. Compliance with
Chapter 16.60, Park Dedication and Fees of the City Municipal Code for park land
dedication and /or payment of in -lieu fees ensures the Project's cumulative impact is less
than significant. Therefore, because the Project does not result in significant impacts to
recreational facilities, and because the cumulative projects are commercial projects that do
Findings of Fact Page 69
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
not contribute to increased demand on recreational facilities, the proposed Project would not
contribute to a cumulative impact to these resources.
Traffic and Circulation
Project implementation will generate approximately 381 trip -ends per day, including 31 trips
during the AM peak hour and 40 trips during the PM peak hour. Based on the analysis
conducted for the proposed Project, all of the roadway segments are currently operating at
acceptable levels of service and are forecast to continue to operate at acceptable levels of
service in the existing plus Project condition. The cumulative traffic includes traffic from the
two cumulative projects plus an annual increase in background traffic. The cumulative
analysis determined that all roadways would continue to operate at acceptable levels of
service as shown in Table 10 -2 of the EIR. As a result, project implementation would not
result in any significant cumulative impacts to the operational characteristics of any of the
roadway segments.
It is important to note, information taken from the Traffic Impact Study was incorrectly
transferred and presented in Table 10 -2 of the Draft EIR, which gives the false appearance
of a much higher trip -end generation estimate than would actually occur as the result of 40
additional homes. Therefore, Table 10 -2 has been revised in the Final EIR to clarify and
represent an accurate assessment of the Project's potential long -term traffic impacts on
roadways. It is also important to note that the Traffic Impact Study and analysis provided
within the text of the Draft EIR were accurately presented. As shown in the revised table,
total trip -ends on East Villareal Drive in the year 2017 (Project Buildout) would be
approximately 2,600; including Project traffic, cumulative project traffic and accounting for 3
percent growth in the area. The approximate 2,600 trip -end estimate is well below the
10,800 capacity of East Villareal Drive. Thus, the revised table reconfirms the conclusions
and determinations made in the Draft EIR, that long -term traffic impacts to roadways would
be less than significant and that no mitigation is required. The revised table is shown below.
Findings of Fact Page 70
Project
Project
Buildout
Roadway Existing Without
Buildout With
Capacity Significant?
Project Traffic
Project Traffic Year 2017) z 3
Year 2017)1.2
East Villareal Drive 2,200 2,300 2,600 10,800 No
Santiago Boulevard 18,700 19,300 19,400 21,600 No
21,600/
Meats Avenue 14,600 15,100 15,200
33,750
No
Lincoln Avenue 28,000 28,900 29,000 50,700 No
Nohl Ranch Canyon
9,200 9,600 9,600 21,600 No
Road
Note:
Assumes a background traffic growth rate of 1% per year for a period of three (3) years as approved by the City.
z Highest ADTs used for each roadway segment scenario taken from Exhibit L in the TIS. Includes cumulative projects.
3 Highest ADTs used for each roadway segment scenario taken from Exhibit M in the TIS. Includes cumulative projects.
4 Capacity is based on LOS D, which is the City's lowest acceptable level of service.
Source: TIS (RK Engineering, 2014); Correspondence with City of orange; Orange General Plan
Findings of Fact Page 70
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Utilities
The proposed Project does not result in significant impacts to utilities and the existing and
proposed sewer and water facilities are adequate to accommodate the proposed Project.
No unavoidable significant impacts would occur as a result of project implementation. Due
to the redevelopment nature of the cumulative projects, it is expected that the necessary
utilities are present on site and no additional services are required to be constructed to meet
the demand of the cumulative projects. Therefore, because the proposed Project does not
result in significant impacts to utilities, and because the cumulative projects are unlikely to
result in significant impacts to utilities the proposed Project would not result in cumulative
impacts to these resources.
X. FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
CEQA requires that an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to
the location of the project, which could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the
project and to evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. Section 15126(d)(1) of
the State 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 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 proposed Project has been compared to two alternative development scenarios,
including the No Project -- Development Under Existing CUP (600- Student High School)
and the Reduced Development Alternative. Three other alternatives were evaluated and
eliminated from detailed consideration for reasons as described in this section below,
including the No Project — No Development Alternative, Off -Site Alternative, and the No On-
site Crushing Operations Alternative.
The analysis contained within the EIR concludes that the proposed Project would result in
long -term project- specific significant unavoidable adverse impacts to cultural resources that
cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level. The following discussion summarizes the
potential environmental consequences and highlights the comparative merits associated
with each alternative identified as "potentially feasible" and analyzed in the EIR as well as
the "No Project" alternative.
A. ALTERNATIVES ELIMINATED FROM DETAILED CONSIDERATION
1. No Project — No Development Alternative
The No Project— No Development Alternative evaluates what would be reasonably expected
to occur on the Project site in the foreseeable future, if no development were to occur. The
environmental conditions existing at the time the Notice of Preparation (NOP) was published
would be assumed to continue, that is, the Project site would remain in its current condition:
unoccupied and unused existing structures. The level of care required to ensure the site
does not pose a public safety or health risk is less stringent compared to that required for
an actively occupied site. If left unoccupied the reduced site security may not be able to
completely control potential homeless occupation or vandalism. In addition, the buildings
and infrastructure would likely continue to deteriorate, ultimately requiring the buildings to be
demolished or substantially modified. Thus, this alternative would also result in a significant
impact to cultural resources.
Findings of Fact Page 71
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
The No Project — No Development Alternative was deemed to be infeasible because it is
unreasonable to expect that, if the proposed Project were denied, the Project site would
remain vacant in the future. The Project site is designated in the City's General Plan and
Zoning Code for residential use. Additionally, a conditional use permit was approved for the
site that allows educational and retreat uses. Given the wide range of uses permitted on the
Project site, it is unreasonable to expect a valuable piece of property would remain vacant.
This conclusion is further supported by the interest expressed and offers made by several
private high schools and other developers during the recent competition to acquire the
Project site. Furthermore, the No Development Alternative would not likely eliminate or
reduce the significant cultural impact associated with the proposed Project because of the
likelihood that vacant structures with limited to no maintenance would deteriorate and likely
require substantial renovations or complete demolition. Therefore, the No Project — No
Development Alternative would not be feasible and has been rejected from further analysis
and consideration as an alternative to the proposed Project.
2. Off -Site Alternative
The criteria used to find an off -site location for the proposed Project included: (1) the
property is located in the City of Orange; (2) the property has a General Plan designation of
Low Density Residential (LDR) and is zoned Single - Family Residential (R -1 -6); (3) the
property is developable; and (4) the property is of similar size. Only one potential off -site
location was identified in the City that is zoned R -1 -6; however it is not a developable parcel
because its current use as an easement for Southern California Edison overhead power
lines is incompatible with residential development (APNs 361- 271 -26, 361- 531 -18, 361 -153-
16, and 361- 761 -01).
No other sites were found that meet the criteria of a feasible alternative location for the
proposed Project. Therefore, development of the proposed Project at an Off -Site Alternative
location would not be feasible and was rejected from further consideration as a feasible
alternative.
3. No On -site Crushing Operations Alternative
The proposed Project includes on -site crushing of the concrete and asphalt generated by
the demolition of the existing structures. Since on -site crushing operations require approval
of a conditional use permit by the City, this alternative is analyzed to discuss the potential
impacts of no on -site crushing should the City not approve that discretionary action. This
alternative is provided to disclose the potential noise, air, and traffic impacts generated by
the No On -site Crushing Operations Alternative.
While the crushing operations proposed as part of the Project do not result in significant
impacts, the no crushing alternative would eliminate the air emissions and noise generated
by crushing of specified demolition materials. Instead, the demolished debris would be
trucked to the nearest landfill facility that is permitted to handle the volume and type of
materials. Trucking would occur over 10 days, 8 hours per day, and the material would be
trucked approximately 9 miles and placed in the Olinda Alpha Sanitary landfill in Brea.
Approximately 950 truck trips would be required to dispose of the material, which would
result in an average of approximately 6 inbound empty trips and 6 outbound loaded trips per
hour, 8 hours per day for approximately 10 days. Therefore, even though the No On -site
Findings of Fact Page 72
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Crushing Alternative would eliminate air and noise emissions from the crushing operation,
this Alternative would potentially cause air quality, noise, and traffic impacts to the
surrounding residential community from equipment and trucking operations.
Air emissions would be associated with the diesel haul trucks arriving and departing the
Project site. The 950 truck trips would generate potential noise impacts along the city
streets that could impact a greater number of residents than if the material were crushed
and reused on site. In addition to the additional noise and air impacts from the trucks
hauling material off -site, approximately 400 additional truck trips would also be required to
bring in fill material that would replace the crushed material that would otherwise be reused
on site (approximate equivalent of 3,000 cubic yards of material). These truck trips would
generate additional air quality and noise impacts when compared to the proposed Project.
The No On -Site Crushing Alternative would generate substantially more construction traffic
than the proposal to crush material on -site. If demolition waste is not crushed on site,
approximately 8,550 tons (90 percent) of waste would require hauling offsite to a recycling
center or landfill. The transport of 8,550 tons of material would require approximately 950
additional truck trips (475 empty inbound trips and 475 loaded outbound trips), based on an
18 -ton per truck capacity carrying larger pieces of uncrushed material. Since the proposed
Project plans to re -use the crushed concrete and asphalt as fill material, an equivalent
amount of material would need to be replaced with the import of new fill material. The
crushing of 8,550 tons generates approximately 3,000 cubic yards of fill. At 15 cubic yards
per load, the No Crushing Alternative would generate an additional 400 truck trips (200
loaded inbound and 200 empty outbound) for import of that replacement material.
Therefore, the No Onsite Crushing Alternative would generate approximately 1,350 (950
plus 400) additional truck trips, which would result in an increase in local and regional traffic
impacts in addition to the noise and air quality impacts previously discussed.
Note, the Draft EIR indicated that the No- Onsite Crushing Alternative would result in an
additional 1,805 round -trip truck trips for hauling demolition material offsite and for hauling
replacement material onsite. This estimate has been corrected as stated above in the
Findings and in the Final EIR to show the No On -Site Crushing Alternative would result in an
additional 1,350 truck trips to cover these activities. This information does not affect the
Draft EIR's conclusions that the No- Onsite Crushing Alternative would result in additional
truck trips and associated impacts compared to the Project as proposed.
B. ALTERNATIVES CARRIED FORWARD FOR DETAILED ANALYSIS IN THE EIR
1. No Project— Development Under Existing CUP Alternative (600- Student High School)
Overview The No Project Alternative — Development under Existing CUP would provide for
the implementation of a development plan that would be consistent with CUP No. 142
approved by the City of Orange in 1962. In 1962, the City of Orange approved Conditional
Use Permit No. 142 to allow for a Catholic parochial girls high school. In 1979, the City of
Orange approved Conditional Use Permit No. 947 to allow the conversion of the girls' high
school to a retreat/conference /educational facility for the Diocese of Orange. In a letter
dated October 10, 2012, the City stated that CUP No. 947 "offers more flexibility for
potential uses on the Project site. For example, it is likely that the high school use previously
permitted under original CUP No. 142 would be considered an educational facility permitted
under CUP No. 947." The prior conditional use permits appear to permit either a
Findings of Fact Page 73
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
retreat/conference facility, similar to the pastoral center operated by the Diocese of Orange,
or a private high school. Since the Diocese received interest from multiple parties to operate
a private high school on the site and since a private high school is a more intensive use
than a retreat /conference facility, this alternative assumes that re -use of the Project site
under the previous CUP would occur as a 600 student private high school.
Depending on many factors which cannot be known today, re -use of the site as a private
high school may entail either re -use of the existing buildings in their entirety along with
additional structural support, or demolition of all the buildings and reconstruction of a new
facility. This No Project Alternative assumes the buildings would not be demolished to
distinguish this alternative from the proposed Project. That is, if the buildings are
demolished, then the same significant impact to cultural resources would occur as under the
proposed Project. Therefore, this Draft EIR analyzes the No Project Alternative as if the
buildings would remain in place. The potential environmental effects of a high school
pursuant to the No Project Alternative are summarized below.
Summary of Malor Environmental Effects Under the No Project (High - School) Alternative,
potential impacts to Aesthetics, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Population and
Housing, and Public Facilities /Services would be negligible to non - existent as the site would
not be developed and remain relatively the same. Impacts to Land Use would also be less
than significant as the site would continue to operate under an existing Conditional Use
Permit. Potential impacts to Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, Traffic, and Utilities (including
water supply) would increase beyond existing conditions with the increased intensity of
operations required to operate the high school. Existing soil settlement issues; damage to
buildings due to settlement and age; presence of Asbestos - Containing Materials and Lead -
Based Paints; and lack of existing water quality treatment and retention facilities would
continue to be an issue for the existing Project site with regard to Geology and Soils,
Hazards and Hazardous Materials, and Hydrology and Water Quality.
Ability to Achieve Project Objectives Implementation of the No Project Alternative would not
meet the Project objectives articulated in Section 3.0 of the EIR, including providing
additional residential development that is compatible with the nearby development,
stabilizing the hillside, protection of public and private infrastructure, providing a fiscally
successful development, and providing on and offsite storm water facilities.
Elimination /Reduction of Siqnificant Impacts The No Project Alternative (600- student high
school) would eliminate the significant impact to cultural resources. However, the existing
buildings are settling and cracking, and are in need of repair. It is likely that use as a high
school would require either replacement or abandonment of some buildings or significant
seismic repairs. While architectural aspects may be retained as part of the repairs, the
buildings would likely be modified. However, based on the fact that the historic buildings
would remain even if modified, this No Project Alternative has the potential to eliminate
significant impacts to cultural resources as compared to the proposed Project.
Comparative Merits This alternative would not achieve any of the Project objectives,
although it would eliminate significant impacts to cultural resources. This alternative would
have greater environmental impacts in the areas of air quality, traffic, greenhouse gas, and
utilities, and would not address existing hazards (i.e., hillside stabilization) which are
remedied through Project implementation.
Findings of Fact Page 74
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Finding Although this alternative would not result in new development on the Project site,
and consequently no immediate impacts to significant cultural resources would occur, over
time it is likely that some modification of the structures would be required to address the
identified need for seismic repairs, particularly if the site is used for a school. The
significant adverse impact to cultural resources may be deferred, but not necessarily
avoided through implementation of this alternative. Additionally, potential impacts to Air
Quality, Greenhouse Gas, Traffic, and Utilities (including water supply) would be greater
than the Project's impact on these environmental issues. Existing soil settlement issues;
damage to buildings due to settlement and age; presence of Asbestos - Containing Materials
and Lead -Based Paints; and lack of existing water quality treatment and retention facilities
would continue to be an issue for the existing Project site and not addressed under this
alternative. This alternative would also not achieve any of the Project objectives. The
public benefit of remediating the existing unsuitable fill material and resolving existing
settlement and soil stability issues that pose a potential hazard to the adjacent properties,
including those to the west and southwest that maintain City Water Tanks and residential
homes, would not be realized. For these reasons, the City rejects this alternative in favor of
the proposed Project.
2. Reduced Development Alternative
Overview The Reduced Density Alternative would result in the construction of a 13 or 14-
unit housing development on approximately 5.77 acres (or 38 percent of the area of the
proposed Project) with the same attributes as the proposed Project (same architectural
style; similar lot sizes at 6,300 square feet; etc.). This alternative assumes that the existing
structures, with the possible exception of the chapel, would be removed from the Project
site and this area would revert to open space. However the unsuitable fill that has led to
settlement of the slope and damage to the existing structures would not be remediated. On-
site crushing would not occur because this alternative does not need the fill material
associated with on -site crushing. Allowing for setbacks and geotechnical considerations,
this alternative results in reduced developable land. This alternative would not achieve the
basic Project objectives; however, it remains under consideration to avoid the air quality,
noise, traffic, and possibly cultural impacts associated with remediation of the unsuitable fill
material. The draft Reduced Density Alternative is shown on Figure 11 -2 of the El R.
Summary of Maior Environmental Effects Under the Reduced Development Alternative,
potential impacts to Aesthetics, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, and Public
Facilities /Services would result from the demolition of existing structures and construction of
up to 14 new homes. Impacts to Population and Housing and Land Use would be less than
significant as the reduced development would be consistent with existing land use
designations and zoning. Potential impacts to Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, Traffic, and
Utilities (including water supply) would be comparable to existing conditions and less
intense compared with the potential No Project (high school) Alternative. Existing soil
settlement issues, over steepened slopes and potential for inadequate water quality
treatment and retention facilities would remain with regard to Geology and Soils, and
Hydrology and Water Quality. The presence of Asbestos - Containing Materials and Lead -
Based Paints would require proper disposal prior to demolition of existing buildings onsite.
Ability to Achieve Project Objectives: Implementation of the Reduced Density Alternative
would not meet all Project objectives articulated in Section 3.0, including stabilizing the
Findings of Fact Page 75
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
hillside, protection of public and private infrastructure, providing a fiscally successful
development, and providing on and offsite storm water facilities.
Elimination /Reduction of Significant Impacts: The Reduced Density Alternative would not
eliminate a significant impact to cultural resources, as under this alternative the historic
structures — with the possible exception of the chapel - would be demolished. Retention of
the chapel would minimize significant impacts to historic resources but would still result in
similar significant impacts as compared to the proposed Project.
Comparative Merits This alternative would have similar relative merits as the proposed
Project. It would partially achieve the Project objective to achieve quality housing
opportunities consistent with the City of Orange General Plan and zoning code, however it
does not meet the other Project objectives, such as remediating unstable soils, property
boundary adjustment to define maintenance responsibilities, and improvement of storm
water management facilities.
Finding: The potential impacts identified for this alternative results in either similar or
incrementally less environmental effects due to the reduction in the intensity of the
development. This Reduced Development alternative is identified as the "environmentally
superior' alternative when compared to the proposed Project due to the reduction in
potential impacts. However, this alternative would still result in significant impacts to cultural
resources at the Project site. In addition, this alternative would not satisfy all Project
objectives including stabilizing the hillside, protection of public and private infrastructure,
providing a fiscally successful development, and providing on and offsite storm water
facilities. Because this alternative would not meet all of the Project objectives, would
minimize but still result in significant impacts to the cultural resources, and would not
achieve the benefits of stabilizing the hillside which would protect public and private
infrastructure, and providing improved water quality features, the City Council rejects this
alternative in favor of the proposed Project.
Findings of Fact Nage ie
ATTACHMENT B
TO THE CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL ADOPTING
FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS
Marywood Residential
Development Project
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
This page intentionally left blank.
Statement of Overriding Considerations Page ii
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
Table of Contents
I. Introduction ....................................................................................... ..............................
II. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts ................. ............................... 2
III. Overriding Considerations ................................................................. ..............................
Statement of Overriding Considerations Page iii
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
This page intentionally left blank.
Statement of Overriding Considerations Page iv
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR
THE MARYWOOD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
ORANGE, CA
I. Introduction
The City of Orange is the Lead Agency under the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) for preparation, review and certification of the revised final Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) for the Marywood Residential Development Project ( "Project'). As
the Lead Agency, the City is also responsible for determining the potential
environmental impacts of the proposed action and which of those impacts are
significant, and which can be mitigated through imposition of mitigation measures to
avoid or minimize those impacts to a level of less than significant. CEQA then requires
the Lead Agency to balance the benefits of a proposed action against its significant
unavoidable adverse environmental impacts in determining whether or not to approve
the proposed project.
If the lead agency determines that the Project will result in significant, unmitigable
impacts, CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 requires the following:
a) CEQA requires the decision - making agency to balance, as applicable, the
economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project
against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve
the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits
of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the
adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable."
b) When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of
significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or
substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons
to support its action based on the final EIR and /or other information in the record.
The statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial
evidence in the record.
c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement
should be included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned
in the notice of determination. This statement does not substitute for, and shall be
in addition to, findings required pursuant to Section 15091.
Public Resources Code Section 21081(b) requires that where a public agency finds
that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including
considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained
workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in an EIR
and thereby leave significant unavoidable effects, the public agency must also find
that overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project
Statement of Overriding Considerations Page 1
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
outweigh the significant effects of the project.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(b) and the State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15093, the City has balanced the benefits of the proposed Project against the
following unavoidable adverse impacts associated with the proposed Project and
has adopted all feasible mitigation measures with respect to these impacts. The City
also has examined alternatives to the proposed Project, none of which both meet the
Project objectives and is environmentally preferable to the proposed Project for the
reasons discussed in the Findings of Fact.
The Orange City Council, acting as Lead Agency, and having reviewed the Final EIR
for the Marywood Residential Development Project, and reviewed all written materials
within the City's public record and heard all oral testimony presented at public hearings,
adopts this Statement of Overriding Considerations, which has balanced the benefits of
the Project against its significant unavoidable adverse environmental impacts in
reaching its decision to approve the Project.
II. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts
Although most potential Project impacts have been substantially avoided or mitigated,
as described in the Findings of Fact, there remains one project impact for which
complete mitigation is not feasible. The City finds that Impact CUL -3, "Demolition of
the existing Marywood development would have a significant impact on cultural
and historic resources under CEQA," cannot be reduced to a level of less than
significant. Although the Project would implement a project design feature, PDF CUL -1,
which consists of the implementation of a religious and architectural salvage program
of items found onsite, and the EIR identified a mitigation measure, MM CUL -3, which
requires that a recordation and architectural salvage program be implemented prior to
the issuance of a demolition permit, the EIR concluded that this impact could not be
reduced to a level of less than significant. In addition, no feasible alternatives were
identified that would avoid or minimize this impact to a less than significant level.
III. Overriding Considerations
The City, after balancing the specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other
benefits of the proposed Marywood Residential Development Project, has determined
that the unavoidable adverse environmental impact identified above may be
considered acceptable due to the following specific considerations that outweigh the
unavoidable, adverse environmental impact of the proposed Project, each of which
standing alone is sufficient to support approval of the Project, in accordance with
CEQA Section 21081(b) and CEQA Guideline Section 15093.
1. The Project provides up to 40 single - family housing units in the City of Orange
which would assist the City in meeting its fair -share housing allocation imposed by
the Southern California Association of Governments. Project implementation also
Statement of Overriding Considerations Page 2
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
furthers the goals and policies of the City's General Plan Land Use Element for
this site.
2. Project implementation would eliminate a potential risk to the public and to public
infrastructure through the remediation of continued soil settlement and potential
slope failure associated with the presence of unsuitable fill material that currently
underlies the Project site. Unsuitable fill material to a depth of approximately 70
feet, along with oversteepened slopes and insufficient drainage structures located
on the west and southwest slopes separating the Project site from City -owned
property has the potential to impact two existing City water tanks and nearby
residential property. Geologic data show continued movement of the unsuitable fill
material downslope toward the City's water tanks. The geologic data indicated that
settlement of the unsuitable fill has not stopped or slowed since the original grading
of the Project site. Left unremediated, the unsuitable fill material could continue to
move, or the slope could fail, resulting in substantial damage to the City's water
tanks and potentially surrounding residential property.
3. Project implementation would generate revenue to the City of Orange as a result of
property taxes and related fees from the proposed residential development. The
revenue could be used by the City to provide public services and facilities,
including fire and police protection and other amenities and services available to the
residents of the City.
4. Project implementation would result in new traffic calming improvements designed
to reduce existing vehicle speeds on East Villareal Drive, and installation of a new
all -way stop that would address existing safety issues at the intersection of East
Villareal Drive and Ridgepark Lane, due to limited site distance, presence of a
cross -walk, and the intersection of two residential collector streets with East
Villareal Drive.
5. Project implementation would eliminate an existing deficiency in the City's storm
drain system and add water quality treatment, which does not exist currently. The
City's storm drain in East Villareal Drive currently operates at over capacity during
larger storm events. Implementation of the Project would provide a storm water
detention basin that would hold storm water on site and release it over a longer
period of time, improving the function of the City's storm drain. Project
implementation would also improve the water quality of the runoff from the project
site through implementation of an on -site treatment facility.
6. Project implementation would result in additional park fees paid to the City of
Orange by the Project Applicant that can be used by the City to provide additional
recreation facilities and /or programs for existing and future residents. The Park
Dedication In -Lieu Fees would result in the payment of $7,994 for each of the
proposed 40 units for a total payment of $319,760 for park fees.
Statement of Overriding Considerations Page 3
City of Orange Marywood Residential Development Project
7. Project implementation would underground existing overhead utilities along East
Villareal Drive from the City's water tanks to the south of the project to the project
entry to the north. Eliminating the overhead utility wires and poles would improve
the visual condition of East Villareal Drive and views from private residences that
back to East Villareal Drive.
8. Use of the Property in its current configuration as a high school could result in a
potable water demand of approximately 59,000 gallons per day. As a result of the
water efficiency measures included in the Project, such as drip and micro -spray
irrigation, smart irrigation controllers, drought tolerant landscaping, low flow
showerheads, low flow toilets, on- demand hot water, and tankless water heaters,
the Project anticipates an estimated water demand of 24,000 gallons per day,
substantially less than what the existing facilities could generate.
Statement of Overriding Considerations Page 4